Sometimes Evil wins.

[Captdon]

On the other hand, who is to say that all of those revolutionary innovations and inventions would not have been established or discovered by American Colonials under British rule? Given the British Empire's history, does anyone believe that they would not have extended it to the Pacific, dealt with the Indians pretty much as we did, etc., and then gone on, as we have, to reform their legal system, improve their public institutions in terms of civil rights, and advance technology in all fields?

Full disclosure, my first thought when I read the OP was the same as yours - Great Britain would be German - but then I thought that if Britain had the natural resources, manpower, etc. of America at its immediate disposal, perhaps WWII would have been years shorter - with American Colonial troops, armaments and technology making their appearance in that conflict in 1938 instead of '41.

The Brits weren't inventors, they were imperialists. Under British rule America would not have been the America of 1941.

[Captdon]

What a ridiculous piece. It essentially said nothing, and tacked a crazy headline on for people to quote.



So that's the center point of your argument. Being that nobody said the switch happened overnight, it fails hilariously.

Any other propaganda pieces are you'd like to trot out to excuse the consistent _conservative_ history of racism? Just leave parties out of it. _Conservatives_ have consistently supported racism. They still do. Address that.

Other than Strom Thurmond, name the Dixiecrats who became Republicans. Be truthful.

[Orion Rules]

No one alive today and no party existing as it exist today is either. I believe this tone of "slavery and racism are the other parties fault " is going too far even by today's polarized standards. Both slavery and the blatant racism that followed it for so long can be blamed squarelye on the society as a whole. As it can in all the places where such atrocities openly existed with majority acceptance.
It's not the other guys fault. it's our ancestor's fault. Thankfully , the society has changed.

The society did change, it was their elite. American host celebrated crats who changed places. 'It was their directives'.

No open borders, stakes XXX crosses + borderless.

[MMC]

The society did change, it was their elite. American host celebrated crats who changed places. 'It was their directives'.

No open borders, stakes XXX crosses + borderless.

Yes society changed wherein the Leftist Elite who had lost a war.....changed up their directive, to keeping the nation divided to gain power. Hence keeping women from voting, blacks from voting, Latinos from voting. Asians from voting and Indians. While learning that they had to play Robin the hood to steal from the Rich who earned and made their money. Then thru stealing everybody's else money thru taxes.

To take from others using fear. White Sheets and hoods. While coming up with titles to rival Mayors and Governors. Calling themselves Imperial Grand Wizards.

[jet57]

This was relevant to 4th of July -- I apologize for late message.

American War of Independence could have brought Freedom to slaves in 1780s had British won. Unfortunately, the Battle of Yorktown was a blunder which cost Britain her colonies. It also cost slaves their chance to be free. Very few of those who hoped to be freed then saw 1865.

Had Britain won, Modern America could have been a state which provides for everyone in need -- like Canada, Australia, NZ and to a degree UK. American Penal System could have been humane like in UK, Canada, Australia, NZ. Most of the 572,000 people who died by firearms in USA 1999 -- 2016 could have been alive.


To a great extent, American Colonies were ideological progenitors of Confederacy and grand-progenitors of modern Democratic Party.

When money is involved, evil wins every time.

From the time that we declared our independence until slaves were truly freed was only 89 years: one life time: or two generations genealogically speaking. From the time we ratified our constitution until slaves were truly freed, only 76 years lapsed; again, one lifetime.

The colonies would not have freed slaves any time sooner because of the economic power of a free labor force. The crown didn't outlaw slavery until something like 1838: the Scots declared against it in the 18th century.

The "confederacy" was a neo-House of Lords. Something the far right wants to return to today.

[donttread]

When money is involved, evil wins every time.

From the time that we declared our independence until slaves were truly freed was only 89 years: one life time: or two generations genealogically speaking. From the time we ratified our constitution until slaves were truly freed, only 76 years lapsed; again, one lifetime.

The colonies would not have freed slaves any time sooner because of the economic power of a free labor force. The crown didn't outlaw slavery until something like 1838: the Scots declared against it in the 18th century.

The "confederacy" was a neo-House of Lords. Something the far right wants to return to today.

Money is a tool, but many people see it as an end onto itself. Or biblically "love of money" which in some cases is more like an addiction. Just like power those most addicted and therefore most willing to do "whatever it takes" are more likely to attain influence than those who aren't hooked.
The problem with money and power is that by their nature they tend to wind up in the hands of those least equipped to ethically deal with them. I am obviously talking about an obsessive devotion to large amounts of money.

[jet57]

Money is a tool, but many people see it as an end onto itself. Or biblically "love of money" which in some cases is more like an addiction. Just like power those most addicted and therefore most willing to do "whatever it takes" are more likely to attain influence than those who aren't hooked.
The problem with money and power is that by their nature they tend to wind up in the hands of those least equipped to ethically deal with them. I am obviously talking about an obsessive devotion to large amounts of money.

What you're talking about is war. Money - is power. Money comes in all sort of examples: we have concerned ourselves in this country with land and oil. Those things create money and as you say, those least equipped to handle it have the majority of it and will do anything to keep it, up to and of course sending US off to war against some other poor bastards that don't have enough to avoid being sent.

It's all about power, nothing more.

[donttread]

On the other hand, who is to say that all of those revolutionary innovations and inventions would not have been established or discovered by American Colonials under British rule? Given the British Empire's history, does anyone believe that they would not have extended it to the Pacific, dealt with the Indians pretty much as we did, etc., and then gone on, as we have, to reform their legal system, improve their public institutions in terms of civil rights, and advance technology in all fields?

Full disclosure, my first thought when I read the OP was the same as yours - Great Britain would be German - but then I thought that if Britain had the natural resources, manpower, etc. of America at its immediate disposal, perhaps WWII would have been years shorter - with American Colonial troops, armaments and technology making their appearance in that conflict in 1938 instead of '41.

Interesting point and it actually taps into one of the time travel debates. Is the fabric of time tough or would it be more like the "butterfly effect"? Obviously no one knows. I wonder if the British had continued to expand their empire if they ever reformed anything. In fact if the Empire had in fact taken control of all the land and natural resources on North America would THEY/WE have become the threat to the world instead of the Nazis?
Another possibility is that if the revolution had not occured when it did, would it have occurred at another time?
We can only speculate about the road not traveled, but it is occasionally fun to do so.

[donttread]

England is a socialist country. Socialists countries don't lead in innovation. That is not the point of socialism. Socialist countries lead in misery.

You don't seem to understand what a socialist country is. It is NOT any country that demonstrates compassion! For example even Forbes referred to the nordic countries as "Compassionate Capitalist" . Socialism is where the state and or people own the means of production. I do not believe that is the case in the UK.
We on the other hand seem to have a society where the means of production owns the state.

[countryboy]

Check it out, another thread that conveniently neglects to mention how the Dixiecrat slavery-lovers became Republicans, and how essentially all modern white supremacists are Republican.

This isn't debatable, not by any honest person. The Dixiecrats became Republicans. The White Supremacists who want slavery back are Republicans. Forgetting to mention such things is lying-by-omission. Lying, of course, is a favorite tool of the evil and the authoritarian.

Name all the Dixiecrat Congress critters who became Republicans. I'll wait.