We all know every country teaches their own brand of propaganda
As far as U.S. history goes, we are the good guys we havent lost a war yet
We come in with big guns and kill the bad guys and
Spread that good ol democracy

How does Britton history tell the American revolution story?
Do they something like the colonies were too rowdy
And defiant so we decided it was better to leave them alone?
Or we granted them independence?

Another question
how are we viewed in history by other countries?
How does Japan rationalize us dropping two atom
Bombs on them? How do you think these countries who
Take these Ls explain it in their textbooks?

They don't teach any of that history in schools over here. I've been shocked at the number of adults I've run into that had no clue about their part in slavery or colonialism etc.

Surely British citizens have to know the us and uk
Are connected...

I mean the English language didn't come over here by itself

They really don't mention slavery?

Kind of crazy they got over that.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://blackpeopleonlocalnews.tumblr.com/

you know if a country teaches it's kids that the usa fucked them royally then the usa considers them "rogue nations" see: cuba, north korea, venezuela

but yeah, most third world countries have private schooling ran by some church
so i dont even know if they go all deep into their history with the usa.

but yeah, i'd like to review history curriculums for other countries as well
especially south american countries

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/rebels_redcoats_01.shtml

Oh wait.







But yea, uk had/has dozens of colonies
Losing a few here and there matters way more to the colony than to the empire

Makes sense

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

At most will just say eh Britain didn't really care, sent a few boats and came back home

History gets downplayed, forgettable or nonchalant for us as well when it's taught before college

Vietnam was long but sooooooo fuzzy on the details very

It started
It sucked
And fuzzy on the ending

Later I realized a lot of conflicts here we went the clear victors or our involvement was not good gets quite fuzzy

Victors write history indeed
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

(c) eve online

both parts come across as kind of a national sense of embarassment

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I see a lot of developing countries in their
Colonial portfolio. Im not sure where South Africa or India rank
Power wise, nigeria either even though they have one
Of the stronger economies in Africa and are in the "next eleven" ranking

But that's a good point you make about
IT meaning more to the colony than the empire
But it's kinda crazy that the colony eventually
Sat at the table with the empire

Senegal

Cuba

Grenada

Trinidad and Tobago

(Damn near most of the Caribbean Bahamas, Jamaica, Barbados, Virgin Islands)

Philippines

Newfoundland

Ghana

Ontario

The Province currently known as Quebec

Nova Scotia

India

South Africa

This doesn't include many of the territories they lost to other european colonial powers.

A lot of the these companies and charters were simply that in name they had no massive army to really subdue the people on it or others from coming in and claiming it.

that shit comes up in their entertainment from time to time...

i get the impression that they are basically...

don't fuck with them too far unless absolutely ready to go HAM cause even if they dumb as shit...they mean business

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Japan has telekinetics and giant robot suits ready to fuck us up if we act up.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

but yeah n korea is closer to jpn than it is to the US, let them have they lil army. nothing wrong wit it, just don't get them imperial dreams popping off

North Korea has the 4th largest free standing army on the planet. Hardly "lil".

yes

does it really matter?

for all my fans who keep my name in their mouth: http://i.imgur.com/v2xNOpS.jpg

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://blackpeopleonlocalnews.tumblr.com/

-ancient Greek/Roman/Egyptian shit
-Medieval/Tudor shit
-industrial revolution with total absence of Empire/colonialism
-WW1 & 2 aka commusinst Russia, nazi Germany & Churchill saves the day

Its funny now that im older and get occasional jokes from american friends around thanksgiving and 4th july about how they gave us a whipping etc. Besides claiming my ghanaian ancestry in those moments i have to tell them i don't know what they are talking about.

I actually recently learned a bunch from a computer game but they have COMPLETELY whitewashed that from schools lol

does it really matter?

for all my fans who keep my name in their mouth: http://i.imgur.com/v2xNOpS.jpg

Minus the small shyt she did like helped found the ACLU, donated to the NAACP in the 20s, was a suffragette, and was hardcore socialist.

Pay that no nevermind.

Think about slavery the way its taught is still odd

I'm waiting for some kid to tell me about stonewall some day

Boston tea party isn't described as a riot

As an adult the thing we have to find out on our own
Maaaan listen
Yeah other countries do the same
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

Same with Germany, them Imperial Dreams had them doing a lot of grimey shit. (Pearl Harbor, Rape of Nanking, "Comfort Women" etc.) They still won't own up to all the medical experimentation stuff.

They didn't have the people or resources to do what they wanted to do on a global scale. If they tried to do it again they'd have the US, UK, China AND Russia squading up on them...so fuck it. Might as well focus on industry so we can at least cake up if we can't have colonies.

They still have a sizeable right-wing "fuck all that western influence" political presence.

Western are often either left-wing or Muslim.

>They still have a sizeable right-wing "fuck all that western
>influence" political presence.

dropped on cities populated with civilians... twice?

Nah man.

A full scale ground assault would have cost hundreds of thousands of lives and Japan was particularly stubborn about not surrendering. Our only goal was to end the war as soon as possible and if the fire bombings (which were just as fucked up and took more lives) couldn't get them to fold then we had to pull out the trump card. Twice. And we still had to pretend we had a third one that we didn't even have just to get them to surrender.

It was very fucked up tho, I'm aware.

>A full scale ground assault would have cost hundreds of
>thousands of lives and Japan was particularly stubborn about
>not surrendering. Our only goal was to end the war as soon as
>possible and if the fire bombings (which were just as fucked
>up and took more lives) couldn't get them to fold then we had
>to pull out the trump card. Twice. And we still had to pretend
>we had a third one that we didn't even have just to get them
>to surrender.
>
>It was very fucked up tho, I'm aware.

man... Japan had been offering to surrender (1 condition....emperor stays)

USA rejected it...said no conditions

You know the week we dropped the bombs the USSR was supposed to enter the war in Asia?

hiroshima was a "virgin city". not one bomb had been dropped there previously so they could see EXACTLY what it did.

it was an experiment. no reason was ever given for the 2nd bomb. it was made differently (experiment) and oh yeah...the USSR was to begin fighting in Japan the next day

the bombings are actually the first act of the COLD WAR. the US was making sure Japan surrendered to Us and WE would be the post war occupier

and btw...the emperor was allowed to stay

we stole hawaii with Guns and threatened to kill those people. look up queen Liliokalani. i digress.....

quoted from howard zinn's "a people's history"

"The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, set up by the War Department in 1944 to study the results of aerial attacks in the war, interviewed hundreds of Japanese civilian and military leaders after Japan surrendered, and reported just after the war:
Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.
But could American leaders have known this in August 1945? The answer is, clearly, yes. The Japanese code had been broken, and Japan's messages were being intercepted. It was known the Japanese had instructed their ambassador in Moscow to work on peace negotiations with the Allies. Japanese leaders had begun talking of surrender a year before this, and the Emperor himself had begun to suggest, in June 1945, that alternatives to fighting to the end be considered. On July 13, Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo wired his ambassador in Moscow: "Unconditional surrender is the only obstacle to peace.. .." Martin Sherwin, after an exhaustive study of the relevant historical documents, concludes: "Having broken the Japanese code before the war, American Intelligence was able to-and did-relay this message to the President, but it had no effect whatever on efforts to bring the war to a conclusion."

If only the Americans had not insisted on unconditional surrender- that is, if they were willing to accept one condition to the surrender, that the Emperor, a holy figure to the Japanese, remain in place-the Japanese would have agreed to stop the war.

Why did the United States not take that small step to save both American and Japanese lives? Was it because too much money and effort had been invested in the atomic bomb not to drop it? General Leslie Groves, head of the Manhattan Project, described Truman as a man on a toboggan, the momentum too great to stop it. Or was it, as British scientist P. M. S. Blackett suggested (Fear, War, and the Bomb), that the United States was anxious to drop the bomb before the Russians entered the war against Japan?

The Russians had secretly agreed (they were officially not at war with Japan) they would come into the war ninety days after the end of the European war. That turned out to be May 8, and so, on August 8, the Russians were due to declare war on Japan, But by then the big bomb had been dropped, and the next day a second one would be dropped on Nagasaki; the Japanese would surrender to the United States, not the Russians, and the United States would be the occupier of postwar Japan. In other words, Blackett says, the dropping of the bomb was "the first major operation of the cold diplomatic war with Russia.. .." Blackett is supported by American historian Gar Alperovitz (Atomic Diplomacy), who notes a diary entry for July 28, 1945, by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal, describing Secretary of State James F. Byrnes as "most anxious to get the Japanese affair over with before the Russians got in."

Truman had said, "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians." It was a preposterous statement. Those 100,000 killed in Hiroshima were almost all civilians. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey said in its official report: "Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen as targets because of their concentration of activities and population."

The dropping of the second bomb on Nagasaki seems to have been scheduled in advance, and no one has ever been able to explain why it was dropped. Was it because this was a plutonium bomb whereas the Hiroshima bomb was a uranium bomb? Were the dead and irradiated of Nagasaki victims of a scientific experiment? Martin Shenvin says that among the Nagasaki dead were probably American prisoners of war. He notes a message of July 31 from Headquarters, U.S. Army Strategic Air Forces, Guam, to the War Department:
Reports prisoner of war sources, not verified by photos, give location of Allied prisoner of war camp one mile north of center of city of Nagasaki. Does this influence the choice of this target for initial Centerboard operation? Request immediate reply....."

the provocations from the US toward Japan.
The sanctions from the US toward Japan.

And let's talk about Pearl Harbor... an attack on a military base. Which yes, was horrendous, and cost the lives of 2500 military personnel with another 1700ish injured. And killed 70ish civilians and injured another 30.

vs.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki in which 250,000 people were killed. When Japan had been trying to surrender.

erm.. the US never removed the emperor.

read the last line of the post

And I love Japan, but Nanking is reprehensible beyond reprehensible. I mean when you repeatedly commit unspeakable atrocities something like those bombs seems merciful in a weird sense. Just dare to think what would have happened had they took a US or Australian city. Their actions in the Philippines and surrounding islands are no less awful.

Their right wing presence is quite strong and anime such as Akira and Ghost in the Shell carry subtle and not so subtle anti American undertones.

yah, war's grimy. it's also not a good guys vs bad guys hollywood movie. the same ppl control both sides. the intentions are hidden. the wars themselves are manufactured for multiple purposes, none of which are inherently good for you.

V.

a great wrong and was punished severely for it is deeply embedded in the national psyche.

They're definitely scant on details as to what constituted that great wrong, though, and the gov't remains in official denial over several documented historical facts about which the general populace is never taught.

uniting Asia against European imperialism

the manner in which they did it is reprehensible, but the point still stands that without rampant European imperialism throughout Asia, Imperial Japan in itself would not have come to be as a force to counteract (while imitating) it

>uniting Asia against European imperialism

.

:)

The point that I was making is that Britain may have lost that battle, but they continue to exert considerable influence over the US.

One example of it is the fact that BP continues to operate with having faced the consequences of their actions in the Gulf.

>The point that I was making is that Britain may have lost
>that battle, but they continue to exert considerable influence
>over the US.
>
>One example of it is the fact that BP continues to operate
>with having faced the consequences of their actions in the
>Gulf.

shit....look who owns the federal reserve bank

ppl probably think its a government agency as opposed to a private business

And ideas?
McDonald's and all of that mess?
I don't know how many of them are in Britain but
At this point it's safe to say everyone has somebody in their pocket

BP was privatised and put onto the public markets in the 80s... it's more Kuwaiti than British these days. It doesn't exert any influence in "Britain's interest".

> It doesn't
>exert any influence in "Britain's interest".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1287222/BP-oil-spill-British-pensioners-pick-BP-compensation-fund.html

Who essentially won the American Revolution for us...didnt learn anything about it until college

that was definitely mentioned in our history classes growing up

Since 1976

Took a hundred years more or less

But I do agree the way the French are mentioned
It's cursory almost incidental
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

initially

it was a commemoration of slavery ending in 1865 that still took 20yrs to finish


in that time thw chains on the hand got replaced with holding a vague "book"

the broken chains on the feet are still there tho

Not slavery that's a myth

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

makes no sense but
as a kid they can get u to believe it




-the shackles are not visible from the ground but they are there
-the idea man behind the statue was an abolitionist and felt the end of slavery + US democracy could inspire democracy/freedom in france and worldwide. so u cld claim independence, but not without the emancipation part

-the immigrant/'poor huddled masses' symbolism got added later

gotcha


~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

is simplest as it can be explained.


the statue being based on a black woman, newly freed black ppl donating to build the base, etc, may or may not be myth



but looks like national park service actually decided to help clarify



http://www.nps.gov/stli/historyculture/black-statue-of-liberty.htm
http://www.nps.gov/stli/historyculture/abolition.htm

>is simplest as it can be explained.
>
>
>the statue being based on a black woman, newly freed black ppl
>donating to build the base, etc, may or may not be myth
>
>
>
>but looks like national park service actually decided to help
>clarify
>
>
>
>http://www.nps.gov/stli/historyculture/black-statue-of-liberty.htm
>http://www.nps.gov/stli/historyculture/abolition.htm

okay
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

The general take is that they were always going to leave at some point, so it's maybe not felt as much as a defeat as a slightly disappointing thing from a selfish point of view, but a perfectly correct thing to happen. Obviously the US, more than India, was an abject defeat (India was always intended to be given back, even if it had to be wrested in the end)... but I think most Brits just see it as getting smacked down by a pet monster who could never really be a pet. You're a united continent, we're a united island. Once you'd got all the political infrastructure you needed, it was only going to last so long.

Whoever said Brits don't get taught their role in slavery and empire is dizzy though; I had to do pretty much a whole year in school on the evils of empire. People have an aversion to flag waving over here and the connection to empire and slavery is a large part of why. We're still very much embarrassed by it.

>
>Whoever said Brits don't get taught their role in slavery and
>empire is dizzy though; I had to do pretty much a whole year
>in school on the evils of empire. People have an aversion to
>flag waving over here and the connection to empire and slavery
>is a large part of why. We're still very much embarrassed by
>it.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

and it was describing D-day and said " a large number of canadian forces lightly assisted by US and British forces stormed the beaches" lmao

I remember in elementary school
They had a map of the world during ww2
Canada and Sweden were colored yellow
Yellow meant neutral as hell lol

does your history textbook explain how the whitehouse got its name?

in all seriousness, canadians fought and won some of the most important battles in WWI made all the more significant by our small numbers (there are also some hilarious stories about painting horses black, and shovels with holes in them).

and a lot of the planning for d-days success was reliant on a first (yes, failed) attempt elsewhere by commonwealth and majority canadian forces (realizing what kind of coast would work better, time of day/tide).

Its kinda interesting.

Dont let the Revolutionary War & July 4th fool you.

All but one of the US Presidents (Van Buren) bloodlines are linked to King John Lackland of England (1166-1216 A.D.)

So Great Britain didnt loose anything in reality

Americas been operating under a shadow monarchy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBg64Bfxp4c

After doing some research, I need to make a correction:
Martin Van Buren is part of the King of England's bloodline
as he is linked to the Roosevelts

So every past, present & future president is predetermined by blood
not by these bogus elections they have every 4yrs

Haitians steady screaming they the first independent colonized nation in the West. French figured it wasn't worth the fight and cut ties.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://blackpeopleonlocalnews.tumblr.com/

.

Financially (along with the USA) isolated Haiti from the rest of the world for winning their independence. Napolean sent his Brother and 200k troops to stop the revolution only to get his ass handed to him and have to sell his territory (Louisiana Purchase for considerably cheap.(compared to what it was worth). Haiti agreed to pay reperations in the form of Trees after winning independence too.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://blackpeopleonlocalnews.tumblr.com/

Mind controls the body.
They just let you think we independent

Not us.

the British Empire never left or gave up power, they just gave the colonies the illusion of freedom so we can feel like the struggle is over. that we're somehow free from the behemoth. they just went covert with the control aspect of things cos of the whole "the slave who thinks they're free is the most enslaved of all" shit.

V.

There is no conspiracy theory here. Britain literally ran out of the resources they needed to maintain power. They left a mark as any empire would have.

Most people credit the Independence of India solely to Gandhi's movement of Passive Resistance, but that is wishful thinking. Britain simply did not have the power to prevent it due to WW2.

They went into massive debt with the Americans to survive, as a result, they lost their ability to hold on to their empire.