Children of a Common Mother
Apr. 19th, 2008 10:58 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dolariOne of the more interesting things about having a Canadian girlfriend is realizing how different the histories of our countries are, despite being neighbors, and essentially offshoots of the British Empire. (Why yes, I'm watching Liberty's Kids, why do you ask?)
When we were visiting the Peace Arch, on the border between Blaine, Washington and Surrey, BC, one of the inscriptions on there was "Children of a Common Monther" meaning both our countries started as British Colonies. I joked "The thing is, the US is that rebellious daughter than yells at her restrictive parents, runs away from home, drops out of school, finds a trailer, kicks out the original inhabitants, then wins the lottery. You know, Anna Nicole Smith."
I'm an American, but also a Texan (and often tell people I'm a Texan first, American second (OR Austinite first, Texan second and American third). The histories I've been taught about the creation of America and Texas were both Wars of Independence, a war fought from 1776-1781 for America and 1836-1837 for the Texas.
In Texas' case, despite the capital shuffling around every three or four weeks and an archive war that kept the capital in Austin after everyone else had left for Houston and a lot of arguing with Mexico and US annexation, it was pretty stable, pretty quick. One of the things I'd love to read about is how the Texas Revolution is taught in Mexico. :)
The US's was a lot more tumultuous - going up against Britain, then struggling with a confederation of 13 nations, and finally getting some of it's act together by 1787 with the Constitution. Again, I'd love to know how Britain teaches this point in history. :)
Living in an South Texas city that has a hispanic majority, you hear a lot of stories about Latin Amercian countries, each having revolutions, or being founded in revolution. So I grew up thinking every country got their independence through some kind of revolt or independence. Throwing off the shackles, as it were.
But talking with Emily, I learned Canada didn't have a revolution, but had a long slow process towards independence. At first my head had trouble wrapping around this...like the open border between the US and Canada, I'd only ever seen the militarized border between Mexico and Texas. I'd only ever heard of Independence through revolution.
From what I understand (and you Canadians feel free to educate me) Canada had it's issues, yes, but had a much more amicable relationship with Britain, and independence came in a long slow process from 1860s to 1930s by granting Canada more and more self-rule. Their links with Britain are much stronger than ours, and their culture, while Canadian, was decidedly more British than ours.
The more I learn about the differences between the US and Canada, the more I see it as a model of what the US might have ended up as had we not had the Revolutionary War (or lost the war). Imagine a US made up of three or four nations (Prolly New England, Virginia, Ohio and The South, the rest being Canada and Mexico), and while the culture would be nominally the same, governments would most likely be Parliaments, we'd all be subjects under the Queen (although as Queen of Wherever we Lived), independent but not nearly as long as we have been. Prolly a fair bit more liberal, too. ;)
Just some imagining of an alternate history. One day I'll write about the three-nation-world we all could be living in had the US not gotten into WW2 and remained isolationist. :)
Now for some Captain N before I go home. Sadly, the best thing I do on Saturdays is SLEEP FOR AS LONG AS I WANT. :)
This long rambling stream of consciousness brought to you by "Lack of Sleep." "Lack of Sleep." Making you look like a babbling moron for 4.8 Billion Years.
When we were visiting the Peace Arch, on the border between Blaine, Washington and Surrey, BC, one of the inscriptions on there was "Children of a Common Monther" meaning both our countries started as British Colonies. I joked "The thing is, the US is that rebellious daughter than yells at her restrictive parents, runs away from home, drops out of school, finds a trailer, kicks out the original inhabitants, then wins the lottery. You know, Anna Nicole Smith."
I'm an American, but also a Texan (and often tell people I'm a Texan first, American second (OR Austinite first, Texan second and American third). The histories I've been taught about the creation of America and Texas were both Wars of Independence, a war fought from 1776-1781 for America and 1836-1837 for the Texas.
In Texas' case, despite the capital shuffling around every three or four weeks and an archive war that kept the capital in Austin after everyone else had left for Houston and a lot of arguing with Mexico and US annexation, it was pretty stable, pretty quick. One of the things I'd love to read about is how the Texas Revolution is taught in Mexico. :)
The US's was a lot more tumultuous - going up against Britain, then struggling with a confederation of 13 nations, and finally getting some of it's act together by 1787 with the Constitution. Again, I'd love to know how Britain teaches this point in history. :)
Living in an South Texas city that has a hispanic majority, you hear a lot of stories about Latin Amercian countries, each having revolutions, or being founded in revolution. So I grew up thinking every country got their independence through some kind of revolt or independence. Throwing off the shackles, as it were.
But talking with Emily, I learned Canada didn't have a revolution, but had a long slow process towards independence. At first my head had trouble wrapping around this...like the open border between the US and Canada, I'd only ever seen the militarized border between Mexico and Texas. I'd only ever heard of Independence through revolution.
From what I understand (and you Canadians feel free to educate me) Canada had it's issues, yes, but had a much more amicable relationship with Britain, and independence came in a long slow process from 1860s to 1930s by granting Canada more and more self-rule. Their links with Britain are much stronger than ours, and their culture, while Canadian, was decidedly more British than ours.
The more I learn about the differences between the US and Canada, the more I see it as a model of what the US might have ended up as had we not had the Revolutionary War (or lost the war). Imagine a US made up of three or four nations (Prolly New England, Virginia, Ohio and The South, the rest being Canada and Mexico), and while the culture would be nominally the same, governments would most likely be Parliaments, we'd all be subjects under the Queen (although as Queen of Wherever we Lived), independent but not nearly as long as we have been. Prolly a fair bit more liberal, too. ;)
Just some imagining of an alternate history. One day I'll write about the three-nation-world we all could be living in had the US not gotten into WW2 and remained isolationist. :)
Now for some Captain N before I go home. Sadly, the best thing I do on Saturdays is SLEEP FOR AS LONG AS I WANT. :)
This long rambling stream of consciousness brought to you by "Lack of Sleep." "Lack of Sleep." Making you look like a babbling moron for 4.8 Billion Years.
