Search this Topic:
Apr 16 17 5:36 PM
Apr 17 17 12:03 AM
Apr 17 17 12:50 AM
Throd wrote:This isn't a US vs the rest of the world discussion. Merely pointing out that much of the success of the US is not just it's political system but that the political system found a very fertile situation in which to grow. For a start most of it was effectively free to anyone with the ability to claim it. John Smith in the UK may be born a natural farmer but if he is the third son of a peasant then what can he do. All land is owned and there is no family money. In the US he had opportunity to find out.
I'm sure there are articles somewhere discussing how the US would have fared if it had stayed part of the Empire. Many nations fared very well. Australia, Canada, South Africa etc.
You would be driving on the correct side of the road for a start.
PS On a lighter note I read years ago the theory that your tornados were initiated by swirls produced when two cars drive past eachother. Would they be less frequent under British rule?
Apr 17 17 4:31 AM
Apr 17 17 4:41 AM
Apr 17 17 5:14 AM
WarshipAdmin wrote:"America brought one thing to the world that has changed it more than anything else, democracy"
16 days late I'm afraid but a good entry.
However taking it as a serious proposition, how do you define democracy in order to make that claim? In order to make it work start with no slavery, universal vote for both sexes above a certain age and excepting serious criminals and the insane, with those votes controlling the effective law making part of the government. You might have a case then. But I have a suspicion, not irrefutable, for example the French probably got there first.
Apr 17 17 5:24 AM
IcelofAngeln wrote:What does universal suffrage have to do with democracy? (Of course, buth in France and the US they were at great pains to establish Republics, NOT Democracies).
Apr 17 17 3:26 PM
Apr 17 17 4:16 PM
Apr 17 17 4:54 PM
Apr 18 17 12:23 AM
Apr 18 17 2:20 AM
Apr 18 17 2:42 AM
IcelofAngeln wrote:Go back and re-read the Federalist Papers, karr. Madison and Hamilton explained at great length that the Constitution would *not* establish a democracy, which was regarded (following Plato and Aristotle) as a Very Bad Thing; demokratia being translated in its pejorative connotation, "mob rule."
France: the first "Republic" was of course a bloody tyranny which collapsed into dictatorship. France didn't get a real republic (or democracy) until 1871.
Of course, Iceland, Switzerland, the Netherlands and several of the Italian city-states had all run working republics long before 1787. For all practical purposes Britain since 1688 has been a republic with an hereditary president. Not to mention Rome.... up until a guy named Caesar pulled an Erdogan.
Apr 18 17 2:44 AM
ChrisPat wrote:Iceland? Rome? Those Greek city states you've casually dismissed?
The summary of your case is that the USA is the world's first, foremost and only example of a USA.
Apr 18 17 2:49 AM
Throd wrote:Africa has potential but a lot of problems too. Very extreme temperatures, large numbers of infectious diseases, many of the rivers have sections that make them impassable by boats. Lots of natives who all have different identities, cultures, languages etc.Canada is very cold. compare it to California.
Russia is rich in resources but much of it is remote. They send people in disgrace to Siberia for a reason.
Modern technology is not the point. The conditions in the US allowed expansion from sea to sea with relatively primitive technology.
The US constitution was a remarkable development but the fertile, resource rich, virtually unpopulated country it evolved in was a gift. Other political alternatives may well have not have made such good use of it but to say that it did not have a major impact on the US success is ridiculous.
Apr 18 17 5:08 AM
Apr 18 17 7:40 AM
Apr 18 17 11:26 AM
Apr 18 17 5:09 PM
Apr 19 17 12:55 AM
Throd wrote:Are you saying that the US would have been the dominant world power if the Pilgrims had gone to Australia instead? I very much doubt it. Among other things is that you would not have the enormous ingress of democratically minded immigrants, you might not have any at all. It was untouched for centuries by any potential immigrants.
And I doubt if the Canadians would be impressed if you tell them that the only reason they aren't the equal to the US in wealth and world power is because they have an inferior outlook.
The US was lucky in many ways. The Ogalla aquifer for instance, ensuring a guaranteed water source for your vast central farmlands.
Again, not saying your constitution was not a major factor but your geography and geographical position helped a great deal. There are lots historians making the same points.
PS You defeated Spain easily in the Caribbean, would you have as easily taken Majorca in the Meditteranean from them as easily?
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.