American Reacts How Do They Teach the American Revolution in Britain?
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 5. 07. 2024
- đOriginal Video: âą How Do They Teach the ...
đDiscord: / discord
đ Patreon: / mcjibbin
âBuy me a coffee!: www.buymeacoffee.com/Mcjibbin
đŠP.O. Box info (NOT accepting ANY perishable items)
For any clothing: l'm a Men's size large
McJibbin
P.O. Box 447
Bristol, Rhode Island 02809
USA
Hi everyone! I'm an American from the Northeast (New England). I want to create a watering hole for people who want to discuss, learn and teach about history through CZcams videos which you guys recommend to me through the comment section or over on Discord. Let's be respectful but, just as importantly, not be afraid to question any and everything about historical records in order to give us the most accurate representation of the history of our species and of our planet!
Having a diverse perspective is crucial to what I want to achieve here so please don't hold back! I want to learn about all I can! Keep recommending and PLEAESE join my Discord :) ( / discord )
#american
#mcjibbin
#americanreacts
#reaction
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
đI have seen the comment made elsewhere., but to the USA this was the founding moment for the nation, for the British it was a Tuesday.
And it was raining so tea break
Calm it down Raul Julie
â@@davidgill5699 Julia
An average tuesdayđ
Just to be pedantic, it was a Thursday
I notice with Americans they ignore all the help they got from the French, Spanish, and Dutch, they always say it was a few farmers that beat the British, completely untrue, but it makes them feel better I guess.
They also often ignore that, when the young USA invaded the early Canada in 1812, the British and French (alongside many First Nations people,) actually *teamed up* to defend Canada against the attempted American invasion in the subsequent War of 1812, even though England and France were enemies at war *against* each other in Europe at the exact same time.
@@TheAmishGamer The French only helped out because of the Hunting Rights that was happening in Canada at that time.
The East India Company was the company that the French really wanted to be friends with, thus they did not want America swooping in and taking away the Pelts they had been trying to sale for so long. The East India Company was British Owned and Ruled as you know, but this mighty Company also had Dutch Benefactors as well, who mainly took a TAX on all Pelts that the French sold to the (EIC) Which was known by the British at that time, but as trade was so good, the Empire looked the other way.
Also,for the British it was 1 colony far away. It wasn't that important and we had bigger things going on at the time,so when the revolution started,we didn't truly defend against it. For several reasons,1,it was so far away to retake or send reinforcements,and as already stated,we had soldiers all over the world on many other colonies at the time so didn't think it important enough to do so.
Really? I was taught that the only reason we won was because the French, Spanish, and Dutch helped us. And it wasn't a "they gave us a few boats and guns" it was "they're the reason we actually had a chance". I thought this was common knowledge across the states, because I've never met anyone that truly believes we won alone.
Not to mention we were controlling 25% of the world at that time of we wanted to keep American we could of pulled the thousands of troops out of Asia and kept it đ€Ł but let them have their independence day we will keep the NHS and 5 weeks paid annual leave whilst they can proudly keep their guns đ€Ł think Al Murray was right..... Lucky escape indeed
British History Teacher here.
The American Revolution received a brief mention in ONE of my lessons this year. Think about how many uprisings and revolutions against the British happened since!
I have to teach 1000 years of History in 3 years đ
A bit like British teachers have to do thenđđđ
@@suebingley5209 they did say they WERE a British History Teacher.
When the Americans have as much history as we do itâll interesting to see how they handle it, like if Hawaii wanted to become independent or Texas or Alaska howâd they deal with it say ok or send in the marines
@@suebingley5209 i am a Brit.
@@suebingley5209ah the ambiguity of the English language. They meant a British teacher of history not a teacher of British history. A bit like how I had a Scottish French teacher.
I'm British and went to my brother's wedding in the USA.
My sister-in-law's brother came up to me after the ceremony, never met him before, and said "didn't we fight a war against you". I genuinely had no idea what he was talking about and my mind went to WW2 but that did not make sense because once the USA joined the war they were our allies. I was genuinely confused.
Anyway, I think that is a brilliant example of the way Americans and Brits see the USA's independence. For an American, the first thing to say to a random English person, but for the English person, no idea what on earth they are talking about.
What's more, she is wrong. The USA didn't exist before the war was over, so how could it be said that they went to war. The facts are, we went to war with ourselves, as all the revolutionaries were British subjects at the time.
â@@emdiar6588 there's also the war of 1812. But that was still 200 years ago. So no, "we" did not fight 200 years ago. No one alive today was born then, not by a long way.
As an American, that just doesnât make sense to me. When I have met the many English people I have met the Revolutionary War is the very last thing I think about. I fact, the only time it has been brought up to my husband was by a Brit, but in a joking manner.
Yes we burnt down the white house in 1812. They had to white wash the remains of it it to get rid of the burns, thatâs why itâs called the white house.
@@katrina3670 i'll wager the joke included "those bloody French bastards" lol
i've come to a conclusion the US revolution is taught badly, in the US. The amount of discussions i've had with Americans who don't understand the causes, the powers behind it is maddening
I've been told we are still sore about it lol
â@@claregale9011
I hope you 'lol' (at least) at such ridiculous assumptions?!
I'm afraid that US history as a whole is taught badly in the US. To be fair, the subject of History gets a shafting whenever politicians get hands on it. The UK did much the same in its History classes from the times of the earliest state schools.
â@@PortilloMoment it my be true now but when I was at school history was taught very well which I loved and still do, not just English history american too. Even the fact that christopher columbus was never on the mayflower which would be impossible has he had been dead over 100yrs and Henry the 8th when they said protistants was a made up religion not true oof I'm going on here lol đ
The fact that Americans also make fun of the French like the English do, says alot about how little they actually know about where alot of those jokes came from and what the French did for them, both in having an actual war with Britain (well numerous) at the time of the declaration of independence, or that that France bankrolled the whole American revolution.
I was once asked why I, an Englishman, didn't celebrate Independance day, as this Amercian thought we did. I then had to explain to him that it was a traitorous act to the crown.
Isn't that just another ignorant American, though, thinking American independence Day is celebrated worldwide? Sheesh.
Celebrating Guy Fawkes NIght is another matter entirely, of course; it's a celebration that the Gunpowder Plot failed and is just an excuse for fireworks now.
4th July in USA is very much a case of Main Character Syndrome (even if it's become marginally more justifiable over time). I wonder if it's celebrated any differently in the original 13 colonies than it is in the majority of the other states that didn't even exist at the time? I understand it is "the birth of the whole nation...yadah yadah ya" but it seems a bit presumptive to celebrate something your state (let alone ancestors) played no part in. Do immigrants from all over the world celebrate, and if so, what are they celebrating?
I also wonder if it's taught just how many colonists were loyalists and had to be convinced to rebel by propaganda from rabble-rousers with access to printing presses?
Maybe England should celebrate when Ăthelstan unified the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, or 1066 when William the Conqueror did his thing or any of the myriad events that created the United Kingdom? If only one war conveniently encompassed the whole thing so we could let off fireworks, get fat, drunk and jingoistic and full of our misplaced importance. 30 July 1966 ticks all the boxes, but excludes Scotland, Wales and NI and everyone who couldn't care less about football. Any suggestions?
Do you think it mere coincidence Canada Day is 1 July and celebrated with fireworks ?
@@nickdanger3802 Deservedly so.
We don't really learn about it in the UK anyway. Why would We? It's One of the few times We've lost. đ
I thought it was the British fighting the British?
Essentially a British Civil War.
Because the French stoked nationalism among the Brits of the 13 colonies they gained their own united identity rather than it being British fighting British
I love pointing that out to modern Americans. It wasn't you vs. us... it was us vs. us. You didn't exist until after.
Also that the original aim wasn't to break away from GB because they just wanted to be British citizens with equal rights.
That's the problem with the USA history it's what suits them at the time
I don't think most Americans appreciate there was sooooooo much more history before the 1700s. The volume of American history is the equivalent to a single star in the night sky compared to everything else.
WAR SITUATION.
HC Deb 09 September 1941 vol 374 cc67-15667
§The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill) Late in July I learned that the President of the United States would welcome a meeting with me in order to survey the entire world position in relation to the settled and common interests of our respective countries. As I was sure that Parliament would approve, I obtained His Majesty's permission to leave the country. I crossed the Atlantic Ocean in one of our latest battleships to meet the President at a convenient place. I was, as the House knows, accompanied by the First Sea Lord, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and the Vice-Chief of the Air Staff, together with the Permanent Secretary to the Foreign Office and others. We were, therefore, in a position to discuss with the President and with his technical advisers every question relating to the war and to the state of affairs after the war.
let's be fair, American history, especially that of pre European involvement is rather limited in scope [and mostly based on archaeology & European recordings of the indigenous populations], so no wonder 'American' history starts with their main event in 1776 and not say the founding of Jamestown in Virginia in 1607 or Boston Massachusetts in 1630, and we of course ignore any of the history that might give creedence to any Spanish, French, Dutch or Viking settlements !
Americans learn about world history. That IS a thing.
We were too busy fighting the French to bother with America at the time and, by the way, it was mostly British settlers fighting the British in your war of independence. "Americans" at that time didn't exist, just colonials.
I was taught about your war of independence in school, although more emphasis was on India, before, during, and after the Raj than on America.
India though very important does not provide the UK's nuclear umbrella. India though extremely significant did not intervene in such a substantial way in WW2. as did the USA and its factories.
ââ@@dennisstafford-cq2xz India had a volunteer army of over 1.5 million. India entered the war of their own choice before the Americans and India provided bases and supplies and fought to stop the Japanese and the Germans from linking up.
The USA siphoned the British empire to give their military it's START.
You sound American, Americans know nothing about WW2, you just learn about your cameo.
â@@dennisstafford-cq2xzwe got nukes and won ww2....American confirmed
@@lukeempty3386 Nothing to be proud about in "nuking" thousands of civilians. You only entered the war because of Pearl Harbour. It was the Russian effort that won in Europe, not the US.
@@WookieWarriorz 1)American factories produced materials found around the world 2 decades post conflict. From canned meats in the Soviet Union to Jeeps and marine craft left on atolls in the Pacific to the countrysides of Europe. The munitions that defeated both the Japanese and Hitler predominantly came from American factories. It was the ships (Liberty Ships) that supplied food and war materials to England and American Forces by war's end exceeded 8.5 million in personnel (war on 2 fronts). Each nation will give its ethnocentric take on WW2 but 2 super-powers were left at WW2s end. India was not one. One of those powers for 3 years was the singular source of nucear power. There was no attempt at world conquest, would that have happened should the other power been in sole possession? The 30 years following the American Revolution excited revolutions in Latin America and the French Revolution. Your recounting totally fails to account for the history of the Western Hemisphere during the American Revolution and the 3 decades after, e.g., Robespierre to Simon Bolivar. The Island amphibious assaults towards Japan, the Naval battles in the Pacific and the amphibious assault on Normandy were with primarily American material and large contingents of American personnel. What history did you study?
18.04 min to say in the UK we don't generally give a crap about the American Revolution, any more than American could give a crap about, well anything that happens outside of the USA.
I mean we care when there completely wrong about what there saying haha its irritating to no end to me how all I ever see if â1776 woooooaaaah!!â đ
Exactly
Trying to remember what they taught us in school 35 years ago.
I honestly can't remember them ever teaching us anything about US history.
It was all Romans, 1066,Tudors, Industrial revolution and ww1 & 2.
This is so true cuz I remember the exact same
Spot on as i remember it
Pretty much yeah. American history just isn't that important to us over here, something that seems to astonish Americans, but why would it be? We've got a couple of thousand years of history in Europe alone to cover.
Don't forget the Magna Carte, the feudal system, crop rotation, seed drills, Jethro Tull, Something about trusting turnpikes. Throw in the plague and the Levellers and you've got the entire 1980s History curriculum of UK Comprehensive secondary education.
Same.
As I understand it - and I could be wrong - the American Brits kept starting wars and creeping west in Spanish, French and Native territory, which the British then had to fight, and it was costing UK land owners and absolute fortune, which lead to raising taxes on things like tea.
The âno taxation without representationâ was the public excuse for the war, which was, apparently, actually due to the desire for expansion and not to be shackled by the crown.
The French and Spanish were Britains global rivals at the time, and aided the American effort - the âfarmers vs high end militaryâ was a myth.
Back in the UK, the desire to continue the war had little support because America was already barely worth keeping, and the cost of the war tipped the scales and made the territory more or less unwanted.
In the US, the British side had half the losses and were winning, and when those fight on the side of the Americans cut the supply chain to the bulk of the forces, the British saw it as too costly to continue and sued for peace. I have read that the French nearly bankrupted themselves funding the war.
To the Americans, this was obviously a huge deal, but to the British, who were emerging as the dominant power in the world, it was one aspect of a much larger global struggle.
Every school in England is taught about the Battle of Hastings, which is a battle we lost, so its not about the fact Britain lose the Revolutionary War, but Hastings was a giant turning point in British history, and the Revolutionary War wasnt.
The settlers did keep creeping west of the Appalachian mountains but that was against the wishes of king George who had trade treaties with the natives (I think he even made a law stopping it) which pissed off the settlers and was a part of the reason for the revolution.
â@choughed3072 It's funny because King George was also for no taxation without representation, there are written essays from the man about it. He just also thought a modern king shouldn't get involved with politics and that it should be left to those who represent the people.
@@insertname3977 it is part of the constitution that the monarch doesn't get involved in politics
I was at a works drinks event and a new starter from America came over to chat and was really angry about how none of the Brits he'd met so far gave a crap about the American War of Independence being a significant point in history for us. I tried to explain we had a lot of other history to take in and a country leaving the empire wasn't necessarily novel. This made him even more upset so I did the most British thing I could think of and bought him a pint.
Watching from Wales đŽó §ó ąó ·ó Źó łó ż UK and we werenât taught anything about The American Revolution and the War for Independence. No disrespect intended but it just wasnât that significant to us.. We donât just NOT hold a grudge but itâs not something we ever think about..
The British State doesn't even want Welsh History taught
Exactly and they don't teach Irish either.â@@dexstewart2450
@@dexstewart2450 nope, nor even the history of the British Empire. Just Henry VIII over and over and over again, as if he was something other than a horrible man
No grudge to hold, there wasn't any 'Americans' involved in the war to begin with unless you are talking about the ones with feathers in their hair.
Britain was at war with France, Spain and Holland during the revolution. America was barely mentioned in Parliament at the time. The White house wasn't even built during the revolution it was burnt during the 1812 war. If the full attention and military had been focused on America at the time you'd still have royalty.
Fact.
Since you said 'you', it sounds like you are not an American, and perhaps British. If you knew anything about the American attitude and spirit, which you should by now, by just looking at the many wars we have been in in the past 130 years, such that the colonist would probably have continued. Just look at the Vietnam and Afghanistan wars - fighting an insurgency within a country is nearly impossible to win, unless you do what Julius Ceasar did back in the first century BC to Gaul (now France), and he killed those that would not accept Roman rule. This would seem quite severe in today's standards, but back then, this was the standard. He killed over a million Gauls to bring them to submission. Of course, he had to win all the major battles as well. But this is what is seems to take to defeat a country that is resisting in totality. So, your claim in your post is really pretty hollow - more like wishful thinking.
There is still royalty in US society. The Treaty of Paris in which Britain recognised US nationhood, includes a clause which makes British monarchs 'a Prince of the United States of America'.
@@vincentlavallee2779 The colonists weren't resisting 'in totality' though, were they? Nor were the Native Americans. From Britain's pov, the Americas were a very minor affair, within the wars they were fighting at the time.
I'm sorry that offends you..
You might review the discussions in Parliament-circa 1760-1790-Americans were very much on British minds that is why colonial taxes were imposed to recover a depleted treasury. Moving more than 120 war ships and tens of thousands of British troops is more than Tuesday.
If you were to ask one of us what that date meant now, weâd probably say âIndependence from the Toriesâ.
However, âThe day British colonials in America had a strop and the empire was too busy with 3 other wars to careâ is the best summary of the 4th of July that Iâve ever heard.
In terms of late 18th century revolutions, the most important to Britain would be the Industrial Revolution.
True. The industrial Revolution was more important than the American one and made America sort of redundant and almost worthless to the Empire, compared to the cost to keep it.
Then the French one. That one caused us no end of trouble, and it was nothing to do with us, it just happened next door.
As mentioned, the US was JUST 1 of over 60 countries who gained independence from Great Britain... We just moved on to handle other issues, while continuing to trade with America anyway! đ
The US did not exist when the British Americans gained independence.
We gave independence to those countries. We have them back .
With the exception of a blockade of American products during the Napoleonic Wars (by both French and British), the seizure of American Merchant Ships,and the impressment of American Sailors all was forgiven by Great Britain and GB moved on comfortably until a few American schooners were shelled and burned off of American coasts after their sailors had been pressed into the Royal Navy then the US declarted war (War of 1812) which was resolved by yet another treaty in 1815. Then things went on swimmingly until the American Civil War in which early British support was for the Confederacy (the rebels) because Britain needed American cotton. The Union Naval Blockade was run with ships built in Great Britain for that purpose. When Lincoln announced the Emancipation Proclamation and cotton markets were delivered by Egypt and India, Queen Victoria's ministers for Britain's home population mindful of the British public led the Monarchy to renounce aid to the Confederacy (and those pro-slavery). Things then went swimmingly well until WW1 when both Britain and France needed artillery, munitons and human bodies having exasperated the populations of existing empire and colonials. The late answer was 2 million American soldiers in 1918 and artillery and vehicles manufactured by Ford and Dodge. One might understand American reluctance to be involved in European wars given this history. Sadly, following WW2, America became a superpower almost by default (everyone else bombed into oblivion and debt) and formed the UN and NATO as possible bulwarks against yet more conflict. That success has been relatively successul for 75 years altrhough there has been lots of conflict elsewhere, just not in Europe until recently. Anyway that is why American Independence might be an interesting subject in World History. . . . wherever taught. Otherwise it is but a sprinkle in Britain's glorious past, the US having just 340 million peoples and the 3rd highest population on the globe and about 1/4th the world's economic capital and the world's largest superpower there is nothing really remarkable or of interest. No reason to be discussed in history whatsoever. Especially in Great Britain. Happy 4th.
@@dennisstafford-cq2xz "I am American and America is the greatest country ever, in all of history, across the entire world, and everything ever entirely revolves around us, and nothing else matters as much as us ever at all."
@@sallyforth9905 That is silly of course but I guarantee other countries study both French and Russian Revolutions and have goven a perfunctory nod to the American one although ot was the precedent of the others. Verdad?
It's hilarious to hear Americans today talk about how we beat the British or we won our independence or we were fighting off tyranny and yet it has nothing to do with 99% of of Americans, the vast majority of the agrarian colonialists some 3 million we're mostly of British heritage that's almost 70%. I'm obviously excluding the African slaves. We fought off our colonial Masters not understanding that they are the colonists. The vast majority of Europeans arrived in the middle half of the 19th century.
From 1609 to 1776 is 166 years of identity. The mass immigration to the US occurred for more than a century and invovled the globe, not just Europe. It still exceeds to this day anything comparable to migrations in Europe. Then internally there were mass migrations also, from East to West and from South to North.. To understand American History includes Britain but does not exclusively include Britain. The influx of European migrations after 1880 were from Central and Russian Europe. The millions of Chinese were pre-1920. The vast majority of Americans trace their roots to German, not British ancestry. It is a lot more complex than Great Britain's heritage. I live in the middle Mississippi River Valley whose ancestors were French and Spanish. By 1850 the vast majority of St. Louis inhabitants were either German or Irish. The current largest ethnic minorities are Hispanic, Bosnian and Somali. Blacks are in the majority of the city proper.
@@dennisstafford-cq2xz we're talking about the War of Independence not current migration patterns into the United States. The fast majority of the colonies were British which is why America speak English and not German. By the way people claiming German heritage because they speak German does not mean that there were all German at the time the arrived onto the shores of the United States of America because Germany didn't exist at 1871 are Austrian Americans German.
Early American colonials were of UK heritage. They had been in America for 167 years at the time of the Declaration of Independence (1776-1609=167). Long enough to actuate self-government, administer currency, commerce, and militia, fight Indian Wars, defend the frontier as British Subjects 1755 on until 1776. Thomas Paine's pamphlet, "Common Sense," began awakening the notion of independence lobbying for a seperate nation-state. The interior and extreme South were made of native (Europeanized native tribes, e.g., Choctaw, Cherokee, Red Sticks), Spanish governance, French habitants (Vincennes, St. Louis, Prairie Du Chien, Prairie Du Rocher, present day Kansas City, New Orleans, et al). and Canadians of several ethnic mixes (including Metis) settling first as fur traders and then as settlers (Cahokia, Des Moines, Portage Des Sioux, Ft. Chartres, Ste. Genevieve, San Carlos/ St. Charles, Florissant, et al). All these populations prior to "American" ones but American (by purchase) after 1803. About 1/3 of American colonials actively were rebellious, 1/3 not so active, 1/3 remained loyalist and many of those evacuated to many places but mostly Canada. So populations were very fluid and varied. Pennsylvania was a haven for religious sects like Quakers and Shakers but also "Dutch" speakers from various places. New York was originally New Amsterdam. And the oldest city of European descent is St. Augustine which was Spanish. The point is, even by 1776 there were differences from American as to Britons inhabiting mother England. Some of the Minutemen defending Boston, Phildelphia, New York, Lexington, and Concord had been born in America and never been to or seen the UK. There were many reasons to celebrate a victory over the world's then Superpower and to acknowledge the concept of self-government as expressed in the American Experiment as somewhat novel and eventually successful. The UN is located in New York not London. The US has about 800 military bases around the globe, not the UK. It was American Naval Fleets that defeated the Japanese at Midway, the Solomons and the Phillipines not the British. So yes, The American Revolution deserves more than a footnote in European history texts. To discredit the importance of Americans to history, especially modern history, is to expunge a reality and be unfaithful to truth. Japanese textbooks are even worse.
Itâs obvious you never studied the intricacies of the American Revolution and the Great Experiment our government was compared to all the forms of governments at this time.
â@dennisstafford-cq2xz alot of the American bases around the world belong to the British but are on loan to the US
The American revolution was essentially rebellious British fighting the British establishment. With everything that was happening in Europe though, it was simply not that important. And it seems nothing much has changed, today independent Americans are still fighting and killing each other, happily ignoring the wisdom of their seniors. The states were created but they have never been truly 'united'.
In the American Civil War, Britain supported the south in every way short of war.
@@nickdanger3802 Utter crap. The British happily sold stuff to both sides. The British supported the South myth is just that, a myth perpetrated mostly by Americans. It has virtually no basis in the actual truth.
Yep, theyâre expressing freedom every day, and more at the weekends
Short answer: they don't đ
They dont. It was never mentioned even in passing. Mine was all Tudors, Romans, Victorian and WW1 &2
My school years were too close still to post WWI, though mostly WWII as I started Primary school in 1958, and Secondary school in 1964...having been born just _8_ years after the end of WWII, so I only recall learning (being taught...) about history up to Queen Elizabeth I... I don't remember much more than that. I don't recall being taught anything about the Victorian era, as what I learned about the industrial Revolution, I was taught in 'Geography', as it interested our 'Geography' teacher - Mrs.Pauline Miller...yes, she was one of my favourite teachers!!
Wow... That's all so long ago...?!!
I'm flippin' _ancient_ !!đźđđ đ
They actually taught more about Neolithic and Bronze age Britain than they ever did about the war of independence when i was at school Neolithic period, Bronze age , Iron age Romans, Dark Ages ,Vikings/ Alfred the great, Medieval period , Tudors/ Spanish Armada, French revolution/ Napoleonic wars , Industrial revolution , Victorian/Edwardian , WW 1 WW 2 , Modern Britain/ Civics
Many historians consider the American Revolution to be a small chapter in a much larger conflict from 1689 to 1815, between Britain and France, informally known as the Second Hundred Years War.
In some circles also known as 'the first' World War due to it being fought all over the globe, though mainly Europe, to be fair.
Why try to conivnce yourself "they MUST talk about America leading up to the Seven Years war"? The US really need to take a step back and understand things important to you DOES NOT equal important to anyone else
Our beginning history is connected to yours .If you don't want to teach it I can understand because the British only win wars and monumental loss of colonies ,the only time the British empire involuntarily lost colonies)had no affect on the history of the world at allđ
We only became a world superpower and shaped history from that period forward
@@user-sp6jk3zz5b Look, this stuff does get covered, but it's one subject among MANY that has to be covered, including a lot of time before and after that period. Our recorded history as a nation goes back over a thousand years alone, and that's ignoring the archaeological record. Plus, this is being taught to kids; there's a lot to cover, and usually not a lot of patience for it from the audience. A lot of things get skimmed over, and the history that's specifically pertaining to the US is simply not that significant to us when put alongside everything else that has to be covered. It's got very, very little to do with some patriotic cherry-picking, and more to do with desperately trying to stuff a LOT of info into a limited amount of time.
@@user-sp6jk3zz5b Look. Get it through your head. We. Honestly. Don't. Care. The problem is that YOU care, it is YOU who want us to care. So you try to force us to care. But we do not.
For us the similar event in our History is 1066, the Battle of Hastings. Every, and I mean EVERY British schoolchild learns of the Battle of Hastings because it is absolutely vital to the formation and evolution of Modern Britain.
The American War of Independence just is not. It is not important to the history of Britain. So we literally do not learn about it in school because, as has been pointed out to you, there is so much more that IS important to how modern Britain came about.
Its not even as if we borrowed the Bill of Rights from the US, that happened the other way around. You probably did not know that did you? The British Bill of Rights, which was used pretty much in its entirety as the basis for the US Bill of Rights was signed and ratified in 1689.
Its not even as if we are avoiding Battles or wars we lost, the Anglo Saxons LOST the Battle of Hastings. It was the last successful invasion of the British Isles.
â@@user-sp6jk3zz5bYou're in denial.
@@user-sp6jk3zz5bgreat - and that is all American history and not part of the British history curriculum. Losing the American colonies wasnât a critical blow at the time, there were more pressing issues going on, and less politically sensitive ones that didnât involve the potential slaughter of âBritish colonistsâ. No matter how important America became after the event, the event wasnât and isnât a vitally important event in British history; history isnât the study of counterfactual what-ifs.
Before we get to the video and if I remember correctly. While we were fighting Napoleon in Europe the Americans thought it would be a GREAT idea to invade Canada and grab a bit more land. America not having enough of course. They burned the Canadians homes and their food Storehouses and, really, just ran amok, leaving Canadians to starve and freeze to death (which they did) as it was on the cusp of a Canadian Winter. Britain took it badly and decided to teach the Americans a lesson. They did burn down your governmental buildings, after making sure no one was in them. They did knock on doors to tell the people what they were about to do and ask if they wanted to vacate their properties to make sure they were safe. Then they dined at the White House and then set it on fire. Yes it is now called the White House, because it was painted to cover the scorch marks.
At the time of your fight for Independence. You will also remember that the War of Independence meant that Britain would be asked to fight their own kith and kin as circa 78% or more of the Colonies population at that time was British. Parliament had hoped to build a Nirvana in America, learning from England's mistakes throughout its long history. It had spent a fortune in the Colonies which was a heavy drain on our own Finances. Asking for increased taxes to cover some of that expenditure did not seem unfair. I think you know it wasn't really about taxes, but more about wealthy landowners wanting a land grab from the Native indigenous people. Something that Britain refused to allow having signed a Peace Treaty with the Natives to protect both the Settlers and the Native peoples from the continued violence between them. France supported your Cause because it hoped the British would divide its forces between Europe and America. The people of Britain had no stomach to fight their own family members even if those people wanted to be called Americans and not British anymore. The French spent enormous sums to shore up America and its fight there against Britain. When the 'fight' was over France was a bankrupt Nation and asked America for help or to be paid for their help in the War of Independence. America said 'No'. This led eventually, in 1789, to the misery of the French Revolution where many of France's poorest were starving and neglected. It also put its stamp on European events for a long time.
Nothing to do with the American War of Independence/American Revolution. Two different wars, separated by at least 40 years.
@@brianferris8668 Hello Brian Ferris. Yes I must have been unclear in my comments. The first paragraph was about Connor's comment he made before the video started. The second paragraph was about the video. Sorry if I confused you.
I am impressed and flattered that you know so much about what took place in The Dominion of Canada in what we call the War of 1812 which was the end bit of the Great French War. I also liked your breakdown of the American Revolutionary War. I wasn't confused but I'm Canadian so the moment the White House was mentioned my brain said "No, no. That was us when we were them." meaning when my ancestors were British. You have a good memory. Nicely done.
Brilliant summary - about time there was more nuance on the causes of the Revolutionary War - more than 'the evil taxing Brits.' -The wealthy colonial elites were definitely chafing at the bit to expand past the Proclamation Line of 1763. Not saying colonial government was perfect - but the myths we are told about the causes of the Revolutionary War need to be debunked.
I think you're right about "the beginning of the world" - for us that's the Norman Invasion, and we all learn about that in primary school.
What annoys me isn't when Americans assume we all feel bad about losing the American colonies, but when they accuse us of lying, stupidity and being in denial when we say we don't. If you assume something that's important to you is important to us, fine - that's understandable. But when we say you're mistaken, we do actually know what we're talking about.
I'd argue that the wars under Alfred the Great were the "beginning of the world" period for Britain. He defied the odds against the Danish conquests, and it was his ambition which lead to the unification of the English kingdoms into one single nation.
The Normans really just came and took over ownership of the result of Alfred's work.
I do agree entirely with the second part of your comment though!
@waterfairy321 it's not that I think you're wrong about Alfred, it's just that we don't count Kings before William. As in, literally. They don't have numbers. So I think most of us take William as the starting point. (I don't think people generally know much before him unless they actually go to the trouble of finding out.)
@@emma-janeadamson4099 it's true. School taught me nothing whatsoever about Alfred. I think it's a shame that such a pivotal few years in the formation of England get so completely overlooked in the formal curriculum. It would be a very different place indeed if he had not prevailed. But I could say a lot about the curriculum's shortcomings in a great many areas so I suppose this is not unique!
@@waterfairy321 A limited amount of time, and a very finite amount of capacity to take it all results in priorities during formal education; further education A levels onwards do get into far more detail, but the average won't learn everything..
@@dougle03 that's undoubtedly true and it's always possible to say that there's more to learn, because there always is.
However from my own experience of history in school (a few decades ago now it must be said) a huge amount of time was devoted to rather lackluster periods with great gaps in between and no real nesting context to give them any relevance. Certainly I left school with the impression that Britain has always been a bit of an inept and useless place where we've basically done nothing but struggle miserably in life and get beaten in wars (or bailed out by someone else).
It left a very bleak view of Britain as an entity and it's no surprise to me at all that we have such a deep lack of patriotic spirit or pride in our younger generation if that is the way in which they are being taught.
It was only by a chance encounter with a video game of all things in my early 20s that I even learned the actual extent of Britain's empire, which surprised me a lot because I thought we had always been the world's whipping boy.
After that I took an interest and started learning by myself just for the curiosity and the joy of it, and these years later I cannot fathom how my school (which was considered one of the more prestigious institutions) managed to turn this country's fascinating and multi-layered history into such an enervating and drab story of obscurity and failure.
It's for that reason that I have such criticism of the curriculum. If I was a more cynical person I'd almost suspect it had been cherry picked deliberately to damp out any potential spark of pride in our heritage. But I prefer to assume incompetence over malevolence...
For that matter, my own history lessons did not even mention the war of 1812 (too many other things going on). I did not even know that British troops ever burned Washington until I read it in an issue of the National Geographic.
Wasn't that in the War of 1812, not the revolution?
@@philb2085 Yes, my second sentence was following on from my first sentence. Both about the war of 1812.
I think we have enough history in our own country to need to learn about things that went on with others. I took history, so I had even more history lessons than the standard curriculum, and the only other thing we learned about that involved other countries was the WW1 and WW2. Anything else was just a passing mention at the most
India was far, far more important to Britain at this time than the 13 colonies. The East India Company which was invested in by many British elites became immensely wealthy. Even the sugar plantations in the Caribbean were more valuable to Britain than the 13 colonies. So Britain lost the 13 colonies but the won the colonization game overall.
and now it's the UK getting colonized
Bigger still, after the 7 years Britain was operating the 13 colonies at a loss: hence the taxation.
@@CaptainTodger69there are only 40,000 illegal immigrants in Britain compared to the countless millions chill out
@@spiraleddays1870 the two largest cities in the country are now both majority non-british. And the non-british population has increased by nineteen hundred percent over the last fifty years.
you can't really gaslight how the UK is being colonized. It's just a fact
@@CaptainTodger69 yes legal immegrant as apose to illegal ones and that happening every where else because travel is becoming more and more accessible
It took half a morning to teach us all about it. Basically, it was ex Brits against Brits, the industrial revolution is a much bigger event as far as history lessons go.
I studied Roman Britain, the Middle ages, The Tudors and 1870 - 1918 at school. Too much history to choose from. Learnt a bit since including the fact that Paul Revere did not say 'The British are coming'; ge said 'The Regulars are coming'. Quite revealing as is American historians need to change what he said
Three cheers for Benedict Arnold, the loyalist in the midst of traitors! Hip-hip....
Whilst the war of independence was a huge thing for America from the British point of view it was a minor rebellion while it was in the midst of a world war with France and it's on/off ally Spain. Basically it was an irritation while we had bigger fish to fry.
North America only made up a tiny percentage of the British Empire's income from trade. This meant the American colonies weren't considered very important compared to India, sugar from the West Indies, spices from the East Indies and tea from China, etc.
In contrast the only stuff from North America was poor quality timber which was only good for cheap furniture, not building ships, plus a few furs. It didn't even have stategic value unlike say the Cape of Good Hope (South Africa), or Gibraltar (access to the Med).
Consequently in the war with France it was very low on the list of areas which needed protecting and the troops there were third rate, green and their officers the dregs of the British army, drunks, incompetents who were sent to places where they couldn't do much harm - like the American colonies.
I don't think Americans are taught this or the huge part France played.
It was common for the various colonial powers to try and stir up unrest in their rivals colonies. The idea was that this would keep them busy and out of your business, stretch their resources and with a bit of luck could be flipped to become part of their own empire. it's very effective.
Today Putin uses the same strategy by using the far right in NATO countries as his useful idiots to cause division and unrest leaving him free to annex parts of his neighbours territory. Hence the rise of the far right in every NATO country over the last 20 years. He started doing this back when he was head of the KGB in West Germany - But I digress.
In France's case they unsuccessfully tried to get the Scots and Irish to rebell, plus mnay other British colonies, then tried their luck in North America in the hope of either getting their colonies there back, or distracting the British enough that they could strike elsewhere.
As soon as they heard the British Colonies were unhappy they sent in agents to stir them up further, provided them with arms and money and gave strategic advice. Without French shit-stirring it's doubtful that the rebellion would have escalated to the same extent.
Of course the British were doing similar things in French and Spanish colonies and in fact gained quite a lot of territory using this tactic themselves.
Britain's problem was that if they moved troops to the 13 colonies to quell any unrest it would leave other far more valuable areas vulnerable, plus the sheer distances in North America made it hard to defend everywhere properly. At the end of the day it was felt much better to lose the N.American colonies than far more valuable ones elsewhere and it was felt the forces already there should be enough, which if they'd been better led and better quality they would have been.
Hi connor , its important to folks in the US of course but us here we couldn't careless .
(US translation) "we could care less". Yeah, but no; we could not care less if we tried.
You were British settlers, so we were basically fighting ourselves. Well done America you have achieved a lot in your short history, must be because were related.đ
Funniest shit is if they had have just stayed with the empire they would have full self governance now just like India, Canada, South Africa, Australia, new Zealand. And maybe muricans would have decent healthcare or workers rights by now hahhahaha
@@anthonyg4671 We always had clowns in charge. At least these ones are explicitly anti-white unlike the previous.
@@anthonyg4671 Womp womp
@@WookieWarriorz Largest Strike In NHS Since 2023
"As he pointed out, the entire British war effort, including all her overseas military commitments, had only been made possible by American subsidies under the Lend-Lease programme. If the Americans stopped Lend-Lease, Britain would face a 'financial Dunkirk' - his words - unless Washington could be touched for a loan of $5 billion. Keynes wrote that such a 'Dunkirk' would have to be met by:
'... a sudden and humiliating withdrawal from our onerous responsibilities with great loss of prestige and the acceptance for the time being of the position of second-class Power, rather like the present position of France.' "
BBC The Wasting of Britain's Marshall Aid
After writing off all but 586 million USD of Britain's 21 billion Lend Lease debt in 1945, the USA loaned 3.75 billion (Canada 1.2 billion USD) at 2% for 50 years with first payment deferred to 1950 with option to skip 5 years.
1948-1952 Britain received 2.7 billion in Marchall Plan (ERP) aid.
That is how Britain paid for the first 6 years of "free" health care.
PS You forgot Ireland.
Except that America hasn't engaged in a single war or conflict in over a century that ended with them coming out on top. The last successful conflict in which they alone were fighting against an opponent was the Spanish American War.
It's one of those things you just sort of become aware of, mainly from watching US tv shows and movies. They didn't even teach us a fraction of the British history they could have done, there's just too much to fit it all in!
Americans focus mostly on their own history as a nation and forget that European history is why they are where they are, Britain considered the colonies less important than saving Europe from its self.
@@surfaceten510n I think every nation focuses on their own history first? And the influences from other countries, not just European countries as the world is bigger than Europe, is taught as well.
@@katrina3670 it's pretty sad that they know very little outside of the few hundred years they have existed they forget to teach the majority of them that European history is their history.
@@surfaceten510n wellâŠwe learn English history up till the Revolutionary War, then we learn about the French revolution, and then itâs pretty much American history.
The high school I attended, when learning world history, gave us a choice to learn European history or Asian history, and I chose Asian history as it seemed it would be more interesting to learn about, and so much of world history I had been exposed to was so European centric, I wanted to learn something different.
@@katrina3670 That all seems pretty fair to me. There is a LOT to cover, after all.
How much focus on Roman occupation ?
Wars with France and Spain must take up a lot of time.
Does the First Opium War get much focus ?
What about bringing slavery to America ?
Some of the things I was taught in the uk were that:
1) The people of the American colony paid the least amount of tax anywhere in British held territory, it was a loss making venture for the crown.
2) American political figures sat in, and we're active in the British parliament where they represented the interests of the colony and its people. In its early days, this actually made it difficult to get the revolution started as too few people were angry at the British.
3) The British made more money from three tiny Caribbean islands than they did from all of the American colonies. This is probably the real reason so few in Britain cared about the loss of the colonies.
4) An attempt was made to invade mainland England by Americans but it ended in farcical circumstances. Apparently ordinary English people either didn't know who the invaders were, or could not be bothered to fight them depending on which account of those events you read. The Americans apparently did some shopping then decided to turn around and return home probably leaving behind some presumably confused locals.
5) Most colonials saw themselves as British at the time of the war.
6) Large numbers of loyalists were forced to walk to Canada leaving their property and land behind.
7) Changes made to american law designed to stop disposesed people from reclaiming property and land still plague the American legal system to this day. America still does not have a loser pays the fees system resulting in endless frivolous law suits.
The Penns walking the line issue as per item 7.
I think in hindsight it was a very lucky escape for Britain, the USA leaves a lot to be desired.
We had the lucky escape, but the US would probably be better if it had stayed under our wing, at least for longer than it did... They started off doing stuff their own way just to spite us (Webster!đĄ) and look where it took them... đą
"The People" don't get much of a look-in these days unless being super-dooper MAGA and completely ridiculous about it... But for the right-thinking, intelligent US citizens, their needs, wants, and rights are undermined at practically every turn, and nobody can hammer any sense into their opposition, so they all have to suffer the same fate...
Poor food quality, worker's rights denied to them, voting, healthcare, housing association bullying tactics, weird drinking laws versus "the right to bear arms" virtually willy-nilly ...etc etc etc...
I do feel sorry for some Americans, whilst feeling angry, đ€Ź
and / or disappointed by others. đąđ€
To quote Al Murray The Pub Landlord âItâs a good idea thatâs got out of hand.â
đđđđđđđ
@@HannahD353 exactly! He got it spot on as usual! đđ
I wouldn't want to live there, particularly now we've finally got rid of the Tories.
@@annalieff-saxby568 definitely not... I used to want to live there, and we went every year for a holiday.. Until 2016, now I won't go there, the country is starting to look like a real version of the handmaids tale and half of the country support the mango maniac which blows my mind.
I am very happy to be in the UK, especially now we have finally got rid of the Tories, they've done their best to ruin this country, let's hope for a better time with Labour đ€
I don't understand how/why a racist rapist with 34 convictions can run for office, the USA is batshit crazy đ€
First a question: How much do American schools teach about Alfred the Great or the Norman Conquest? Is that the sound of silence. It is after all a part of YOUR history. History did not start with the Pilgrim Fathers (an unsavoury bunch by all accounts)?
I did history in the UK at high school, and vaguely recall that we started around about the Roman occupation, skipped through that & Alfred the Great to The Viking & Norman invasions, briefly mentioned the Wars of the Roses, Agincourt, Crecy etc, then paused on the Tudors, wars with Spain & the reformation, skimmed the English Civil Wars, touched on the Wars with Holland & France, and the French Revolution, covered the Industrial revolution in Britain, Steam Power, & Napoleonic Wars, Mentioned India, covered the South African situation & Cecil Rhodes etc, The Boer wars & WWI, then the Russian Revolution. Where is there is any room in the 2000 years mentioned for much more than a brief mention of the American Revolution?
PS Don't conflate the war of 1812 with 1776 the two things have nothing in common, except that they are both not taught beyond a mention in British schools. Britain had far more important things to worry about, and the failed US attempt to invade Canada is the only thing we are likely to be concerned with.
There are houses in the UK with average families living in them that are older than the USA.
We were going to give give you independence as long as you allow the Indian tribes to keep their lands but your people said no and never would have won the war without the Franch. the rest is history
History topics for me in an 80s Cheshire school: Stone Age; Iron Age; Roman Britain; Dark Ages; Vikings and Danelaw / Saxons and Alfred/Aethelflaed; types of Castle design; Middle Ages; Norman Conquest; Feudal and Manorial systems; The Crusades; The Black Death; Wat Tyler and the Peasants' Revolt; Tudors and Stuarts; British Empire; triangular slave trade; 100 Years War; The Enlightenment; Industrial Revolution; (oddly) American Civil War; The Great War/WW1; Suffragettes; WW2 and the Holocaust.
There were plenty of school trips to museums and mills in Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, Style and Avon Croft as well as historic sites in Chester, York and Ynys Mon.
Would have enjoyed learning more about the Dark Ages, Celtic Britain, Hen Ogleth etc.
But... nothing on the American War of Independence or The US's 1812 invasion of Canada and subsequent DC scuffle. đ
As I've pointed out in other videos on my hometown of Liverpool, the very first US consulate in the world was opened here in 1790. That's pretty good going after the end of hostilities, when you consider that an entire diplomatic corps had to be constructed from scratch. So it was 'business as usual' within a very short period.
The building is still there (despite the blitz). It's now a Cote bistro at 51 Paradise St, but the very first consulate/embassy eagle can still be seen on the upper floor.
American Independence is a footnote in British History.
We had more important wars to fight in europe. It's that simple, we prioritised and had more important things to defend. Also, the americans would never have repelled us without the french and dutch. There's a reason the statue of liberty is french. We are taught of america in history when we recall how much they charged us for lend lease and how much they benefited from WW2. Medicine, science, aeronautical science.
Yeh i learnt recently just how much us buying tuff through lend lease from america did to them, our money basiclly built there indistry for war
America was inevitably going to break away. It was a good thing for everyone.
Other countries in the empire were actively encouraged to be independent from the 1830s. Canada and Australia didn't want or need to independent immediately , they progressed at the rate they chose. There was never any long term intent by Britain to retain dominion over the colonies from 1837 onwards..
@@glynnwright1699 The Irish War of Independence (Irish: Cogadh na Saoirse)[4] or Anglo-Irish War was a guerrilla war fought in Ireland from 1919 to 1921 between the Irish Republican Army (IRA, the army of the Irish Republic) and British forces: the British Army, along with the quasi-military Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) and its paramilitary forces the Auxiliaries and Ulster Special Constabulary (USC). It was part of the Irish revolutionary period.
The Indian National Army (INA; Azad Hind Fauj /ËÉËzÉËĂ° ËhinĂ° ËfÉËdÊ/; lit. 'Free Indian Army') was a collaborationist armed unit of Indian collaborators that fought under the command of the Japanese Empire.[1] It was founded by Mohan Singh on September 1942 in Southeast Asia during World War II.
True. But there is now an argument that it should break up into smaller countries. Because the people are so divided, and National Government is often unable to make decisions for the Nation as a whole. The individual States seem over time to be getting more power.
@@glynnwright1699 Like Ireland ?
Yeah, we 100% donât give a shit about this in the UK.
Honestly Connor, there's no resentment from the UK about Americans celebrating Traitors Day. After all, our gain is your loss!!!
I hope that you and yours did have an enjoyable 4 July!
The brits were the Traitors! (just let my american brain think that) đ â€
@@McJibbin Anyone historically minded is probably more peed off about america stealing our empire in the post WW2 period :D
It was Brits against Brits at that stage, Connor.. there was no USA vs Britain. â@@McJibbin
I live in London and my grandchildren's local primary school [ ages 5 - 11 ] they have a map of the world in the school play ground and pins showing where all the children from that school have family relatives or other connexions . Fun way to learn about the whole world
The British Empire is incredibly old and the USA as a whole is a very young nation, so realistically the loss of one of many colonies doesnt really matter that much in Britains history.
@@try2dream One could say that they are merely in their âteenageâ eraâŠ
Connor spitting facts and I'm 40 seconds in, you've learned so much over the past few years and its been a pleasure to watch it happen haha but in all seriousness, I hope you enjoyed July 4th with gusto!
I moved to the UK (from the US) over a decade ago and the Brits really do not care about the US any more than the US cares about Britain.
We are allies when it matters of-course but over 65 nations celebrate independence from Britain in one way or another. The US is (in the words of a pub-land-lord...) a good idea that got out of hand. :)
THAT IS TRUE, AND JUST LOOK AT HOW CRAPPY THOSE SIXTY SIX NATIONS HAVE TURNED OUT AND HOW LITTLE ANY, ESPECIALLY AMERICA, HAS CONTRIBUTED ANYTHING GOOD TO THE WORLD. đŹđ§
On the subject of America, I have a little video you might find interesting. Its nearly 6 minutes
"I Never Knew That About Britain - Is America named after a man from Bristol?"
The 4th July in Amurica is called Independence Day, here in the UK we call it a lucky escape. đ
My mum teased my American friends and called it âCasting our the Colonies Dayâ đ
Fun fact. My secondary school was originally a girl's school and a separate boy's school built with a large garden between the two. The schools overtime were merge together and physically joined together, and expanded with many many extensions being added, The two original buildings became the Maths department and the English department.
The Math & English departments of my school were older than the USA.
TBH we learned more about Robert Clive in India and Cecil Rhodes in Africa than we did about Ben Franklin in the American colonies. In fact we learned more about Paul Revere than about Ben Franklin.
And Wolfe and Montcalme on the Heights of Abraham (Canada), and the unification of Italy and Germany. (Bear with me, I took Geography as an option instead of history, after the third year in secondary school.)
@@marieparker3822 Same here. Always regretted that choice. God, geography was a waste of time. You'd think we'd get to learn cool stuff about geology, and actual geography; somewhat, but those interesting parts were in the extreme minority. Most of the time we were learning the "humanities" side of it, and that was some of the most boring guff I've ever had to sit through. It almost dragged it down to the appallingly low level of Religious Education. Almost.
Think we know more about Alexander Hamilton because of lin Manuel than we do anyone else.
And just to sow further confusion on country names, the British Isles (not Great Britain) comprises the group of islands to the north of mainland Europe, consisting of Great Britain, Ireland (as a whole), Isle of Man, The Hebrides, Orkney and Shetland
@@jamesbowring9528 I believe there are approximately 5000 of them in totalâŠ
hes right,im 48 and from UK in my younger days always played cowboy & indians,grew up watching ALF & the A team etc etc,we learned a lot,same values so no need to get upset about a nation bettering itself, also when i was young tv showed a lot via books made into a series,"north & south" being one & my GCSE English lit exam was based on the book "to kill a mocking bird" and "kelly heros" on telly :) & also served with my friends from across the pond,we not much different
A better way to put it for Americans is to think on how important to the average American is the independence of the Philippines from America. Now imagine how important that event is for Filipinos.
Your knowledge of the UK is impeccable. You are amazing sir. Cymru Am Bith
bith?
@@eniej Wales for ever. But I take your point, it should be byth.
@@BillDavies-ej6ye im confused now, i just put it through my translate app and it said it wasn't a word, i wasn't correcting them, i was just curious đ
@@eniej I put "Wales for ever", the translation from the Welsh, for anyone unfamiliar. Many people are unaware that the UK has several native languages in addition to English. I assumed that you had knowledge of the language, as you mentioned "bith" which was mis-spelt.
i have T shirts older than the USA đâ€đ
Most Brits have never heard of the Seven Years War.
I've heard of it george washington started it
Of course we know about it. Well where I live we were taught about it in school.
@@scott4600 The Americans bankrolled the French.
At school in the 1960s, we did learn about the 7 Years' War in Canada but the American War of Independence and the War of 1812 were never mentioned. The American Civil War was briefly mentioned in passing (in relation to British industrial history and foreign policy).
â@@rickycassidyThe Seven Years' War was a worldwide conflict, primarily between European powers but involving colonies e.g. Canada and India. You are right that, as a junior officer, he was in at the beginning of the "American leg" of that war, the French and Indian War, fighting on the right (British) side that time.
As a British student who did GCSE history not long ago, the only thing that was mentioned in history about the American Revolution was that the only reason they got their independence was because the Brits were battered and bruised, waiting for reinforcements at a river where they were then cornered and forced to surrender, which i will admit was a genius move by the Americans tbf. If it weren't for this, its unlikely America would've got their independence.
And if you're wondering what was actually taught in history GCSE, we did America 1920s, - featuring 'scarface' Al Capone - the Spanish armada along with the Queen at the time (Queen Victoria I), the space race, the arms race and a few other things I can't remember :)
The Spanish Armada had in July 1588, Elizabeth I was queen then. Victoria wasn't even born until 1819.
I haven't watched McJibbins video for a long while. He have learned a lot!
From a Brit who used to live in the states I can honestly say no one in the UK that I've ever met cares about the American war of independence.
In the early 80's I can remember we did study the American civil war.
Everything I know about American history I learned from TV and movies because they bring it up all day, every day, all the time again and again and again..
I never learned anything about it in school.
The whole "fighting British tyranny" thing is a tad overstated, the UK was in a big colonial war with the French and the reason given for the tax increase was to pay for the troops protecting the Americas, money that the colonialists could afford given the average US colonist was well off. It was mostly the rich elites and merchant class that instigated it.
Proud of you for knowing the UK/Great Britain stuff.
When I was taught history the US civil rights movement and the transatlantic slave trade were more important than anything else relating to the US. Being a Scot, I did learn several times about the Scottish Wars of Independence. Even when I went to uni and studied colonialism for a semester, the American Revolution didnât really matter when compared to other colonies like India or how indigenous Americans have had their land, livelihoods, culture, and people stolen.
If you think you can make a case for the indigenous peoples of Canada and Australia faring any better, please do so.
I seriously recommend you get the following two books from your local public library:
1. Liberty's Exiles by American writer Maya Jasanoff. Tells the stories of some of the thousands of loyal Americans who left the infant USA.
2. The Last King of America. The Misunderstood Reign of George III by Andrew Roberts.
I think he meant the 51st state, which is common joke term. There would have to be 51 states already lol. You said that the US was not seen as important in the 18th and 19th centuries and, if you think, the British were fighting in the war of the 6th coalition, at the start of the war of 1812 through to 1814, it seems like this war, in gaming terms, was merely a side mission
Canada is often called the 51st state
@@tomstorey8559 All countries have a joke term, which are not states. Sometimes Canada, Puerto Rico, America Samoa and Guam are referred as this aswell. There is no 52nd state, just a loose term of 51st, but people have started using 52nd for some odd reason
@@jamesbowring9528 because it's almost always recognised that Canada would be the 51st due to geography
â@@tomstorey8559 There was a movie called 51st State, known as Formula 51 in the US, produced in the early 2000s, which was a US/UK collaboration. Anyway, I don't know how it rates on Rotten Tomatoes, but I enjoyed it. This film had a title based on a play on words and featured Samuel L. Jackson and Robert Carlyle in the lead roles. Again, there are more places that have been given this loose moniker: the Republic of Palau and the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, if you thought logically, based on the War of 1812 and what the early US wanted to strategically achieve, Canada would most certainly be number one for this title.
As an addendum: I realised at the point of the war of 1812, there would not have been 50 states at the time anyway
Further addendum: As the 18th state of Louisiana, being given statehood on 30th April 1812, Canada, if the US had won, would have been 19th state
Puerto Rico is considered the 51st state. The last vote in 2020 had 53% of voters in favour of it becoming an official state if given the opportunity. Congress is unlikely to put it into law though - do a myriad of reasons..! đ€ đ
As the pub landlord said - it was a lucky escape.
For the UK
I don't remember any history being taught in Primary School, but I never paid much attention at that time anyway. The first time i remember any history lessons was in secondary School, where I remember we started with ancient history, the Pyramid of Khufu, the Lion Gate at Mycenae, that sort of thing. The sheer age, size, and majesty of those places just blew my young mind, and I have loved reading History ever since. The American Revolution was really just mentioned in passing later on. To be honest we usually had so many wars going on all over the world that it just didn't seem too important at the time.
"i think it would atleast take a chapter in a history book" you're giving it more credit than we tend to easily
Puerto Rico is seen as the 51st state.
In Israel they say it's Israel
Isn't Puerto Rico a US Territory?
@@brigidsingleton1596 same as Dublin airport in Ireland then.
@@george-ev1dq
Sorry for late reply - I was listening to Nick Abbot on LBC...
What's that about Dublin Airport ?
(Sorry, I don't fly, so have no idea).
@@brigidsingleton1596
If you fly to the USA via Dublin, you usually do US Immigration and Customs in Dublin, and the flight is then an internal US flight (you just collect your luggage and walk straight out of the airport when you reach the US, with no further checks).
USA needed France and Netherlands help
It was almost a British civil war set over there
@@Benson...1 correct, it was British VS British, the US never even existed at the time.
@@Benson...1 You give it too much credit; it was a British rebel uprising like the Luddites.
@@Bakers_Doesnt the operative word "almost"....not to much credit lol
@@Benson...1 Fair play, though it covers a multitude of sins - almost British or almost a war? Should say that "was" is the operative word, "almost" is a qualifier, but who cares?
The revolution was just a British civil war. George Washington, a British citizen and former officer of the British army, originally wanted the British union flag to feature in his own. The British army had spent many years protecting British colonists in America from the French, they never invaded their own nation and struggled to fight their own people in battle later. It's why mercenaries were frequently used on both sides of the conflict. No one's heart was really in it. It was an emotionally and psychologically devastating war which tore families apart and pitted brother against brother. When British colonists declared independence from their own country and became "Americans", historical revisionism swept the newly founded nation and many uncomfortable truths and facts were buried. Now, many Americans believe the UK was a former enemy that they defeated. In reality, the British defeated themselves. The USA is Britain's most beloved and rebellious child.
At higher level education 15 - 17 for my now grown up children with regard to the USA, the most comprehensive part of your history taught in British and Irish schools was the Civil Rights era. My daughter when we moved from Scotland to Southern Ireland found herself studying this part of your history for the second time.
What has shocked me is finding out that this part of your history is not taught in many US schools.
The "51st state" is probably Puerto Rico
no, it is Israel, the biggest by a clean mile Yank Missile base in Asia.
Israel.
Perhaps Puerto Rico, or even DC is considered the 51st state, so Britain becomes the 52nd?
BTW Sweden is sometimes called the 51st state, since we are so Americanised.
FYI: Yes, Puerto Rico is considered the 51st state and it's a regular topic of conversation there. But Congress is currently reluctant to grant the status into law for a myriad of reasons... đ
@@stewedfishproductions9554 Nope, he's just wrong. Probably baiting comments for 'engagement' like others do with a deliberate fluff in each video...watchmojo do it also. The term '51st state' has been used generally in a derogatory way to describe US/UK relationship primarily since the end of WWII...especially during the cold war and the protests that happened in the 70s/80s about the US airbases and nuclear weapons sites like RAF Greenham Common and RAF Lakenheath etc in the UK that had been used by the US to store and potentially deploy nukes from.
New Model Army had a song entitled '51st State' mentioning it also 80s...and it was a well known phrase then...again, generally in a derogatory way
'Cause we're the 51st state of America
Yeah, we're the 51st state of America
This is the 51st state of America
Our star-spangled Union Jack flutters so proud
Over the dancin' heads of the merry patriotic crowd
Yeah, tip your hat to the Yankee conquerors
We got no reds under the bed with guns under our pillows...
Also loosely about perceived US oversight in UK affairs and its military presence.
This month we mark the 240th anniversary of a revolutionary battle cry that I think should be better known: âYo soloâ- âI alone,â the words attributed to Bernardo de GĂĄlvez, the governor of Spanish Louisiana, who attacked British-held Pensacola and forced the townâs surrender on May 8, 1781, two years before the end of the Revolutionary War.
GĂĄlvezâs words remind us that the American Revolution - the eight-year war between the United States and Great Britain - was also fought here in Florida, led by the Spanish. Their victory certainly should be celebrated as a source of pride for all Floridians.
Though Spain never signed an official agreement to fight alongside the United States, the two had a common enemy - Britain, long a Spanish rival - and a common friend - France, with whom both would form their own alliance.
Spain declared war on Britain in 1779, but not out of altruism to the American cause. Spainâs goals were self-interested and strategic. King Carlos III wanted to recover key positions in the Mediterranean lost to Britain earlier in the century: Gibraltar, on the Spanish coast, and the island of Minorca. Preserving Spanish access to the Gulf of Mexico and Central America was also vital. Plus, taking Britain down a peg would feel good, too.www.ucf.edu/news/spain-deserves-more-credit-for-american-independence/#:~:text=Though%20Spain%20never%20signed%20an,altruism%20to%20the%20American%20cause.
I went to a British grammar school in the 1970s and we studied the American War of Independence in great detail when I was 15-16. Our teacher was very unbiased and taught us about British governmental and military incompetence during the war as well as the unreasonable British demands on the colonists which led up to it ('taxation without representation'). We were also taught about the American constitution and the Bill of Rights. These topics are rarely taught in British schools today, unfortunately.
Do you know where the US Bill of Rights came from? It was ripped off almost in its entirety from the Bill of Rights of 1689, signed during the Reformation of the Monarchy in order to give all in Britain a set of rights unassailable by Monarch or Parliament.
Taxation without Representation was an excuse, not a reason. The British public were taxed far more heavily than the American Colonists and they had no representation either. This was LONG before Universal Suffrage...
While there were cases of military and governmental incompetence on the side f the British the opposite is also true. Claiming that the British were 'all incompetent' is both stupid and provably incorrect.
As for unreasonable British demands. DO you know why the British increased taxes on the 13 Colonies? Because they kept starting wars with the Natives and the French through aggressive expansion then kept running the Britain to pull their backsides out of the fire. The French-Indian War? Yeah, the American Colonists LITERALLY STARTED IT....
The War of Independence like most historical events is a good deal more nuanced than the everyday portrayals of it make out....
As an Australian, the greatest significance of this War of Independence is that it led to the colonisation of the Great Southern Land. The loss of the American colonies as a dumping ground for unwanted convicts meant that Britain looked further afield to solve this issue and extend their sphere of influence, as well as gaining untapped natural resources. Possibly explains why British history doesnât dwell on 1776 as much as Americans might imagine given that the land that was to become Australia was a worthy addition to the British Empire. And as disastrous for the indigenous peoples as all colonialism.
German here. In fact, the American War of Independence plays only a minor role for Europe and not just for the British. 38 years ago, I wanted to study the subject and discovered that there was practically only one useful book in German. And I had to have it sent to me via interlibrary loan from a university library. But that book also did a thorough job of clearing up the American founding myths. It was particularly fascinating how American crown governors did business with pirates (Thomas Tew) and also lined their own pockets. And that went on for decades and with all sorts of men in office. The fact that the British wanted to clear up the problem was also one of the reasons for setting up their own business. Not particularly noble, is it...?
The history of the British Isles is over 2,000 years old. There's a lot there bluntly. 1776 was Brits against Brits, and by the 1800s we'd established good relations. So, shrug basically
As someone from the UK, I knew of the American Revolution but never really learned about it. I think it is just because there's so much history as the video says. Lol
The American revolution is really rather insignificant to the rest of the world. The US would be nothing of what it is today without for example the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution.
What has surprised me about American History Lessons is that a lot of Black ethnic people seem to blame Britain for Slavery, and are now doing reaction videos about Slavery discovering for themselves that Britain Ended Slavery and it was universal, and saying i was not taught that in school? You have to have the right people doing the teaching and those people have to cover the truth not their own Agenda.
You threw our tea in the water, i learned that đ , priorities
In England, in the younger years, Iâm talking to children from the ages of 6 to 11, they learn about ancient Egypt, ancient, Greece and Rome, the Tudors, Vikings, World War II, all very broadly. In secondary school, from the ages of 11 to 16, we didnât learn anything about the American revolution really. It really wasnât seen as that important. Our little islands owned so much of the planet that losing that one chunk of it, so far away, I donât think has had that much of an impact long-term.
You have to remember, that we didnât lose the America you have now, we lost the America thatâs existed back then. It wasnât that important
American Independence Day turned out to be our Thanks Giving, all things considered.
2:27 that was because you guys tried to invade Canada, not because we were getting back at you XD hands of Canada!
Your ferver for history is admirable,keep it up fellađ đ
Obviously, if we knew how big and powerful America would become, we would have made more of an effort, but as many have commented we were at war with a few more countries at the time!
51st would be Canada and 52nd UK
I think you will find that Puerto Rico is considered the 51st state of the USA... Also in the MOST recent vote (2020), 53% of voters supported Puerto Rico becoming the 51st state. But only an act of Congress can grant that and it's unlikely to happen ! Just saying... đ
In reality the UK is the founding state and the other 50 have been working for the UK ever since its conception most of the founding fathers were Freemasons and that is where their loyalties really lay, Mary's chapel, Edinburgh.
I'm sure most English people could tell you what happened in 1966 .. in (West) Germany, not so much. They don't care.
Do these people honestly this school should teach all of history.
from the British perspective the AWI is a skirmish on a far away front during the Anglo Spanish war with the french on Spain's side... which... we won. Gibraltar was the biggest battle during the AWI, and was fought in Spain and is still a British colony and controls all trade via the Mediterranean.
A fun factoid, the 2nd largest book repository in the World from about 18th Century onwards was Boston, many books that became unavailable in the UK could be found in the Boston archives.