This Should Be Fun!
UPDATE: Freerepublic reads the same article and the gang weighs in. And, of course, there's lots to chuckle about.
===============================
Ottawa to tread carefully in War of 1812 commemorations
I have a feeling that our version of events is a bit over-blown, 'cause there was no such thing as Canada then, so how could "we" have won a war? My hunch is the Yanks will largely ignore our commemoration, thus feeding our favourite obsession: "You know nothing about us. Waaaaaah, waaaaaah! How dare they deprive us of an opportunity to rub our petty grievances in their faces!! Just for that, we'll have to turn it into a bitch session."
Anywho, it's only recently that I finally understood the context of this old song, which I've always liked:
The Yanks know how to celebrate their history and their approach doesn't involve fretting about possible negative reactions from other countries.
To date, this has been our version events:
Oh. And Laura Secord? I thought she was best known for making a mighty fine box of chocolates. Now that's something to celebrate!
===============================
Ottawa to tread carefully in War of 1812 commemorations
"It’s a sticky question. Exactly how should Canada commemorate the 200th anniversary of a war in which our predecessors repelled an invasion by the United States – now this country’s closest ally and most valued trading partner?I know. We could invite the Americans to burn down the parliament buildings for good this time. Many of us will be grateful.
The bicentennial of the War of 1812 is fast approaching. It’s a major formative event in Canada’s history – but like all wars, was wrenching and destructive. Both the White House and early Parliament buildings in Upper Canada were torched during the conflict."
"Ottawa’s messaging, though, is carefully crafted to steer Canadians away from chauvinistic jingoism or triumphalism at having repelled the Americans in the long-ago war."[---]
"Canadian military historian Jack Granatstein predicts anti-American sentiment will nevertheless be stirred up – through no fault of the Harper government.Seriously, I know nothing about that war, other than that the Yanks claim they won it and we claim we won it, and 200 years later we're still and forever reminding them that we burned down the White House, as if our most glorious moment in history occurred two centuries ago and involved sticking it to the Yanks, and for that we suck.
“I think this is going to turn into an anti-American festival, no matter what the government does.”"
I have a feeling that our version of events is a bit over-blown, 'cause there was no such thing as Canada then, so how could "we" have won a war? My hunch is the Yanks will largely ignore our commemoration, thus feeding our favourite obsession: "You know nothing about us. Waaaaaah, waaaaaah! How dare they deprive us of an opportunity to rub our petty grievances in their faces!! Just for that, we'll have to turn it into a bitch session."
Anywho, it's only recently that I finally understood the context of this old song, which I've always liked:
The Yanks know how to celebrate their history and their approach doesn't involve fretting about possible negative reactions from other countries.
To date, this has been our version events:
Oh. And Laura Secord? I thought she was best known for making a mighty fine box of chocolates. Now that's something to celebrate!
Labels: Canada, Canuckistanis, history, Yanks
posted by Louise at 10:03 am
11 Comments:
I hate to tell you this but for most Americans, the War of 1812 is about our defensive war against Britain. it's often referred to as our "Second War of Independence". Our, um, kerfuffle with British Canada is, in our minds, a footnote.
We think of it as primarily a naval war, with the two notable exceptions of (1)the successful British attack on Washington and attempted attack on Baltimore, repulsed by the brave defenders of Fort McHenry. From which engagement, we ultimately derived our National Anthem, "The Star Spangled Banner". And of course (2)our tremendous victory at the Battle of New Orleans.
There was and is great pride over the tremendous American victory over the invading British Army at New Orleans. All the British troops were combat veterans from the Napoleonic Wars in Europe and were led by highly skilled, combat-proven British generals and subordinate officers. They were generally considered the world's best army, and a badly outnumbered rag-tag force of Americans whipped their asses. On a smaller scale, we dramatically succeeded at New Orleans where Napoleon failed at Waterloo.
While the force of numbers of the Royal Navy ultimately prevailed over the far smaller US Navy, imposing a naval blockade of most of America's ports, we also think proudly of the incredible naval victories of the radically advanced design frigate USS Constitution and her three sister frigates. (Each costing the then-breathtaking sum of over $250,000 to build.)
The USS Constitution had five engagements with British frigates in the War of 1812 and won them all. The other sister ship frigates were also very successful in combat. ("Plus ça change..." Their role was to harass and tie up as much of the overwhelming numbers of the Royal Navy as possible, to act as "commerce raiders", against the far superior numbers of the Royal Navy, much like the role of the German Kreigsmarine in WW1 and 2.)
These American frigate victories were such a blow to the pride of the Royal Navy and her very honor-conscious Officer Corps -victors of the truly historic Battle of Trafalger, from whence "Britannia rules the waves"- that the Admiralty actually had to issue written orders to all Royal Navy frigate captains in the Atlantic that under no circumstances were British frigates to engage USS Constitution or any of her sister frigates UNLESS they had at least a 2 to 1 numerical advantage. Not bad for a bunch of impudent Americans!
But that's all history. Today, (with the exception of the anti-American leftard Canadians, who ought to move to Hollywood where they'd fit right in), we Yanks hold you Canucks in the highest regard. :-)
You liar! You loved telling me that!
PS: My knowledge of that war just sky-rocketed, thanks to your history lesson.
Got anything else you'd "hate to tell" me?
Americans in Canada. Be sure to read the credits at the end.
What, me guilty of a bit of passive-aggressive schadenfreude?! Reagan forbid! :-)
Loved the credits! So good to see that The Usual Suspects ethnically cleansed the Bob & Doug show of Yank influence! I'm surprised the Lieberals never had the Govt put up jammers, like the Soviets did to keep Radio Free Europe out of Soviet-Unfree Europe. Lost opportunity there. They could have blocked the insidiousness of the Lawrence Welk Show, Leave It To Beaver, Bonanza, etc. :-)
I liked Bonanza!! Canadians were not allowed to forget that Lorne Green or was it Greene (Pa Cartright) was Canadian. I can hear the theme music as I type.
I even liked Lawrence Welk, believe it or not. I think the corniness and the pure syrupy-sweet morality was part of the attraction. It was a case of let's tune in to see how corny they can get this week.
Leave it to Beaver, I have no memory of. We didn't get electricity and hence, TV, until the very late 50s or early 60s and I think the Cleavers had quit TV by then.
And besides, insideousness was Canadian produced television programming. So blocking signals from the US wouldn't have helped. Come to think of it, all the American shows were broadcast on Canadian networks, so the Canadian networks must have bought them. That was before satellite dishes.
Well, here's a nice walk down Memory Lane for you:
Lorne Greene (yes, with the e) singing the Bonanza theme Loved Bonanza! Lots of TV trivia buffs know the melody. Here's the lyrics. I don't know if it's true, but supposedly the real reason that Pernell Roberts quit the show is that he and Lorne Greene absolutely couldn't stand each other. Supposedly, it got to the point they even had a fistfight on the set once. Presumably Roberts was making good money but as soon as he'd developed some star power, and had lined up another gig, starring in a doctor/hospital TV program, he quit. Adios, Adam!
I once visited the Ponderosa outdoor set in Nevada, in the 90's. (Most of the indoor scenes were actually shot in Hollywood.) It was developed into a pretty nice tourist stop. The Ponderosa ranch house, a western street, with a cool saloon, general store, etc. At one time, I had souvenirs, a Ponderosa coffee cup and retro-looking photo of me and my now-ex wife & sister-in-law. You got to pick out costumes to wear for the photo. I was a cowboy and she & sister-in-law were saloon-dance hall floozies. It was fun.
The Lawrence Welk Show I hated it but my parents loved it.
Did you ever watch The Addams Family? Great tongue-in-cheek on horror cliches comedy.
And if Canadians didn't get to see The Twilight Zone, you were deprived of some damn good, always entertaining, usually thought-provoking sci-fi. Rod Serling wrote all the scripts for the first couple of seasons. They were all great but he started running out of ideas, so he also brought in a lot of other excellent scripts, from Robert Heinlein, other excellent writers. Classic, quality TV!
I think I had already left home and was attending uni when the Addams Family started. I may have seen a few episodes from beginning to end, but basically I don't remember much about it. I mostly remember the theme music.
I do remember the Twilight Zone, especially the weekly introduction to it. My grandparents had TV for years before we did. Actually, everybody had TV for years before we did, so I did get to watch some TV at other people's places.
And NO!! That can't be about Adam. He was my favourite 'cause he was so good looking!!
I remember Mad Magazine did a spoof of Bonanza once. It was just about the funniest spoof they ever did.
Sunday evening was the night to look forward to. The Ed Sullivan Show followed by Bonanza. There were precious few other shows that were so appealing.
I used to like TV way back when. Now it's nothing but garbage. /old fart speak
I don't have TV. The few occasions that I get to watch it at other people's places simply reinforces the wisdom of not subscribing. Besides. One addiction is enough.
Great post and you and Dave here in the comments are even better.
Ya, but it's kind of embarrassing that half the comments I get are my own. :p
Unfortunately, however you choose to remember the War of 1812, it was first and foremost an aggressive war waged for the express purpose of conquering Quebec (which in those days included Ontario and was called "Canada"). This is why it rightly recognized that the U.S. lost the war.
That it wasn't a catastrophic loss is the best you can say for it. Of the many marginal gains boasted of, there was none that couldn't have been made peacefully, or that could possibly have justified the cost of the war.
None of which detracts from the courage and the skill of the men who fought on both sides, of course. Which is really what we ought to be remembering.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with ebt over the causes of the War of 1812.
The United States did not declare war on Britain for the purpose of invading British Canada. Here is a good summary of the reasons, which were British encroachments and depradations on America and American citizens and American rights of free trade and navigation on the high seas. These included British kidnapping, called impressment, of American citizens from American ships on the high seas, Britain reneging on the Grand Banks American fishing rights as Britain has guaranteed in the 1783 Treaty of Paris, massive inteference with American shipping trade with France, fomenting vicious Indian wars against the US and American settlers in the Northwest Territories.
ebt and others might want to think about these, most especially the last one listed. The last one was British aggressions against America, committed on American soil, resulting in the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands of American settlers AND staged by British officers stationed in British military installations in British Canada.
The idea of invading British Canada was a REaction, a strategy for obtaining a big bargaining chip for subsequent US-British negotiations. If the strategy worked, Britain would get British Canada back in exchange for addressing all the other grievances America had with Britain. In my link above, that particular topic is addressed in the section under the header "United States expansionism". After the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, America was legally sovereign over a vast tract of land, most of the territory of what is now the mainland US. We didn't need or want to add conquered land and involuntary citizens. Many of the Founding Fathers still living, the President in office in 1812, many Members of Congress, AND many everyday American citizens then personally knew what that was like, the long-term unworkability of it, and the most important, the injustice of it.
I know this is totally un-PC to say, it being unquestioned Canadian historical mythology, but let's be done with Canada-as-victim-of-America, please. If British Canadian colonists -used as pawns by the British Govt- didn't like American troops on British Canadian soil in 1812, they should have complained to the people that caused that, the British Govt and the British military officers implementing British Govt state policy, committing aggression against America, from British Canada.
Post a Comment
<< Home