Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Ellis
"Mainland Chinese visitors don't believe in waiting their turn inand they throw weight about like they own the country." TT wrote.

Actually TT they do own it.

Yes, I mentioned that in my reply.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Actually TT you didn't--- you said "whether" the chinese own HK. That implies an argument over ownership. There isn't one. HK is part of China.

Many countries have areas where the inhabitants speak a different language, not just a different form of the same one. Think of India, Belgium, Switzerland, the UK---and so on, and there are plenty of countries where one part is much more 'couth' than other parts!

What will influence us all, and which you have not addressed, is the effect of the millions and millions of Chinese who still live at sub-standard levels becoming eager consumers. I think this would cushion China from some of the effects of a world wide recession (which has not happened yet. Some countries are, for various reasons, still OK.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
in one of the videos a person from mainland china was
deported to hong kong , so that says something.

yes , Ellis

your right if china were to build their own economy that is
not so dependent on exports it would certainly help them
to avoid being so attached to the rest of the worlds various economies.

I think that china could even build a stronger economy by
demanding that it maintains a export deficit.

this would encourage chinese employers to increase labor prices so that the employees could buy things from the diverse countries of the world that would then be repairing or refitting their export capabilities.

( chinas export on machinery should not be included in the export deficit as to allow the world to rebuild and repair )

all in all , the bottom line is that china and asia and india
cannot expect to carry the rest of the world forever they must compromise.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Ellis
Actually TT you didn't--- you said "whether" the chinese own HK. That implies an argument over ownership. There isn't one. HK is part of China.
What I wrote:
Quote:

Hong Kong and China are not the same country, regardless of whether Hong Kong Island is owned by China.

This implies the reasoning of both China and HK as having distinguished themselves separately by government, language, history, social mores and influence. Regardless of whether China owns HK. There was no argument implied as to ownership of the Island by Mainland China. Talk to any HK resident and they will distinguish themselves as separate from Mainland China and its communism. Most will say they will never accept communist rule, and I doubt seriously China will send their army to HK to enforce communism as the rule.
Originally Posted By: Ellis

Many countries have areas where the inhabitants speak a different language, not just a different form of the same one. Think of India, Belgium, Switzerland, the UK---and so on, and there are plenty of countries where one part is much more 'couth' than other parts!
I will not argue that fact. However my experience in HK will still not accept your implied idea that HK and China are one in the same country. HK residents are not allowed in Mainland China without passing inspection and receiving a passport approved visa. In other words there is a border between the two that no Chinese or HK resident can cross without inspection and approval in either direction.
Originally Posted By: Ellis

What will influence us all, and which you have not addressed, is the effect of the millions and millions of Chinese who still live at sub-standard levels becoming eager consumers. I think this would cushion China from some of the effects of a world wide recession (which has not happened yet. Some countries are, for various reasons, still OK.
Excuse me? What affects us all is the push to bring industrialization and economic pressure on civilizations that were self sustaining until the Government took their land from them and their farming lifestyle because they thought it convenient to build factories and employ the farmers in their factories.
Eager to become consumers? What are you nuts?
Eager to become brainwashed and sucked into consumerism by materialists who wish to change the lifestyles of independent poeples so they become dependent on manufactured goods and corporate farming?

You really live a sheltered life. Where do you get all of your information? Television and Newspapers? Yahoo?

What about all of the displaced and impoverished consumers who were the factory workers of the USA, and who lost their jobs because corporations decided to move their factories to Mainland China to avoid taxes that paid for systems to prevent pollution and toxic wastes being spewed about in the U.S.? China has less of a concern for the waste products dumped in the rivers where the factories were built as well as the clouds of toxins spewed into the air. China as a government has no love for the world outside of China, and no love for its own people. It is bought and paid for like most of the worlds Governments.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Bill Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Eager to become consumers? What are you nuts?
Eager to become brainwashed and sucked into consumerism by materialists who wish to change the lifestyles of independent poeples so they become dependent on manufactured goods and corporate farming?

Yes they are eager for all of those things. You don't seem to have noticed that being a farmer is a dawn to dusk activity, particularly if you don't have a lot of technology behind you. The invention of power farming equipment was a major driver in industrializing the industrial world. Now most people work only a part of each day, and have days off at the weekend. This allows them to develop other areas of interest, including discussion of science. If you are a basic farmer you have no time to do anything but farm. And of course in China there has long been a population problem. Without technological means of food distribution much of the population would be starving at least part of the time. I haven't studied how the population of China is spread out, but I bet that there really isn't room for their population to live on the land. So having jobs is the biggest thing in their lives. As I have said before, all the developing nation went through this phase. With our example, even handed down through other cultures, they will hopefully work through it much more quickly than we did.

Kicking people out to live on the land is what Pol Pot tried in Cambodia. When he became leader of Cambodia he forced almost everybody out of the cities to live a farm life. He wound up killing a huge lot of the population, because it just doesn't work. You can have a small scattered population living off of the land, or you can have an industrial society that can provide the resources to help the people to actually live a fulfilling life.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill

Yes they are eager for all of those things. You don't seem to have noticed that being a farmer is a dawn to dusk activity, particularly if you don't have a lot of technology behind you.
It was for most a family tradition where all of the family was involved.
Originally Posted By: Bill
The invention of power farming equipment was a major driver in industrializing the industrial world.
Industrialism has had its advantages and it's disadvantages.
Originally Posted By: Bill
Now most people work only a part of each day, and have days off at the weekend.
And those that work part of the day don't necessarily have much of a life. They try to make one on weekends when they are not feeling like a cog in the wheel of the workday in an amongst the other industrialized consumers hoping they won't get laid off and lose their pension.
I used to work for Boeing Aircraft Corp. In Seattle Washington U.S.A. The average life expectancy of the factory worker after retirement was 5 years. Some I knew never made it that long.
Originally Posted By: Bill
This allows them to develop other areas of interest, including discussion of science.
Assuming they haven't lost their soul to the undustrial revolution and have had an education and social support system that isn't qualifying and measuring the individual as a success or failure in the system or as a human being.
Originally Posted By: Bill
If you are a basic farmer you have no time to do anything but farm.

You know this having been a farmer?
Originally Posted By: Bill
And of course in China there has long been a population problem.

Guess they had some time on their hands other than just farming to make that happen.
Originally Posted By: Bill
Without technological means of food distribution much of the population would be starving at least part of the time.

Now with the technical superiority of the new age most of the population of every country is starving all of the time.
Originally Posted By: Bill
I haven't studied how the population of China is spread out, but I bet that there really isn't room for their population to live on the land.
Government owns most of it. They even decided to take some of it away from those who used to own it.
Originally Posted By: Bill
So having jobs is the biggest thing in their lives.

Survival would be important, and since they can't fend for themselves what are you gonna do but work for someone else?
Originally Posted By: Bill
As I have said before, all the developing nation went through this phase. With our example, even handed down through other cultures, they will hopefully work through it much more quickly than we did.

Probably not though. With all of the human rights complaints coming into public view. It's not likely that they are going to improve upon the failures of other countries, but instead perpetuate the same policies that separated the rich from the poor so that the few could rule the many.
Originally Posted By: Bill

Kicking people out to live on the land is what Pol Pot tried in Cambodia. When he became leader of Cambodia he forced almost everybody out of the cities to live a farm life. He wound up killing a huge lot of the population, because it just doesn't work. You can have a small scattered population living off of the land, or you can have an industrial society that can provide the resources to help the people to actually live a fulfilling life.

Just goes to show you that when people are not free, they suffer the atrocities put upon them by those that control them and take away their sense of creativity. Maybe this time communism will really work... crazy


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
TT- Your picture of historical rural China is quite farcical. The owners of the land were not the farmers, the farmers were serfs, peasants or even slaves and were legally bound to work long hard lives for their exploitative landlords from the ruling classes. That was why the Chinese Revolution was so well supported by the peasant class in China. Of course it all went a bit pear-shaped but the collective farms actually gave more control to the peasants farming them than the previous wealthy landlords ever did, and certainly women were able to enjoy more freedom. Don't forget there are still some women still alive today with the dreadful maimed bound feet left from the customs of before the revolution.

Now most of Eastern China is relatively prosperous, but Western China, which has some areas of racial minorities is not. As in HK these people from Western China have to have permission and 'papers' (internal passports) to travel elsewhere in the country, particularly to the cities of Eastern China. It is not a paradise, but as Bill says now the peasants have jobs and some degree of independence as to their future.

China has a complicated history to western eyes, and we feel it is taking a long time to decide on their future--- but think how long it took us in the west--- Hundreds and hundreds of years. This phase of Chinese development is only decades old and at the moment they are probably doing better than most of their critics.

Last edited by Ellis; 07/30/12 06:06 AM.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Ellis
TT- Your picture of historical rural China is quite farcical.

You and I may be speaking of different histories, or different generations. I was speaking of families that I know that have ties to Mainland China and the last century.
http://articles.latimes.com/2004/mar/07/world/fg-land7
http://www.china.org.cn/english/2006/Jul/175674.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/03/us-china-urbanisation-protest-idUSTRE6721DW20100803
The governments decisions to take the land for either public or industrial use has compromised both the independent farmer and the countries ability to feed itself regardless of the industrial revolution.
About 35 percent of China's labor force is in agriculture (compared to 2.5 percent in the U.S.). There are 425 million agricultural workers (200 million farming households) in China. A little over a decade ago China was home to 700 million farmers. They made up about 60 percent of the population.
"Farmers find it hard to survive in an industrialized society. Farmers want to work in the factories, but transition is difficult and few of them adjust. They have no skills. They lack education. They lack the attitude one needs to learn. They have no sense of time, of living by the clock." The small-scale farmer is largely seen as a dying breed in China, made up mostly of the elderly left behind in the mass exodus of migrant workers to much higher-paying jobs in industrial cities.
Improved farming policies and technologies have given China a high level of self-sufficiency and growth. But the country's top economic planning body warned that this would be hard to maintain. The lack of farm subsidies and expropriation of farmland for urban construction has crippled agriculture. As more farmers move to the cities, lured by better housing, education and other incentives, maintaining the food supply becomes more tenuous.


Originally Posted By: Ellis
The owners of the land were not the farmers, the farmers were serfs, peasants or even slaves and were legally bound to work long hard lives for their exploitative landlords from the ruling classes.

Obviously a different generation..possibly a different century altogether.
Originally Posted By: Ellis
It is not a paradise, but as Bill says now the peasants have jobs and some degree of independence as to their future.
Independence from their previous lifestyles, with no compensation for their losses in education and training to enter the new and completely different lifestyle.
Originally Posted By: Ellis

China has a complicated history to western eyes, and we feel it is taking a long time to decide on their future--- but think how long it took us in the west--- Hundreds and hundreds of years. This phase of Chinese development is only decades old and at the moment they are probably doing better than most of their critics.
Your gonna have to make up your mind as to whether we are speaking of decades or centuries in your descriptions of serfdom and slavery.
Slavery was legally abolished in 1909.(not saying it wasn't and isn't still a part of the current government)


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Bill Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Tutor, you are still talking about the same things that we went through in the Western world. We got through them and now people have greater dignity than at any time in the previous history of humanity.

The Chinese are still working through this stage. It is undoubtedly bad, but I think that we are better off than when we were subsistence farmers, and the Chinese will be too.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Bill
Tutor, you are still talking about the same things that we went through in the Western world. We got through them and now people have greater dignity than at any time in the previous history of humanity.

Really? Not sure which part of the western world you live in. The U.S. has outsourced most all of its manufacturing jobs to help other countries become consumers at the cost of the American Dream as it used to be. No longer is it likely a U.S. citizen will retire from a long term employer employee relationship. The middle class is on its way out and turning into a memory of what dignity was for most Americans who could work one job and support their family. Now a good number of people have to work more than one job to make ends meet and unemployment is higher than it has ever been since the depression era of the 1930's.
Originally Posted By: Bill

The Chinese are still working through this stage. It is undoubtedly bad, but I think that we are better off than when we were subsistence farmers, and the Chinese will be too.
Bill Gill
We are technologically more advanced, but in just about every way as humans with the capability for compassion and unity still thinking at the level of those who created witch hunts and holy wars.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Bill Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Really? Not sure which part of the western world you live in. The U.S. has outsourced most all of its manufacturing jobs to help other countries become consumers at the cost of the American Dream as it used to be. No longer is it likely a U.S. citizen will retire from a long term employer employee relationship. The middle class is on its way out and turning into a memory of what dignity was for most Americans who could work one job and support their family. Now a good number of people have to work more than one job to make ends meet and unemployment is higher than it has ever been since the depression era of the 1930's.


Tutor - Starting with the industrial revolution (around 1750?) factory workers in the West were treated pretty much the same as Chinese workers are today. At first they pretty much had to put up with it, but then they started getting organized and working with a lot of people who had money and realized that the treatment of workers was atrocious. This gradually led to improved working conditions, although it took a long time. I know in the coal mines there were still a great many abuses well up into the 20th Century. Workers who were injured on the job had no safety net to fall back on. If they couldn't work they had no income. Industrial safety was practically non-existent. Witness the Triangle Shirtwaist fire in New York City in 1911. 146 workers, mostly female, died in the fire caused by a total lack of any safety precautions. Many times when workers tried to strike to get better treatment the government sent in troops to break the strike. Eventually it was recognized that things had to get better and they slowly improved. That is the state of things in China today. With time they will probably also start improving conditions.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
You mean when they start creating unions to protect workers and ensure decent wages? Then they'll find themselves gaining the same momentum towards wage increases forcing the industry to outsource and send their jobs to the West where the current employment situation is so desperate they'll work for food.

OH WAIT!!!! The idea of a union in a communist country is a non sequitur... blush


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Bill

Quote:
Tutor, you are still talking about the same things that we went through in the Western world. We got through them and now people have greater dignity than at any time in the previous history of humanity.


china has a government that doesnt allow their people to
get through things.

in china if you try to get a union started you get arrested.

in the U.S. you just get fired and added to the terrorist list.

theres a really big difference between what the U.S. went through and what china is going through.


if people that have money in china try to help the workers gain dignity or higher wages then they get arrested also.


its a fear thing like hitler or the bush admin tried to impose with their fear tactics after 911.

in my opinion the only people that really have any influence on chinese labor conditions is the people that buy chinese products.

we in he U.S. could demand from our democratic government that the communist chinese products be labeled with an indicator of the factories labor conditions , and non scheduled non chinese inspections could be carried out at the factories to determine the conditions and if the product is worthy of the label.

also in my opinion the people in china have the military in china outnumbered 1.3 billion to 4.5 million or something like that.

1300 to 4.5

think about it.

about 800,000 of that number is reserves.

however if another revolution were to occur in china because
of unrest then the military would most likely turn.

and leaders would be exchanged , and china would most likely become a democratic nation that allowed its peoples freedom.

that is how we did it , Bill.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN!


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
But, TT, suppose the voters chose, by properly supervised voting, to return to communism. Perhaps democracy has to evolve slowly as it did in the western Europe (Magna Carta was signed in the C12th), rather than be forced onto people almost overnight by others. It also requires expertise not necessarily there in other methods of government. An example of this is the concept of an opposition, which may , peacefully assume government as a result of election. This is an idea that has not caught on very clearly in many countries!!

The Chinese have already had their Revolution, and a massive one it was, in which the peasants deposed their overlords. They then had Mao's Great Leap Forward-- a more 'peaceful' affair, but to our western eyes still horrific. It, and history generally, are still definitely not ignored by modern China. Your last sentence, TT, suggests that your understanding of chinese history is quite unique, in fact as unique as their country is.

Last edited by Ellis; 08/01/12 01:55 AM.
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Bill Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Ellis probably knows more about Chinese history than I do, but I have done some reading on the subject. The Chinese have had a civilization for around 3000 years. During that time they have had many dynasties. Generally a dynasty arises at the end of a period of turmoil. The dynasty imposes order and things go along pretty good for a while. After a dynasty has been running along nicely for a while the peasants start getting unhappy because their end of the stick is getting even shorter. Then there will be a peasant revolt, followed by another period of turmoil until a new dynasty takes over. Then things will get good again. Well, at least the lives of the peasants won't be totally hopeless. All through Chinese history the government has been balanced on the backs of the peasants. Historically the last dynasty was ended early in the 20th Century. This was followed by a government that was unable to stabilize the country. During that time large parts of the country were controlled by local war lords. After WWII the communists pushed across the country and chased the Chiang Kai-shek government off of the mainland and took over the country. In many ways this seems to me to count as a sort of a dynasty. So we may start seeing a wave of peasant unrest in the not too distant future, and then a new dynasty. I'm not prepared to guess what that dynasty will look like, but there will probably be big changes.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Ellis
But, TT, suppose the voters chose, by properly supervised voting, to return to communism.

Which time frame are we speaking of now? Return to communism from....?
Originally Posted By: Ellis

Perhaps democracy has to evolve slowly as it did in the western Europe (Magna Carta was signed in the C12th), rather than be forced onto people almost overnight by others. It also requires expertise not necessarily there in other methods of government. An example of this is the concept of an opposition, which may , peacefully assume government as a result of election. This is an idea that has not caught on very clearly in many countries!!

Humanity would need to evolve first.
Originally Posted By: Ellis

The Chinese have already had their Revolution, and a massive one it was, in which the peasants deposed their overlords. They then had Mao's Great Leap Forward-- a more 'peaceful' affair, but to our western eyes still horrific. It, and history generally, are still definitely not ignored by modern China.
Had their revolution? Are you suggesting since they had one that's it?
Universe rules no more than one?
History is often painted by the authority, so who knows what history is favored in China, and which history is favored in Western societies and whether they are the same.
Originally Posted By: Ellis
Your last sentence, TT, suggests that your understanding of chinese history is quite unique, in fact as unique as their country is.
I suppose unique is a step up from farcical.
However I doubt that you and I have the same take on my last sentence.

There are all kinds of revolutions.. Industrial, spiritual, democratic, Communistic, maybe even humanitarian...


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Bill- That's a fair description of China, in that various dynasties ruled in succession, some lasting many hundreds of years, but they were not revolutions as such. That is they were wars of powerful overlords seeking to depose the ruler, who often had grown complacent and greedy. (Something like King John and the Magna Carta, which was initiated by the barons and earls not the commoners, but it did establish a change of government in the Magna Carta, that included the representation of ordinary people in a governing body ). Their victory did not change the lot of the peasants much though, that came later.

Yes TT- Usually there is one definitive movement of revolution in a country , which deposes the ruling class -sometimes obliterating them completely, and removing their power for all time. The victors in this case assume the power, and since they are not of the ruling class, they usually, as part of their revolution, ensure that rules are put in place for the future governance of the country along their own ideals.

Further wars may happen, but they are not revolutions, they are Civil Wars or armed skirmishes, terrorism or fighting caused by insurgents. These are not a revolutions. A revolution has to imply a complete change of the system of government, and the installation of this by the winners themselves. Revolution will fail if it is imposed from outside, on conquered people by the conquerer. Then it is just regime change, and is usually weak as the people involved have no real interest in its success other than their personal gain.

China's revolution took place just before World War 2, led by Mao Zedong . It included a moment of extreme inspirational importance to the Chinese people, The Long March, and caused a complete change in China, as it was supported by the serfs and peasants as well as many of the intellectuals of the time. The Great Leap Forward was not a revolution.



* Just a personal note here. I used to be an English/History teacher and taught a subject called 'Revolutions in History '. We could choose from four revolutions- the American, the French, the Russian and the Chinese. I always did the first 3, the Chinese one is very complicated! I enjoyed teaching the subject though- we explored the reasons for revolution etc. plus the outcome, and it is a fascinating topic.




Last edited by Ellis; 08/02/12 02:26 AM.
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Bill Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted By: Ellis
These are not a revolutions. A revolution has to imply a complete change of the system of government, and the installation of this by the winners themselves.

In some ways that isn't quite what happened in the American revolution. Now what I have to say here is based in large part on "The Western Tradition" video series on the history of Western Civilization. It is a college level history course on film. Eugen Weber, the lecturer points out that most of the revolutions we hear of, such as the French Revolution do indeed overthrow the existing structure and try to replace it with something completely different. However, in Britain's American colonies it worked a bit differently. For most of the 16th and 17th Centuries the British weren't really make much money out of the American Colonies, and they kind of let them run open loop. So the colonies had gotten into the habit of mostly governing themselves. Then Britain decided to tighten up their control of the colonies and start making more money out of them. That was when things went to pot. The Colonists wanted to keep on doing things the way they had been and Britain wanted to start telling them what to do. That led to our Revolutionary War, and independence. But what the revolutionaries were trying to do was to keep things they way they "always had been". Then when the war was over and we were independent we actually based our government on the basics of English law, without the king. So we didn't really have a complete overthrow with a new system. It was just a modification of the British system.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Bill- I respect your interpretation of the history of the American Revolution, however in fact the result was as I said. At the start the head of state of the American colonies was the King of England and governmental power at a fundamental level devolved to Britain. Don't forget there was no American constitution until after the war.Also after the war the whole system of government was to put the power in the hands of the elected representatives, even the head of state was elected by the voters. So the result of this war was a complete change of the power structure.

An interesting result of the American revolution was that Britain was no longer able to ship out their spare convicts to the American colonies (though this trade had declined it was still active). Luckily soon after, a British lieutenant discovered a so-called empty continent in the southern hemisphere, thus enabling the Brits to dump their convicts there instead-- (and haven't we both done well!)

A less happy result meant that the plantation owners in the southern states and the islands of the West Indies were so bereft of cheap ( free) labour when the British supply dwindled to a halt that they started shipping in captured Africans and thus started/expanded the slave trade. (A somewhat simplified version, I admit, but basically it is what happened.)

Perhaps everything has unintended consequences, and we can see that in History--- a study which is rapidly becoming untaught here in our schools and universities. (That was a political statement!)

Last edited by Ellis; 08/02/12 10:14 PM. Reason: demoting Captain Cook.
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5