A Queen question for our British cousins. (actually everyone, but them, mostly)

[yulzari]

Ah tea. When the american tea smugglers were **** off that the governor undercut their criminal activities by removing the tax on tea they boarded a legitimate importing vessel and threw their hard earned tea into the harbour to keep the local prices up. They should have been happy that they paid negligible taxes and didn't have to pay for their own defence. Still they are much better off now......?

[michaelmaltby]

".... Still they are much better off now......?"

Compared to whom ....?

[meatloaf109]

Interesting take on the events in Boston, I suppose that the line between criminal and patriot can get blurred.
It is also easy to sit here today 200+ years later and think all the conspiricy revisionist things one wants.
Doesn't change my views on those brave, red-blooded, tax-hating, dress-up loving guys that made it possible for me to enjoy my second cup of coffee this fine morning!

[stona]

Not tax hating. It was a refusal to pay an imposed tax to which the colonists had not consented. This is not the same thing. In a democracy an elected government may impose taxes that we may not like but to which,in electing that government,we have tacitly consented. If you don't like those taxes and can get enough others to agree with you,then you can vote that government out and elect one more to your taste! This was not an option for the colonists who were having taxes imposed on them from London.
This was one of the causes of the so called English civil war (actually far more complicated than that). Infact many of the English parliament's 17th century grievances against Charles I bear a striking resemblance to those of the American colonies against the crown a hundred and twenty odd years later.
Cheers
Steve

[Readie]

Interesting take on the events in Boston, I suppose that the line between criminal and patriot can get blurred.
It is also easy to sit here today 200+ years later and think all the conspiricy revisionist things one wants.
Doesn't change my views on those brave, red-blooded, tax-hating, dress-up loving guys that made it possible for me to enjoy my second cup of coffee this fine morning!

Neither criminal or patriots really ML..the whole 'Tea' issue was a cunning way of letting you new Americans 'win' so you lot thought that you had bettered blighty whereas in actual fact we let you go...
We tried a similar trick with the Canadians but, they insisted on staying Royal and with us.
John

[Lucky13]

....and as we all know, the 'daddy' of the USN, was a Scot, riiiiiight?

[meatloaf109]

....and as we all know, the 'daddy' of the USN, was a Scot, riiiiiight?

John Paul Jones?
I didn't know the bass player for Led Zeppelin was a Scot!

[yulzari]

I think Parliament's view was no representation without taxation. They were fed up with paying for troops to defend America when America wasn't paying anything and causing most of the need for defence. In fact taxation was a local matter and people had representation to their own governor whose administration made the laws. A substantial number of MPs in Britain felt that Britain should not be subsidising the colonists any longer and they should be cast adrift to look after themselves (the Belizean solution). The restraint on them was the expectation that the French would move in instead. Vive l'Amerique Francais! Exit Elvis Presley, enter Johnnie Halliday!

My favourite reference to the Second American Civil War is that it proved English amateurs could beat German professionals in open combat.

Had Loyalist Americans not lost that civil war then the expansion of the 13 colonies would have been stopped and Middle America would become French and the West Spanish. The Canadians had best learn Quebequois French for la belle colonie de France from Hudson's Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. Alaskans would need to practice their Russian. For Mexicans, you are in your own country all the way from Yucatan to Seattle. If you are a native American/First People then you are still buggered anyway; sorry.

[meatloaf109]

Neither criminal or patriots really ML..the whole 'Tea' issue was a cunning way of letting you new Americans 'win' so you lot thought that you had bettered blighty whereas in actual fact we let you go...
We tried a similar trick with the Canadians but, they insisted on staying Royal and with us.
John

I've been to Canada.
Nice folks.

[michaelmaltby]

I've been to North Carolina.
Nice folks.

MM

Canada: Home of Ethical Oil

[michaelmaltby]

America loses the War of Independence - alternate history - Google: America loses War of Independence - Alternate History Discussion Board

"... Had Loyalist Americans not lost that civil war then the expansion of the 13 colonies would have been stopped and Middle America would become French and the West Spanish. The Canadians had best learn Quebequois French for la belle colonie de France from Hudson's Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. Alaskans would need to practice their Russian. For Mexicans, you are in your own country all the way from Yucatan to Seattle. If you are a native American/First People then you are still buggered anyway; sorry ..."

Interesting musings, yulzari from france. They your own?

MM
Proud Loyalist Canadian

[Messy1]

Interesting MM!

[yulzari]

There are many ways to read alternative histories.

Had Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld been a boy then he would have ruled Hannover as well as Britain etc. and Prussian expansion would have been thwarted in the west, thus no Franco-Prussian war, WW1 or WW2. Britain would still remain ruled by Germans though....

My favourite remains Harald Sigurdsson winning the Battle of Stamford Bridge, defeating Wilhelm the Bastard in Kent with a combined English and Norwegian/Danish army and England remaining within the Scandinavian sphere.

I have yet to meet an unpleasant Canadian.

[stona]

I think Parliament's view was no representation without taxation.

The other way around. No taxation without representation. The American colonists were obviously not represented.

With regards to the English problem,Kings were used to calling parliaments whenever it suited them,usually with a view to raising money (by taxation). By the early/mid 1600s we'd had enough of that and had to show the King who was really in charge by the simple expedient of beheading him. A new phrase entered the language after the restoration,"Constitutional Monarchy". Strange for a state with no written constitution!

Even today the monarch does not enter the House of Commons. At the State Opening she sends an official (Black Rod) to summon MPs to the House of Lords. There is a nice bit of theatre when the door to The Commons is slammed in her official's face. A gesture which gives hope to the republican minority

An Act of Parliament does not have to have Royal Assent to become law anymore either though this formality is usually observed. Parliament makes the law,Charles I must be spinning in his grave.

Cheers
Steve

[Messy1]

There are many ways to read alternative histories.

Had Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld been a boy then he would have ruled Hannover as well as Britain etc. and Prussian expansion would have been thwarted in the west, thus no Franco-Prussian war, WW1 or WW2. Britain would still remain ruled by Germans though....

My favourite remains Harald Sigurdsson winning the Battle of Stamford Bridge, defeating Wilhelm the Bastard in Kent with a combined English and Norwegian/Danish army and England remaining within the Scandinavian sphere.

I have yet to meet an unpleasant Canadian.

How about this scenario along the line of your what if as to Princess Victoria being born a boy. What if Hitler had been born a girl? Would WW2 still occured? These scenarios can go on and on, with no real end in sight, and no realistic scenario as to how it would have changed history.