doublestandards. . Independence or Death! Treasonous little bugger! Daddy, can we have independence, please? Pleeaase? Well, if you insist! Really? What good wa doublestandards Independence or Death! Treasonous little bugger! Daddy can we have independence please? Pleeaase? Well if you insist! Really? What good wa
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (236)
[ 236 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #4 - konradkurze
Reply +243 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
USA: demanded its independence
other colonies: asked nicely
South Africa: Britain demanded that be made independant
#45 to #4 - alekshm
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#76 to #4 - smellmyfaceforswag
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
South Africa said they wanted independence from Britain.
South Africa said they wanted independence from Britain.
User avatar #189 to #76 - konradkurze
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
the guys from SA i spoke to said britain demanded they free the apes and give them the majority, governing power over SA
the white SA's said no, the brits threatened war, so the SA's asked to at least be given time to train the apes how to run a country...brits said no, free them NOW....so white gave up power and SA became a ******** of black leaders with no clue how to lead
#254 to #189 - bann
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
I'm sure if you ask the white people there they'll tell you that, but for the vast majority things go much better when apartheid. Also you're referring to Nelson Mandala, who is considered one of the most successful leaders of all time, even by his rivals. But like gerfox said, I'm not even sure what event you're talking about.
User avatar #257 to #254 - konradkurze
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
as if mandela represents all black leaders
#261 to #257 - bann
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
No but he was the primary leader in South Africa for long period of time, and they're still relatively successful today. Truly most of Africa went to **** once Europeans left fault on that is widely debated , South Africa actually pulled it together and came out alright in the end.
#243 to #189 - gerfox
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
I don't know what you are insinuating, but the context makes it look like you insinuate that South Africa didn't gain it's independence from the UK until the fall of Apartheid. In that case you're 60 years late, kiddo.
#31 - snood
Reply +140 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
i feel like polandball leads to people thinking their learning something historical when in reality someone's just trying to make a joke and the content is actually completely wrong historically. like obviously america did ask for independence and had to go to war when they refused.
User avatar #74 to #31 - serotonin
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
America at first didnt even want independance. Rebels wanted representation on royal court. ``No taxation without representation`` was slogan of rebelion. And crown was ready to discus matters with rebels but seening that they didnt have phones back then communication was a big issue so things escalated before diplomacy could stop it
#88 to #74 - anon id: 22224100
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
This is wrong. The US tried diplomacy for 8 years. It was only when George III realized that he wasn't going to win the war that he requested diplomacy. At that point the patriots pretty much told him to **** off
User avatar #95 to #88 - serotonin
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
yeah...how about no. read about start of revolution
#101 to #95 - anon id: 22224100
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
User avatar #103 to #101 - serotonin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
I will have a look at it tomorow. Where I am its getting kind of late. Will say what i thik of it once I read it
#48 to #31 - dragx
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #51 to #48 - snood
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Britain was taxing the colonies like hell to pay for wars and other things that the colonies didn't want or need. They went from part of Britain to Britain's slave/workhorse, so they really weren't in a position to ask nicely.
#58 to #51 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Apparently Americans still don't understand what taxes are for.

Don't try glorifying the rebellion - it was done as much out of selfish greed as it was for some sort of moral 'good.'
User avatar #65 to #58 - theism
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Taxes are paid to a governing body with the understanding those taxes will be used to provide services back to the people. The colonies payed an exorbitant tax rate that was taken almost entirely for the British empire. They weren't returned services for their taxes and instead the money went to the royal treasury.
#164 to #65 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Your taxes get spent across the country, not just your town. This is fine is it not?

Same thing with an empire, taxes get spent across the whole empire which included such things as stopping the OTHER superpowers of the time coming and ******* all the colonials up and taking their ****. Only a moron, child or utterly naieve person could think that nothing was provided in return. Your ignorence in this is simply represents the general problem with democracy - average joe doesn't understand **** about politics yet thinks he knows it all.
User avatar #166 to #164 - theism
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
The money spent by the federal government is meant to benefit all citizens of the country. The British had no intention of putting money back into the colonies.
#183 to #166 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Except for the fact that, y'know, they did.

God you're retarded. At least try and learn a little history before spouting the **** you were taught in patriotism 101.
User avatar #184 to #183 - theism
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
A very significant amount went to the personal treasury of the British monarchy.
The Empire saw the colonies as a business and didn't actually view the colonists as members of the empire. In addition to the taxes they put ridiculous restrictions on them and gave the colonists little to no say in their own governance.
#195 to #184 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Another way to think about this:

Why do people go on Dragons Den (Or whatever the US version is - Shark Tank?) ?
They end up giving a huge amount of their profits to a 3rd party that has very little actual input in the day-to-day of the business. However the dragons facilitate the company growing hugely which means that they make far more than they otherwise would have done and so the net result is that they profit more.

Trade, and the security of that trade was the primary benefit to ALL of the colonies.
#192 to #184 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
So do you feel that it is fair and just for employees of a fortune 500 company to declare independance and seize the company assets?

What is very often overlooked (Because it's harder to quantify than "they took X amount and kept Y% of it for fancy balls and military uses" is the fact that the Empire brought with it institutions which increased all aspects of productivity in the first place, and allowed for a global economy. They may have taken a big chunk, but considering if the Empire had never had an input the same colonies would not have produced anywhere near as much then it actually isn't that bad. If you take 3 from a production of 5 it seems a lot. If the alternative however is simply producing 1 then you've still benefitted.

You can't just take the positive institutional aspect of Empire as independant variables simply so you can segregate the bad aspects and present them as the whole story.
#210 to #192 - anon id: dce9d741
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
**** this whole "who's the bad guy?" thing. The Empire did a ****** job of handling their possessions, so they lost them. Justified or not, the colonists were unhappy and parliament ignored them.
#212 to #210 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Bahaha don't bother commenting when you have absolutely no idea. The Empire did a **** job of handling it's possesions? Man that nearly killed me.

#84 to #65 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
And yet all across the Empire the living standards and general livelihood of the subjects were raised from the ********* they were at first found in.

America didn't, and still doesn't, like the idea of contributing to anything but their own interests. Did Britain take a large proportion? Of course, it was them that had built the ******* empire in the first place, thats what they're allowed to do.
User avatar #145 to #84 - xdeathspawnx
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
god dammit how uneducated are you. Britain did not build or even help create the colonies, that was done by the colonials living there. What you are saying would make sense if at least a portion of the taxes they paid went back to helping them, but all of it went to the mainland while those living in the colonies were forced to fend for themselves. The reason the standard of living went up in the colonies is because of the work those living there did, not because of any amount of help that Britain gave them. (which was none)
#162 to #145 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Holy ****, is that actually the version of history you rednecks get taught?

Wow. Just wow. Americans really will twist history into a gorey mess to push their ********. I also love how you called me uneducated.
User avatar #205 to #162 - xdeathspawnx
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
You're uneducated if you seriously think the taxes the colonials were paying were going back to help them in any way. The reason Great Britain started taxing the colonies in the first place is because they needed to repay war debts from the seven years war, which is where all the money went. Not only were taxes not going back to help any British colonies, but no colonials were allowed representation in parliament even though they were technically British citizens and paid way more taxes than citizens living in the mainland. You say we are twisting history when in reality you are to make it seem like Britain has done no wrong. Do you really think that wanting Independence or at least representation in the government your taxes are funding is wrong?
#207 to #205 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Yeah, you're simply ignoring things now to make yourself feel better. What did they get back from their taxes? Harder to quantify but that doesn't mean you can simply write them off. What was provided to the colonies was a stable, international trade and the institutional organisation which allowed that to be taken advantage of. I'll reiterate what I said above - if yo produce 5 units and 3 are taken as tax then it seems terrible, unless the alternative is only producing 1 unit.

I never said the empire did nothing wrong, I simply argued aginst the outright vilification that was being thrown at it. The simple fact is that the Empire was no bad thing - it benefitted every colony by fostering them to become the stronger and opened up the way for the current international society we live in. You've had so many years of propaganda convincing yourselves that your rebellion had some greater meaning than simply wanting more power for yourselves and letting France **** over Britain.
User avatar #227 to #162 - yuukoku
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
When the revolution started, the English who were taxing the American colonies had absolutely nothing to to with their construction. They were taxing the colonies in an absurd attempt to pay back debt from the French and Indian War, which THEY started. The war was fought in the Americas for the prosperity of Britain, not us, and then they taxed money out of us for themselves, not us. All the money was going to Britain and Americans were seeing no return because that money was going to other countries in order to pay off war debts. They weren't helping us, they were leeching off of us.
User avatar #169 to #84 - theism
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
You are either the blindest idiot I've ever seen, or a very convincing troll.
#100 to #84 - ogloko
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
the british didnt do **** until the colonies started to be successful, then they taxed the **** out of them.
User avatar #126 to #100 - Rockaman
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Funnily enough, to make them successful, the British had to invest quite heavily to get them going in the first place - therefore they did quite a lot before taxing them - which can be seen as a kind of return from the initial investment.
#94 to #84 - anon id: 22224100
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
"Still doesn't like contributing to anything but their own interests."
That's the entire world mate. And second of all the Americans had no say in government. If the US did that to Puerto Rico and they rebelled they would have every right to. However, the US does give Puerto Rico and other territories a seat in Congress. Also, the DC was pissed for the same reasons, that they were paying taxes yet they didn't have any representation in Congress. Now DC has a Congressman representing them that has voting power. That was all the Americans asked for, was a seat for a representative that addressed their needs and complaints. They were denied.

And like theism said, the US was paying large amounts of taxes on goods that they themselves were making. Then things like tea were being sent back to the colonies, and though the Americans were boycotting against the taxes, the British were pretty much forcing them to buy the product and pay the taxes anyways. Britain used force, not diplomacy
User avatar #60 to #58 - snood
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
if selfish greed means that the colonies wanted their taxes to be used for their interests and protection instead of someone across the ocean, then yeah i guess that was selfish. Please tell me all about how you would do it differently. but don't actually
#61 to #60 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Your attitude typifies the arrogance of America that has caused so much grief for the world.

Don't worry snowflake, you're all No. 1! And the greatest country on Earth!
User avatar #66 to #61 - snood
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
well i'm glad you can at least admit that we're the best, that's all i need to hear.
User avatar #73 to #66 - mussyo
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
You are not helping yourself with that comment...
User avatar #77 to #73 - snood
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
you know how any race can have pride besides white people. like there's asian pride and black pride but you can't have white pride? it's basically the same thing with america, what country doesn't want to claim to be the best? but china and england and whoever else can say they're the best place to live but if america says it then they're ignorant. if i didn't think my country was the best place to live i wouldn't live here.
#82 to #77 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Don't try to pull that ****. America has hightened the 'USA RULEZ! NUMBER 1 NUMBER 1" ******** to a whole new level. Pride in your country is one thing, blind zealotry is another.
#93 to #82 - anon id: 5e0e0245
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Hey man I dont appreciate you coming up here preaching about american values when really its all a media sham and what not to glorify the U S of A. In reality we dont have **** for national pride, and even the move neck-beareded 'muricans would rather raise the confederate flag than the stars and stripes.

source: Im an inner city american kid
#99 to #31 - newdevyx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
i guess they should have asked more nicely.
i guess they should have asked more nicely.
User avatar #125 to #31 - Rockaman
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
*Some Americans - you do realise that the War of American Independence was somewhat of a civil war as around 20% of Americans of European origin took the Royalist side. Seeing as about 40% of Americans of European origin stayed out of the war all together, the Republicans weren't actually a majority!
#2 - enspir
Reply +131 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
At the times the colonies "asked", England was in a weakened state and had to comply in any case, as they couldn't afford another fight after WW2.
Instead they came up with the Commonwealth.
#8 to #2 - anon id: a44bdcb8
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
And the Netherlands were ready to take back there colonies even in a weakened state after the second world war but then america went all ape ****.
User avatar #9 to #8 - crazyolitis
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Well, we only had like one that was really trying to be independant, Britain had like 1/10th of the whole world.
User avatar #21 to #2 - Truthordeal
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
World War I, bro. The Balfour Declaration created the commonwealth of the Anglo colonies (Canada, Oz, etc). After World War II, they let go the non-Anglo colonies (India, Israel), mostly because they were made to. This comic seems to be depicting the first commonwealth.
User avatar #230 to #2 - thismustbeseen
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
What? No. That's completely wrong.

Canada gained independence in 1867.. 70 years before WWII.. the two had nothing to do with each other.
User avatar #233 to #230 - rogueuwot
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Actually it wasn't truly independent until the 1960s I believe as it was only given dominion status like Australia and New Zealand.
User avatar #127 to #2 - pioneermhm
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
*cough cough* Canada *Coughing intensifies*
User avatar #232 to #127 - Dwarf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
*coughs internally*
User avatar #171 to #2 - sursum
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Australia got its independence in 1901, very much during Britain's glory days.
User avatar #128 to #2 - snowshark
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Actually it's more than that. If the UK had still been at the height of it's power after WWII the result would probably have been the same because of the anti-imperialist wave that swept over the world. The people of the UK didn't want to be the same as Germany and when the people of the colonies had just asked after fighting and dying alongside the countless other free nations there really wasn't much in the way of opposition.

The countries wanted their freedom and they got it in the commonwealth, still regarding the reigning monarch as the head of state but being completely autonomous. If it was all about strength then the commonwealth wouldn't exist. This was about both freedom and unity. Peoples united in the same kingdom, though separated by freedom.
#6 - azraelthemage
Reply +62 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
What the **** do you think this was for? No seriously, the war was completely avoidable.
#26 to #6 - anon id: 2edfca45
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
You didnt say please?

God, americans were notoriously rude back in the day aswell. And then you went ahead and wasted perfectly good tea aswell!
#97 to #26 - anon id: 5e0e0245
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
** "oh **** man its the copS!"
*** "Dude, i didnt even pay taxes on this tea.... **** man"
** "***** i aint going to the guillotine for this biznatch"
*** "Shhh... just shh. Quick dump that **** in the harbor"
** "alright its done... ***** we out"

> tru life of an american tea smuggler.
User avatar #118 to #6 - fuckscreennames
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
exactly what i was thinking. and on top of that, the colonists had been saying that they thought they were being treated unfairly/poorly and warned Britain that they would rebel/ revolt if they didn't do anything, then politics happened and basically England said we don't feel like it so no and then war. this is not entirely accurate i know, but it's a ************* summary so deal with it
#115 to #6 - higitusfigitus
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
I think we both know the answer to that.
#22 - Milos
Reply +56 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Imagine if they asked.
User avatar #36 to #22 - biscuitsunited
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
I think if they'd waited for Independence, and (assuming that Britain went on to get the largest empire anyway) , the world would be a lot, nicer.

Well think on it, Most commonwealth countries are quite peaceful and co-operative towards each other, and the world wars would have been won plenty faster if the U.S had been in from the start.
User avatar #50 to #36 - legionx
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Did you forget the fact that the world wars were between the common wealth countries, and the rape of Africa where after dividing it up into sections at the Berlin Conference they went on to fight over territories anyway when they diamonds and gold. As well was the fact that America became a Common wealth Country after the Spanish-American war when Spain handed over Puerto Rico and the Philippine islands... This probably reads a lot angrier than I meant it to be
User avatar #53 to #50 - unhappyspanners
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
The anon below is me, I forgot to sign in.
User avatar #54 to #53 - legionx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Did you mean common wealth countries as in GB Germany or France. Countries that owned territories or Countries that were territories such as Congo, South Africa, The Virgin Islands?
User avatar #56 to #54 - unhappyspanners
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
You said the world wars were between the commonwealth countries...
#59 to #56 - anon id: 99b276dd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Reading is hard right? He said no such thing. Try again.
User avatar #104 to #59 - unhappyspanners
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
"Did you forget the fact that the world wars were between the common wealth countries"
#52 to #50 - anon id: faf6675f
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
The world wars were between the common wealth countries?
User avatar #142 to #36 - xdeathspawnx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
if the US had not shown that it was possible for a colony to fight against it's parent country and win then it's possible that the common wealth would have never been formed because Brattain would not have taken it's colonies as a serious threat when they asked for Independence.
#86 to #36 - anon id: 22224100
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
No it wouldn't have. The US probably never would have expanded westward which means that a third of what is now known as the US would probably belong to france and half of it would belong to Mexico

Also, the US may not have been as populated during that time as it was, nor would it have the same resources either. Also, it would not have been the United States, but most likely would have remained 13 separate entities and governing bodies. Also, the British Empire only collapsed because of their treaties with the US that ruined them economically. Had the US stayed the British Empire would probably still be around today, or in a very likely scenario Germany would have won WWI and there wouldn't have been a WWII.
#68 to #22 - heroicvenom
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
#209 to #22 - imnotkickthecat
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#216 to #22 - anon id: bd0d6bc3
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
I don't see United Kingdom's flag on Canada's flag..
User avatar #265 to #216 - ChromedDragon
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/29/2014) [-]
it was there until like the 50's when they switche it out for a leaf
User avatar #250 to #216 - milthyfoustache
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Oi ya bloody fart puncher we invented maple trees, and syrup, and red, and white, and flags.
User avatar #40 to #22 - brrigg
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
ah...the red white and red white and blue.
#87 - shroomftw
Reply +36 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
and look who's on top   
   
 preparing for eurorage
and look who's on top

preparing for eurorage
#105 to #87 - anon id: 94f9fa1d
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
On top of what?

A pile of dept and ****?
#123 to #105 - Rockaman
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
More or less...
User avatar #132 to #123 - ProWig
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
holy **** this is awesome
User avatar #110 to #105 - smithforprez
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
its debt, 'course a goddamn socialist like you wouldn't know
User avatar #112 to #110 - shroomftw
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
hell yeah. we should get together and go commie hunting sometime
User avatar #114 to #112 - smithforprez
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
but then who's going to make overpriced coffee and pretentious whiny music?
User avatar #106 to #105 - shroomftw
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
im atop ur mum m8
#122 to #105 - tyroneisanigger
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
debt*
User avatar #119 to #105 - tdogmeds
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Pile of department.
#121 to #87 - Rockaman
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
How aboot you look at a map, guy?
#131 to #121 - altairibnlaahad
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
I'm not your guy, friend!
I'm not your guy, friend!
#148 to #131 - UnforgivingOne
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #170 to #121 - shroomftw
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
I'm sorry i cant read because who needs reading wen u hav fredum
#79 - swagloon
Reply +27 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
The colonies asked for fair representation and didn't receive that what makes you think they could had simply asked for independence?
#83 to #79 - zomaru
-3 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#96 to #83 - anon id: 22224100
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
That's stupid. You think Britain would have just let us go 50 years later? **** no. The US is the reason for the collapse of the British Empire
User avatar #89 to #83 - theguythatisnotyou
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Except you know, America as a culture and a country would be incredibly different with names like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson wouldn't hold the same context as they do now.
User avatar #98 to #89 - buggybman
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Lincoln wasn't a founding father
User avatar #263 to #98 - theguythatisnotyou
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
No, he/she was stating that the Civil War wouldn't have happened meaning everything Lincoln did wouldn't have happened in this alternative universe.
#90 to #89 - zomaru
-2 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #91 to #90 - theguythatisnotyou
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Our Economy is actual very stable. We just don't have an Net Income, like most countries.
#92 to #91 - zomaru
-2 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #107 to #92 - damping
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
How is high school? I assume only a high school student would think that our economy is not stable.
#109 to #107 - zomaru
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Alright, I can't do this troll thing.
I don't know how people can go for red thumbs like this. It just feels so... Wrong.
User avatar #111 to #109 - damping
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
You got to have a certain mindset about it. You have to want to make other people angry. Trust me, I know I have had a few -100 comments in my day.
User avatar #113 to #111 - zomaru
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
I just can't. I can only pretend to be stupid for so long before I get a headache.
#81 - thatguyyoumightno
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Fixed it.
User avatar #134 to #81 - ProWig
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
i dont see how
User avatar #188 to #134 - blastwave
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Edwin Starr - War (What Is It Good For?)
User avatar #124 to #81 - kommandantvideo
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(12/18/2013) [-]
Say it again
#43 - bobthedilder
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
But we did ask....
User avatar #57 to #43 - grieze
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
that wasn't an ask. it was us demanding freedom and then saying go **** yourself with john Hancock giving his john hancock
#64 to #57 - fareastbrainseer
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
It was more like a very well thought out break-up letter. It basically said, "We've been trying to make this work, but here is a list of all the things we can't deal with that you're forcing on us, so we're within our rights to go on our own. Bye."
User avatar #71 to #57 - bobthedilder
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
fareastbrainseer summed it up rather well, but to be fair those other countries didn't go begging to Britain for independence they did similar things also they weren't worth as much as the American colonies.
User avatar #62 to #57 - endercrew
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Well. We did before that ask for more autonomy but the British Parliament refused to. So it led to that.
#102 to #43 - mypieguy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
User avatar #41 - reginleif
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
I'm not sure what good it would have done the Canucks and Aussies to ask during the reign of King George the 3rd. Seriously that guy was a certified nut, with delusions of near absolute monarchy, the PINNACLE of the inbrededness that was the British royal family.

On the scale of 1-10 on the retard scale he was Potato. I'm sure the Canadians and the Aussies were like ..... "maybe we'll ask after this one dies".
#46 to #41 - anon id: b9f42004
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(12/17/2013) [-]
Actually many Canadians supported the American's request for independence, and many of them wanted to join the American revolution. However, the governor of Canada threatened to kill anyone found supporting the rebels. It wasn't so much King George, it was that the governing bodies were much, much more loyal to the crown