Burning the White House.

Should Britain apologize for burning the White House

  • Yes.

    Votes: 2 2.2%
  • Yes and pay reparations.

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • No. Its history.

    Votes: 41 45.6%
  • No. They deserved it.

    Votes: 20 22.2%
  • I didn't Know they did that.

    Votes: 2 2.2%
  • It didn’t happen.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Way to go Great Britain.

    Votes: 14 15.6%
  • The U.S. can kick British butt now.

    Votes: 6 6.7%
  • This poll is anti-American.

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • This poll is anti-British.

    Votes: 3 3.3%

  • Total voters
    90
DAv2003 said:
Meh, at least you don't have 'God save the king/queen' when we should have 'Rule Brittania' 'Jerusalem' or 'Land of hope and glory'.

I agree that "God Save the Queen" is the worst national anthem imaginable (as far as I know, the only one that is devoted to the head of state), although technically it's not the national anthem since it was never officially adopted. But I don't like any of your other suggestions any better. "Rule Britannia" - yeah, right. How many waves do we rule right now? "Jerusalem" - a song about how rubbish Britain is, covered in dark Satanic mills, where Jesus would never have wanted to come. "Land of Hope and Glory" - you don't need Noel Coward to point out how manifestly untrue *that* is. Plus, of course, the composer loathed the lyrics, which rather puts one off.

Now, what amuses me is the fact that everyone in this thread seems to use the words "we" and "you" to refer to those who carried out actions two centuries ago. As far as I know, no-one today has any responsibility for these actions, and I'm almost certain that no-one posting on this site has anything to do with them or much to do with the actions of modern governments either...

The issue of Australia and the Aborigines is a bit different and rather interesting. There is a powerful argument *against* any apology being given, to the effect that to do so is to distinguish between Australians and Aborigines. That is, if the government says "sorry" to the Aborigines, that is in effect saying that the Aborigines are different people from the government, that they are intrinsically "governed" people rather than the ones doing the governing. It places them in a position of pure passivity, whether of passively being eliminated or of passively being apologised to. After all, if the prime minister were an Aborigine, would there be calls for him to apologise?
 
Plotinus said:
The issue of Australia and the Aborigines is a bit different and rather interesting. There is a powerful argument *against* any apology being given, to the effect that to do so is to distinguish between Australians and Aborigines. That is, if the government says "sorry" to the Aborigines, that is in effect saying that the Aborigines are different people from the government, that they are intrinsically "governed" people rather than the ones doing the governing. It places them in a position of pure passivity, whether of passively being eliminated or of passively being apologised to. After all, if the prime minister were an Aborigine, would there be calls for him to apologise?

That is quite possibly the best argument that I have heard on this issue! Mind if I quote you when this contentious issue arises amongst my countrymen again?
 
DAv2003 said:
Wasn't there a section of the American National Anthem which said the same thing about the English?

Technically, the British aren't mentioned at all, but it continually refers to "the foe", which, in this case would be the British ships bombarding Fort McHenry. Incidentally, after he wrote it, Francis Scott Keys showed it to a friend, who realized it fit the tune of a popular British song, "To Anacreon in Heaven", and it was first published with a note that it was sung to that tune.
 
Plotinus said:
Of course! I like it when people quote me. As long as it's not something embarrassing I wrote when I was two.

So we can quote the embarasssing things you said recently then? :mischief:
 
White house is a building. And it was not white back than. So it is too much to apologise for.
 
Well, to be fair, a lot more than the President's residence itself was burned.
 
Evil Tyrant said:
Besides, we won the war of 1812. :p

Surely the most relevant fact posted?

Very sad the last battle (New Orleans?) was fought AFTER the peace treaty. What a waste!
 
Actually, just a point of curiousity, what colour was the White House before the British forces used it for a bonfire?
 
DAv2003 said:
Actually, just a point of curiousity, what colour was the White House before the British forces used it for a bonfire?
I believe it was made of gray stone.
 
CruddyLeper said:
Very sad the last battle (New Orleans?) was fought AFTER the peace treaty. What a waste!

Incidentally, most of Congress's demands were agreed to a few days before the war began, but, because ships take months to travel from England to America, Congress had already declared war. This fact, plus the fact that, iirc, one of the demands that hadn't been met had been listed as the biggest complaint in the declaration of war, caused the British to believe that the Americans were just acting as agents of the French.
 
It didn't help that the British response was also delayed because their PM had just been assasinated.
 
Top Bottom