In article <ld5kflFu232U1@mid.individual.net>,
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:

In article <v4k3d5$3fg9u$1@dont-email.me>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

So is this series basically Nazi fanfiction?
I can do without that.

No. There is nobody (including the author) rooting for the Draka.
They are portrayed as awful and evil. However, sometimes evil wins.

Except that the timeline in the appendix to the first novel, _Marching
Through Georgia_, contained many events that I consider to be
extraordinarily unlikely* (even assuming that the unlikely previous
events happened).

*For values of "extremely unlikely" equal to a successful Operation
Sealion (Nazi Germany invasion of Great Britain in 1940).

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. �-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 6/15/2024 10:03 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <ld5kflFu232U1@mid.individual.net>,
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:

In article <v4k3d5$3fg9u$1@dont-email.me>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

So is this series basically Nazi fanfiction?
I can do without that.

No. There is nobody (including the author) rooting for the Draka.
They are portrayed as awful and evil. However, sometimes evil wins.

Except that the timeline in the appendix to the first novel, _Marching Through Georgia_, contained many events that I consider to be
extraordinarily unlikely* (even assuming that the unlikely previous
events happened).

*For values of "extremely unlikely" equal to a successful Operation
Sealion (Nazi Germany invasion of Great Britain in 1940).

In partial mitigation extremely unlikely things have happened in
reality. Also the point of the books was a dystopia as horrible as the
author could manage so....


--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v4kj0l$3ifm5$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

On 6/15/2024 10:03 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <ld5kflFu232U1@mid.individual.net>,
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:

In article <v4k3d5$3fg9u$1@dont-email.me>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

So is this series basically Nazi fanfiction?
I can do without that.

No. There is nobody (including the author) rooting for the Draka.
They are portrayed as awful and evil. However, sometimes evil wins.

Except that the timeline in the appendix to the first novel, _Marching Through Georgia_, contained many events that I consider to be extraordinarily unlikely* (even assuming that the unlikely previous
events happened).

*For values of "extremely unlikely" equal to a successful Operation
Sealion (Nazi Germany invasion of Great Britain in 1940).

In partial mitigation extremely unlikely things have happened in
reality. Also the point of the books was a dystopia as horrible as the author could manage so....

There is a difference between "improbable" and "implausible". IMHO, many
events in the Draka timeline look implausible.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. —-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v4o33o$ab71$1@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/16/2024 11:48 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <v4kj0l$3ifm5$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

On 6/15/2024 10:03 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <ld5kflFu232U1@mid.individual.net>,
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:

In article <v4k3d5$3fg9u$1@dont-email.me>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

So is this series basically Nazi fanfiction?
I can do without that.

No. There is nobody (including the author) rooting for the Draka.
They are portrayed as awful and evil. However, sometimes evil wins.

Except that the timeline in the appendix to the first novel, _Marching >>> Through Georgia_, contained many events that I consider to be
extraordinarily unlikely* (even assuming that the unlikely previous
events happened).

*For values of "extremely unlikely" equal to a successful Operation
Sealion (Nazi Germany invasion of Great Britain in 1940).

In partial mitigation extremely unlikely things have happened in
reality. Also the point of the books was a dystopia as horrible as the
author could manage so....

There is a difference between "improbable" and "implausible". IMHO, many events in the Draka timeline look implausible.

Depends on how you feel about the Drakas unifying the continent of
Africa under their iron hand in the middle 1800s.

Africa is a big place (it is bigger than North America). It was not
exactly lightly populated. There would had been about an order of
magnitude fewer Draka than Americans. The disease environment would work
in the Draka disfavor. In summary, no way, no how.

The single trigger event is when George Washington exiled the 120,000 Loyalists to South Africa instead of Canada after the USA Revolutionary
war.

I doubt that this could have occurred (who would pay for this? Not USA).

In our reality, the 120,000 Loyalists were exiled to Canada from the
USA. I had no idea that this really happened in the late 1700s.

In our timeline, the Loyalists (number is a bit uncertain), went to
numerous places. Some went to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; some went
to southern Ontario, some went back to the British Isles; some went to
the British possessions in the Caribbean. A significant fraction of the
above returned to the United States several years later (after passions
cooled, I suspect).

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. —-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v4qmh1$10mc5$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 6/17/2024 5:26 PM, William Hyde wrote:

Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 6/16/2024 11:48 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

.

The single trigger event is when George Washington exiled the 120,000
Loyalists to South Africa instead of Canada after the USA
Revolutionary war.

<Snip>

But the vast majority of loyalists stayed behind, and played a role in
the politics of the new nation.  The last laws against former
loyalists were repealed a few years after the war, though local
prejudice lasted much longer.

And Canada certainly did not receive 100k of loyalist immigrants.

I had no idea that this really happened in the late 1700s.

Not mentioned in high school history?

William Hyde

https://www.britannica.com/topic/loyalist

<Snip>

But we didn't get 100k. After all, if you are a loyalist from Georgia,
do you really want to grow turnips in Upper Canada, or sugar in Jamaica?
And if you're a urban type from NY, do you chose Montreal or London?

When I was a kid there were still people who added "UE" to their names
as descendants of the loyalists. It's been a long while since I've seen that, though.

My paternal grandmother denied it, but my late father believed that she
had Loyalist ancestors because she had ancestors born in the regions of
Canada that had Loyalist settlements (IIRC, initially settled by
Loyalists).

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. —-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <robertaw-D3EBEB.21520117062024@news.individual.net>,
Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

In article <v4qmh1$10mc5$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 6/17/2024 5:26 PM, William Hyde wrote:

Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 6/16/2024 11:48 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

.

The single trigger event is when George Washington exiled the 120,000
Loyalists to South Africa instead of Canada after the USA
Revolutionary war.

<Snip>

But the vast majority of loyalists stayed behind, and played a role in
the politics of the new nation.  The last laws against former
loyalists were repealed a few years after the war, though local
prejudice lasted much longer.

And Canada certainly did not receive 100k of loyalist immigrants.

I had no idea that this really happened in the late 1700s.

Not mentioned in high school history?

William Hyde

https://www.britannica.com/topic/loyalist

<Snip>

But we didn't get 100k. After all, if you are a loyalist from Georgia,
do you really want to grow turnips in Upper Canada, or sugar in Jamaica?
And if you're a urban type from NY, do you chose Montreal or London?

When I was a kid there were still people who added "UE" to their names
as descendants of the loyalists. It's been a long while since I've seen
that, though.

My paternal grandmother denied it, but my late father believed that she
had Loyalist ancestors because she had ancestors born in the regions of >Canada that had Loyalist settlements (IIRC, initially settled by
Loyalists).

UE's were well enough remembered when I went to school in the 1960s
that one of my teachers, presumable not a UE, carefully explained
UEs were terribly inbred. I doubt that was on the curriculum and
I'd love to know the backstory to why she felt the need to say
that.

Somone being proudly UEL comes up in a Davies novel set in the ...
1940s? 1950s? Not on a complementary context.

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v4q2cs$ss0s$1@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/17/2024 11:49 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <v4o33o$ab71$1@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/16/2024 11:48 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <v4kj0l$3ifm5$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

On 6/15/2024 10:03 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:

In article <ld5kflFu232U1@mid.individual.net>,
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:

In article <v4k3d5$3fg9u$1@dont-email.me>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

So is this series basically Nazi fanfiction?
I can do without that.

No. There is nobody (including the author) rooting for the Draka. >>>>>> They are portrayed as awful and evil. However, sometimes evil wins. >>>>>

Except that the timeline in the appendix to the first novel, _Marching >>>>> Through Georgia_, contained many events that I consider to be
extraordinarily unlikely* (even assuming that the unlikely previous >>>>> events happened).

*For values of "extremely unlikely" equal to a successful Operation >>>>> Sealion (Nazi Germany invasion of Great Britain in 1940).

In partial mitigation extremely unlikely things have happened in
reality. Also the point of the books was a dystopia as horrible as the >>>> author could manage so....

There is a difference between "improbable" and "implausible". IMHO, many >>> events in the Draka timeline look implausible.

Depends on how you feel about the Drakas unifying the continent of
Africa under their iron hand in the middle 1800s.

Africa is a big place (it is bigger than North America). It was not
exactly lightly populated. There would had been about an order of
magnitude fewer Draka than Americans. The disease environment would work
in the Draka disfavor. In summary, no way, no how.

Did you mean "an order of magnitude fewer Draka than" AFRICANS ?

No, I meant Americans. The Draka had to run rampant over a larger area
with drastically fewer people than USA did and had in the 19th century.

S. M. Stirling seems to disagree with you about the Domination of
Africa. Remember, the Domination was all about the enslavement of every other human on Earth for the purposes of the Draka.

Since I am utterly unconvinced in the plausibility of the timeline he
offered on how this was done; I don't care about his opinion on the
matter. I am speaking of abrupt un-suspension of willing suspension of disbelief.

And George Washington was one of the richest people on the planet in the middle 1700s. He was 3% of the economy of the USA. I suspect that he
could have raised the funds to exile the Loyalists to any place that he wanted to. He chose Canada for most of them.

Where is your source for the extent of George Washington's wealth? I
don't believe it. I don't think he was even 3% of Virgina's economy.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. —-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 16 Jun 2024 20:21:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

In our reality, the 120,000 Loyalists were exiled to Canada from the
USA. I had no idea that this really happened in the late 1700s.

How many of the Loyalists were actually pro-British during the
Revolution vs those who bought land in Canada after the Revolutionary
War when Canada was selling land in southern Ontario for about 1/3 the
cost per acre that the US government was selling land for at the time?

(At the beginning of the war of 1812 Canadian colonial governors were
in a state of panic coucerning whether the ex-Americans would show
more loyalty to America or their own land - in the event 95+%
preferred their land)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 21:52:02 -0700, Robert Woodward
<robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

But we didn't get 100k. After all, if you are a loyalist from Georgia,
do you really want to grow turnips in Upper Canada, or sugar in Jamaica?
And if you're a urban type from NY, do you chose Montreal or London?

When I was a kid there were still people who added "UE" to their names
as descendants of the loyalists. It's been a long while since I've seen
that, though.

My paternal grandmother denied it, but my late father believed that she
had Loyalist ancestors because she had ancestors born in the regions of >Canada that had Loyalist settlements (IIRC, initially settled by
Loyalists).

Whereas while I'm a Canadian my only ancestors who fought in the war
of 1812 who fought in the NY state militia who were part of the
invasion of Canada....(as opposed to my American father who met my
Canadian mother while they were college students in Seattle long ago)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 21:04:58 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, there was legislation, as I mentioned, and those laws were part of
the reason that loyalists formed voting blocs in the last years of the >century.

But we didn't get 100k. After all, if you are a loyalist from Georgia,
do you really want to grow turnips in Upper Canada, or sugar in Jamaica?
And if you're a urban type from NY, do you chose Montreal or London?

When I was a kid there were still people who added "UE" to their names
as descendants of the loyalists. It's been a long while since I've seen >that, though.

William Hyde

Hmmm. I grew up in BC and went to university in Ontario and never saw
that suffix to anybody's name or in print.

Though I >DID< get whacked by my late wife for telling her I had just
read Pierre Berton's 2 volume history of the War of 1812 which
included a reference to the last execution by hanging drawing +
quartering in the British Empire (in 1816 - of 4 Canadians who acted
as guides to US troops marching from Niagara to York - modern day
Toronto - on their way to burn the city of York and who later were
captured by British forces. It happened to be the old town square in
her home town - and the old town square still exists and was a mile
from her parents' home and was a popular tourist trap though they
definitely didn't mention THAT piece of history!)

(Given your nationality I assume you've heard of Berton - many
Americans wouldn't have)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:47:10 -0700, Robert Woodward
<robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

No, I meant Americans. The Draka had to run rampant over a larger area
with drastically fewer people than USA did and had in the 19th century.

S. M. Stirling seems to disagree with you about the Domination of
Africa. Remember, the Domination was all about the enslavement of every
other human on Earth for the purposes of the Draka.

Since I am utterly unconvinced in the plausibility of the timeline he
offered on how this was done; I don't care about his opinion on the
matter. I am speaking of abrupt un-suspension of willing suspension of >disbelief.

No question I also thought a fair bit of "handwavium" was required to
set up what turned out to be a pretty good tale.

And George Washington was one of the richest people on the planet in the
middle 1700s. He was 3% of the economy of the USA. I suspect that he
could have raised the funds to exile the Loyalists to any place that he
wanted to. He chose Canada for most of them.

Where is your source for the extent of George Washington's wealth? I
don't believe it. I don't think he was even 3% of Virgina's economy.

That does seem like an impressive stat which I wouldn't accept without
a readily available cite.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:36:21 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

However, Ontario also received a number of "delayed loyalists", i.e. >Americans attracted by free land, well after the war(1). As these
proved far from loyal to the British in the war of 1812(2), perhaps your >grandmother had a point.

I've never seen a source that suggested land in modern day southern
Ontario was free though it was a fraction (I've read 1/3) of what the
US was selling land for in what is now the Midwest.

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to
be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now
Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-06-19, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:47:10 -0700, Robert Woodward
<robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

No, I meant Americans. The Draka had to run rampant over a larger area
with drastically fewer people than USA did and had in the 19th century.

S. M. Stirling seems to disagree with you about the Domination of
Africa. Remember, the Domination was all about the enslavement of every >>> other human on Earth for the purposes of the Draka.

Since I am utterly unconvinced in the plausibility of the timeline he >>offered on how this was done; I don't care about his opinion on the
matter. I am speaking of abrupt un-suspension of willing suspension of >>disbelief.

No question I also thought a fair bit of "handwavium" was required to
set up what turned out to be a pretty good tale.

And George Washington was one of the richest people on the planet in the >>> middle 1700s. He was 3% of the economy of the USA. I suspect that he
could have raised the funds to exile the Loyalists to any place that he
wanted to. He chose Canada for most of them.

Where is your source for the extent of George Washington's wealth? I
don't believe it. I don't think he was even 3% of Virgina's economy.

That does seem like an impressive stat which I wouldn't accept without
a readily available cite.

Indeed. According to Wikipedia, his estate was equivalent to 0.19% of
the gross domestic product, so he was rich. But that's his wealth, not
his income ("3% of the economy" is a claim of income.) His wealth was
all in property, he tended to be quite cash-poor, without a high income.

Chris

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <2g957j5m5qfpevnuuojggu1d98la2vgrpv@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:36:21 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

However, Ontario also received a number of "delayed loyalists", i.e. >>Americans attracted by free land, well after the war(1). As these
proved far from loyal to the British in the war of 1812(2), perhaps your >>grandmother had a point.

I've never seen a source that suggested land in modern day southern
Ontario was free though it was a fraction (I've read 1/3) of what the
US was selling land for in what is now the Midwest.

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to
be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now
Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

Yeah, to the 1812 invaders' enormous surprise, you can't win hearts
and minds by setting fire to people's homes.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v4ul1p$7ud$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:

In article <2g957j5m5qfpevnuuojggu1d98la2vgrpv@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:36:21 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

However, Ontario also received a number of "delayed loyalists", i.e. >>>Americans attracted by free land, well after the war(1). As these
proved far from loyal to the British in the war of 1812(2), perhaps your >>>grandmother had a point.

I've never seen a source that suggested land in modern day southern
Ontario was free though it was a fraction (I've read 1/3) of what the
US was selling land for in what is now the Midwest.

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to
be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now >>Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

Yeah, to the 1812 invaders' enormous surprise, you can't win hearts
and minds by setting fire to people's homes.

So, while there's no UE or American Invasion of 1812 About Which
They Would Later Lie Shamelessly stories in the Canadian side of
my family, my aunt had a rather astonishing claim that we were
related to Upper Canada's Bishop Strachan, a stalwart figure who
played a central role in the Upper Canada Rebellion... by being
such a consumate dick (along with the rest of the Family Compact
that ran Upper Canada back then) that he helped provoke it.

Well, you can't have heroes without villains.

What makes the claim eye-brow-raising is that Bishop Strachan
was very very Anglican, whereas my mother's family were very
very Catholic. How you bridge godless heretics to Catholics,
I don't know.

One answer is maybe my grandfather wasn't a Catholic but I
cannot imagine that would have escaped comment. There was
certainly commentary when my father (Unitarian atheist)
married my mother (fugitive ex-nun atheist), from both
sides.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 6/19/2024 6:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:

In article <v4ul1p$7ud$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:

In article <2g957j5m5qfpevnuuojggu1d98la2vgrpv@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:36:21 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

However, Ontario also received a number of "delayed loyalists", i.e.
Americans attracted by free land, well after the war(1). As these
proved far from loyal to the British in the war of 1812(2), perhaps your >>>> grandmother had a point.

I've never seen a source that suggested land in modern day southern
Ontario was free though it was a fraction (I've read 1/3) of what the
US was selling land for in what is now the Midwest.

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to
be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now
Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

Yeah, to the 1812 invaders' enormous surprise, you can't win hearts
and minds by setting fire to people's homes.

So, while there's no UE or American Invasion of 1812 About Which
They Would Later Lie Shamelessly stories in the Canadian side of
my family, my aunt had a rather astonishing claim that we were
related to Upper Canada's Bishop Strachan, a stalwart figure who
played a central role in the Upper Canada Rebellion... by being
such a consumate dick (along with the rest of the Family Compact
that ran Upper Canada back then) that he helped provoke it.

Well, you can't have heroes without villains.

What makes the claim eye-brow-raising is that Bishop Strachan
was very very Anglican, whereas my mother's family were very
very Catholic. How you bridge godless heretics to Catholics,
I don't know.

By setting fire to all the Anglicans' homes? ;)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 20/06/2024 01:23, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

On 6/19/2024 6:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:

In article <v4ul1p$7ud$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:

In article <2g957j5m5qfpevnuuojggu1d98la2vgrpv@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat  <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:36:21 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

However, Ontario also received a number of "delayed loyalists", i.e. >>>>> Americans attracted by free land, well after the war(1).  As these
proved far from loyal to the British in the war of 1812(2), perhaps
your
grandmother had a point.

I've never seen a source that suggested land in modern day southern
Ontario was free though it was a fraction (I've read 1/3) of what the
US was selling land for in what is now the Midwest.

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to
be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now
Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

Yeah, to the 1812 invaders' enormous surprise, you can't win hearts
and minds by setting fire to people's homes.

So, while there's no UE or American Invasion of 1812 About Which
They Would Later Lie Shamelessly stories in the Canadian side of
my family, my aunt had a rather astonishing claim that we were
related to Upper Canada's Bishop Strachan, a stalwart figure who
played a central role in the Upper Canada Rebellion... by being
such a consumate dick (along with the rest of the Family Compact
that ran Upper Canada back then) that he helped provoke it.

Well, you can't have heroes without villains.

What makes the claim eye-brow-raising is that Bishop Strachan
was very very Anglican, whereas my mother's family were very
very Catholic. How you bridge godless heretics to Catholics,
I don't know.

By setting fire to all the Anglicans' homes?  ;)

Sufficiently High Anglican is doctrinally only slightly different to
Roman Catholic.

Simply replace all uses of the word "Pope" with "Monarch of England" and
add in the bit about divorce being allowed. ;-)

Cheers,
Gary B-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 19 Jun 2024 11:58:18 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:

Where is your source for the extent of George Washington's wealth? I >>>don't believe it. I don't think he was even 3% of Virgina's economy.

That does seem like an impressive stat which I wouldn't accept without
a readily available cite.

Indeed. According to Wikipedia, his estate was equivalent to 0.19% of
the gross domestic product, so he was rich. But that's his wealth, not
his income ("3% of the economy" is a claim of income.) His wealth was
all in property, he tended to be quite cash-poor, without a high income.

And what proportion of that was from his wife? (Which was Robert E
Lee's claim based on his relationship to the Washingtons)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:33:31 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

You are quite right about the Berton, though I confess it's been a long
time since I read it. I gave it and "Vimy" to an American friend who >wondered if Canada had been in the world wars.

Could be worse - I know Americans who confused the Canadian Vimy
memorial with a memorial honoring the victims of 9/11. (Which is
rather unusual for a Canadian memorial in France)

In case you don't know what it looks like: https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/an-aerial-picture-taken-on-july-6-2018-in-vimy-northern-news-photo/992659604?adppopup=true

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 08:23:14 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to
be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now
Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

Yeah, to the 1812 invaders' enormous surprise, you can't win hearts
and minds by setting fire to people's homes.

So, while there's no UE or American Invasion of 1812 About Which
They Would Later Lie Shamelessly stories in the Canadian side of
my family, my aunt had a rather astonishing claim that we were
related to Upper Canada's Bishop Strachan, a stalwart figure who
played a central role in the Upper Canada Rebellion... by being
such a consumate dick (along with the rest of the Family Compact
that ran Upper Canada back then) that he helped provoke it.

Well, you can't have heroes without villains.

So even if we agree many of the colonial Canadian powers that be are
"consumate dicks" how does that create a right by Americans to
"liberate" them.

(Mind you who am I to speak - while I'm a Canadian my only ancestors
who fought in the War of 1812 were New Yorkers who fought in the NY
state militia - and were part of the invasion of Upper Canada -
today's Ontario)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:25:58 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
<grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:

What makes the claim eye-brow-raising is that Bishop Strachan
was very very Anglican, whereas my mother's family were very
very Catholic. How you bridge godless heretics to Catholics,
I don't know.

By setting fire to all the Anglicans' homes?  ;)

Sufficiently High Anglican is doctrinally only slightly different to
Roman Catholic.

Simply replace all uses of the word "Pope" with "Monarch of England" and
add in the bit about divorce being allowed. ;-)

Last time I attended a Catholic church was for a mass in honor of my
late wife (organized by my very very Catholic mother-in-law). I was
astonished how much of the liturgy I knew from memory since I know the
Anglican prayer book somewhat well.

(It's been suggested that when the Catholic church put the liturgy
from Latin to English - which was around the time of Vatican II - they
used the Book of Common Prayer as a model...since they admired the
"flow" of the Anglican liturgy if not the content)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <gu5a7j92krg3mvqstdv6mpt5bcj0eu37v4@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 08:23:14 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

Again - in British eyes there were enough of them that it was felt to >>>>> be a security threat in the region between London (ON) and York (now >>>>> Toronto) though in the event these settlers chose loyalty to their
land rather than to their former country.

Yeah, to the 1812 invaders' enormous surprise, you can't win hearts
and minds by setting fire to people's homes.

So, while there's no UE or American Invasion of 1812 About Which
They Would Later Lie Shamelessly stories in the Canadian side of
my family, my aunt had a rather astonishing claim that we were
related to Upper Canada's Bishop Strachan, a stalwart figure who
played a central role in the Upper Canada Rebellion... by being
such a consumate dick (along with the rest of the Family Compact
that ran Upper Canada back then) that he helped provoke it.

Well, you can't have heroes without villains.

So even if we agree many of the colonial Canadian powers that be are >"consumate dicks" how does that create a right by Americans to
"liberate" them.

In this case, the US attempt steal Canada _led_ the rise of the
Family Compact.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 23:15:12 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:25:58 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
<grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:

What makes the claim eye-brow-raising is that Bishop Strachan
was very very Anglican, whereas my mother's family were very
very Catholic. How you bridge godless heretics to Catholics,
I don't know.

By setting fire to all the Anglicans' homes?  ;)

Sufficiently High Anglican is doctrinally only slightly different to
Roman Catholic.

Simply replace all uses of the word "Pope" with "Monarch of England" and >>add in the bit about divorce being allowed. ;-)

Last time I attended a Catholic church was for a mass in honor of my
late wife (organized by my very very Catholic mother-in-law). I was >astonished how much of the liturgy I knew from memory since I know the >Anglican prayer book somewhat well.

Unless something has radically changed, the Lutheran liturgy might
also be oddly familiar.

After all, it was originally the "German Mass". Which was basically
the Latin Mass with the objectionable (to Luther) bits removed.

(It's been suggested that when the Catholic church put the liturgy
from Latin to English - which was around the time of Vatican II - they
used the Book of Common Prayer as a model...since they admired the
"flow" of the Anglican liturgy if not the content)

Most of the content was probably pretty familiar to them. It was,
after all, an English translation of the Latin Mass, purged of any
elements deemed objectionable.

The liturgy has been around a long long time.

Non-liturgical groups, of course, rolled their own.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <2q5a7j5pv7lhlp624um15kuulg0aogkiba@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On 19 Jun 2024 11:58:18 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:

Where is your source for the extent of George Washington's wealth? I >>>don't believe it. I don't think he was even 3% of Virgina's economy.

That does seem like an impressive stat which I wouldn't accept without
a readily available cite.

Indeed. According to Wikipedia, his estate was equivalent to 0.19% of
the gross domestic product, so he was rich. But that's his wealth, not
his income ("3% of the economy" is a claim of income.) His wealth was
all in property, he tended to be quite cash-poor, without a high income.

And what proportion of that was from his wife? (Which was Robert E
Lee's claim based on his relationship to the Washingtons)

IIRC, most of it.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. -------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 14:09:17 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

And what proportion of that was from his wife? (Which was Robert E
Lee's claim based on his relationship to the Washingtons)

IIRC, most of it.

Yup. Marrying a rich widow is an old tried and true way for a man to
become rich.

Robert E. Lee was married to Martha Washington's granddaughter. I have
been in their house at the edge of the Arlington National Cemetery.

Well no question being a war hero makes you a hot commodity on the
marriage market. (Which certainly applied to Washington, depending on
your point of view may or may not have applied to Lee - since he was
24 when he married in 1831 long before he came to prominence)

I've never been to Arlington (I'm a west coast Canadian) though my
daughter went there on a day trip when she was doing an exchange year
at the art school in Baltimore some 15 or so years ago. (She also made
the mistake of going to Gettysburg in February which was a huge
disappointment to her as the battlefield was covered in snow that day
- which certainly wasn't the case on July 1-3, 1863!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)