r/worldnews Sep 22 '22 Silver 2 Helpful 4 Wholesome 7 All-Seeing Upvote 2 Take My Energy 1 Take My Power 1

Zelenskyy calls on Russians to 'protest' and 'fight back' against Putin's draft if they 'want to survive' Russia/Ukraine

[deleted]

60.3k Upvotes

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.0k

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '22

Probably the first one because people didn't know what was happening.

1.2k

u/clintCamp Sep 22 '22

My distant ancestor was conscripted by a local lord to try and take out the British monarchy. They lost, the Lord was executed and we got banished to the American colonies.

757

u/ZedTT Sep 22 '22

Oh yeah let's just put all the people who tried to kill the monarch in one place and tax them without representation they won't revolt or anything

420

u/kamikazi1231 Sep 22 '22

I mean it lasted for a good century and a half. Future kings problem.

15

u/Striking-Math259 Sep 22 '22

Depends how far back I suppose

-2

u/Oldballs2 Sep 23 '22

Under rated comment right there. “Simpsons did it” Ve va las Simpson’s

3

u/Wermillion Sep 23 '22

Ve va?

8

u/Grigoran Sep 23 '22

Like "viva" but for those who don't know how to spell it

-1

u/cinderubella Sep 23 '22

Says the guy who doesn't know it's à la.

3

u/Grigoran Sep 23 '22

It look like they are saying "long live Simpsons," so "viva" is correct.

1

u/cinderubella Sep 23 '22

'simpsons did it' is more like 'à la the Simpsons' than 'viva the Simpsons' (mainly because the latter makes little sense, and absolutely no sense in context)

→ More replies

1

u/play_Max_Payne_pls Sep 23 '22

And by the time they revolted the King was no longer in true power so instead you had to deal with the even scummier government

62

u/nictheman123 Sep 23 '22

To be fair, that place was "way the fuck over there where they can't reach us" so there's some sense to that.

Did they revolt? Sure. Did they do any damage to the homeland, Parliament, or the monarchy? Not at all!

Good for keeping control of the colony? Perhaps not. Good for keeping the brewing peasant revolt from harming anyone you consider important? Absolutely!

0

u/Sentinel-Wraith Sep 23 '22

To be fair, that place was "way the fuck over there where they can't reach us" so there's some sense to that.

Did they revolt? Sure. Did they do any damage to the homeland, Parliament, or the monarchy? Not at all!

Captain John Paul Jones: "Am I a joke to you?"

2

u/nictheman123 Sep 23 '22

First of all, here's a reddit formatting guide to help you with those block quotes

Second, he managed to partially damage one port town and failed to take some minor Earl hostage according to that article you just listed. So, as far as doing damage to the British homeland, yeah, kinda a joke.

1

u/ThroatMeYeBastards Sep 23 '22

I enjoyed reading about this, take my upvote

92

u/Unions4America Sep 22 '22

What do you mean? Sounds brilliant to me. Just like when Hitler logically came to the conclusion 'The only way to feed the German people long-term is to invade the East' rather than 'We can just be peaceful and trade for food with foreign nations.' Fool proof plan, if you ask me.

107

u/DefiantLemur Sep 23 '22

I'm glad he's a idiot. The world would have been worse off if he stopped after taking Poland, Austria, Rhinelands and Czechoslovakia and consolidated his power into a dystopic hell in Central Europe.

18

u/hi_me_here Sep 23 '22

it would've collapsed within a decade, max, no matter what. the Nazis had No long term economic plans and the German economy as it was under his rule could only function on aggressive military expansion because they didn't actually have the ability to pay for all the checks they were writing, and they wouldn't be able to maintain any international trade due to either bankruptcy or warfare blockades or both. All of their spending was military focused, that shit isn't useful if you're not using it, nobody's buying it and you can't afford to keep it running yourself. It can't project power overseas because the German Navy was miniscule and had no hope of contesting Britain's seapower well enough to attempt any kind of invasion of the UK, especially with the USSR waiting in the east for a moment of weakness. without taking out the UK, they're stuck on dry land, forever, no matter what, and, again, running out of gas

the Nazis were utterly dependent on conquering, robbing and enslaving everyone and everything in reach to keep the gears turning - the only way he could've swung that around is by taking the oil fields down in the caucasus, which meant invading Russia, which wasn't winnable and would only become less winnable as time went on

Without taking the oil fields, they run out of oil for heavy industry and fuel and collapse. If he didn't invade the ussr, even if the US never entered the war, the ussr would have invaded Germany by 1944 at the very latest, earlier if France was still intact. If he invades France, now he's got the entire Atlantic Coast of Europe to secure, useless for trade because of the royal navy blockading him indefinitely, with ever dwindling fuel and resources to run his war machine. if the war machine stops running, Nazi Germany stops existing, either due to internal collapse or external invasion or both

it was just a bad plan all around - don't invade

50

u/Chitown2181 Sep 23 '22

What a nightmare. What a different world.

No one would have stopped him.

54

u/Leege13 Sep 23 '22

The issue was he couldn’t stop himself. Once he got conquering, he couldn’t just stop at a few countries, he wanted all of Europe. Thought he was building a Reich and all he was doing was cosplaying Napoleon, even including the Russian invasion.

8

u/Kaymish_ Sep 23 '22

Dude had other motivating factors than he was just a power hungary arsehole. The money looted from the first few conquests didn't really pay off his creditors enough so he needed to keep going. Also the USSR hated his guts and Stalin was furiously building up to take him out; they would have come for him eventually so Hitler felt he had to strike first before Stalin was powerful enough to crush the Nazis. Its the same dynamic that was between the German Empire and the Russian empire in WWI Germany felt they needed to deal with russia before they had modernised enough to crush them.

6

u/gryphmaster Sep 23 '22

He really pulled off the cosplay in the end tho, real devotion to realism with the whole “lose massive battle after battle” after uniting all of remaining europe against you

6

u/watduhdamhell Sep 23 '22

The only way to make sure you kill all the interior races and such, the way he envisioned, is to conquer the world. I mean, really. If he didn't conquest for it all, it meant being okay with interiors living happily for however long. He just couldn't have that.

Luckily he was far too tunnel-visioned over his hatred to realize the long game would have been the right play, even if it meant allowing the hated to live for a while longer.

What a combination of POS/psychopath/warmonger/fascist. I mean, really. He may be the worst person to have ever lived with real power... and hopefully, it stays that way.

1

u/idlefritz Sep 23 '22

Happens to me every time I play Civilization too.

4

u/oijsef Sep 23 '22

Same for Japan right? If they never attacked the US they could have just enjoyed raping their conquered lands in SE asia.

1

u/Plenty_Somewhere_762 Sep 23 '22

What a different world....oh wait were back to being worried about Russians and their nuclear weapons. It's 1980 all over again.

1

u/betterwithsambal Sep 23 '22

?? still would have gotten his ass stomped by the allies. Granted without the soviets to distract them in the eastern front it would have taken a bit longer. But they were stilled doomed because the US and other allies were absolutely smokin in wartime production. Plus it's feasible the allies would have opend another front for them to fight against anyway after Africa and Italy and the western front.

1

u/DefiantLemur Sep 23 '22

He got those territories during the appeasement period. That was all from before the war. I was saying if he didn't push his luck and the war never happened. The world would have been worse off.

1

u/werepanda Sep 23 '22

That was not the reason why Hitler started invasion

0

u/nashedPotato4 Sep 23 '22

"Communism is the problem".

"Why?"

"Because they just slaughtered 20k of our invaders on the Eastern Front."

30

u/Aschrod1 Sep 23 '22

I mean it worked until we were made to pay for a war… for our defense. Palpatine esque irony intensifies

23

u/jisaacs1207 Sep 23 '22

Isn’t it agreed that the French and Indian War was just a proxy environment of the Seven Years War, which means that it really wouldn’t have happened without the monarchy?

3

u/Riothegod1 Sep 23 '22

Yep, and with the resulting Royal Proclamation it was decreed “The American Indian is to go unmolested”. This meant the 13 colonies had nothing to show for the war effort. And that’s not getting into the turmoil caused by restoring Quebec language and religious rights to secure their loyalty. Especially since winning meant Canada had to take on all the loyalists fleeing country.

4

u/Aschrod1 Sep 23 '22

Ehhhh… but why was there conflict there in the first place and what did the Americans do after gaining independence? The colonial militia was on board and the promise of further expansion is a big motivator. Anecdotally, GW the great was a surveyor and land speculator. It’s possible part of the impetus for revolt was also that Indian territory was off limits after the 7 years war. The same people stayed in power after the revolt too. The colonists were uh… real bad people as a collective who really liked land. So we can wink and say fuck you George, but it was also what we showed we wanted also. 🤷🏼‍♂️

2

u/jisaacs1207 Sep 23 '22

The Proclamation of 1763 was unpopular, for sure, but in terms of the reason for the French and Indian War-it was kind of just an extension of the Seven Years War. It’s really only named the French and Indian War in American history books, from my understanding, because it is only seen as a different thing by Americans. It, otherwise, is just another venue of a global conflict.

Realistically, having to pay for an imposed war after generations of salutary neglect would be enough to rattle anyone-even today.

2

u/Aschrod1 Sep 23 '22

Oh for sure, but blaming it completely on the Master is not the same as admitting the subject was complacent as well. The reasons the colonists fought in the war are the same reasons the Americans bought, stole and fucked across a continent that will take countless generations to settle completely in a little under 100 years, 200 if you want permanent US. The war would have happened Monarch or no. At that time? Probably not. But it’s foolish to just say British did it. Global conflict. 🤷🏼‍♂️ People don’t work that way.

2

u/jisaacs1207 Sep 23 '22

Are you arguing that the 7YW didn’t come first, that it wasn’t a global conflict, or that the F&IW wasn’t just one part of it?

There were something like 3-4 continents involved in the 7YW with more than a dozen venues-the Americas were just one. To put this in to perspective, the 7YW was as close to a world war that the 1700s could get-we don’t refer to WW theaters as separate wars but as campaigns.

Anyways, outside of arguing wording, it’s the revocation of the unofficial salutary neglect that was the issue. As you had said, generations of colonists became complacent in that they weren’t going to be ruled like the Spanish ruled their colonies. The colonists were neglected in pretty much every way prior, and then had a fight brought to their doorstep that they were then told to pay for.

The situation was jarring.

1

u/Aschrod1 Sep 23 '22

Shapiro, let’s return to the actual context and scope of the claims I made. You drifted way off topic my friend. The colonists revolted on the pretext of grievances, a chief one was being unfairly taxed as subjects of a King that neglected their desires and gave them limited representation. A chief driver of debt was subsidies and direct war material spend related to the 7 Years War. Meanwhile they (the colonists) payed far less in tax than their equivalents in Britain and a disproportionate amount of treasure was spent on a war the colonists would have sought and fought anyway at some point. The colonists involvement and the results of their involvement and willingness to participate as well as the British paying exhorbinant sums to defend a backwater. I take great care to say that the “British did it”. Is a very poor argument to such a complex situation. While I laud your rhetoric, calm down dude. It’s ok to ask questions and pursue a thread, but that went off on a tangent that, while I’m equipped to talk about, is not in context.🤣

1

u/rainbowjesus42 Sep 23 '22

Also didn't GW basically kick it off by illegally starting shit over the Ohio Valley?

2

u/LilSpermCould Sep 23 '22

I mean we did Ukraine them. They looked down upon us, wrote us off as a bunch of idiots from the garbage classes of humanity. They messed around and found out. However, as others have pointed out, had the crown fully committed to dealing with us low lives, they would have handled business.

Seems to be similar in some ways to Russia's mistakes. Had they done their due diligence and properly committed to the war it would have ended quickly. No HIMARs in significant numbers until July. Now look at Ukraine, they had the time to prepare and train with weapons that are supreme force multipliers on top of tactics built upon exploiting predictable Russian tactics.

As an American, how can you not be proud for Ukraine. We're the ancestors of people who made somewhat similar sacrifices hundreds of years ago.

1

u/Brapapple Sep 23 '22

Ya know it's a lot more nuanced then that, America was basically skipping out on the tax, the royals dgaf. Your representative was telling us it was all roses, so no attempts to fix the relationship were made.

It's almost petulant, but hey at least you got freedom, don't forget to pay your hospital bill on your way to your zero holiday job.

1

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

I'm Canadian lmao. I'm taking one of my three weeks of vacation days on the Monday after truth and reconciliation day so I can get a four day weekend.

My comment really isn't that serious. It's a joke about how obviously a colony full of people who tried to kill the monarch would eventually revolt. Obviously 100% of the colony wasn't that and obviously something on that scale would have a lot of nuance involved.

Enjoy your crumpets and Brexit or whatever lmao

2

u/Brapapple Sep 23 '22

Fair enough, I apologise Internet stranger.

Also fuck the monarcy, old cheating Charlie and randy Andy ain't nothing to me.

1

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

The queen is dead, long live the king republic.

1

u/Brapapple Sep 24 '22

The Queen is dead, quick grab her purse.

-6

u/SkyNightZ Sep 23 '22

Tax without representation is a myth.

Any Americans that truly believe that this had anything to do with the civil war don't care about history. They just care about parroting falsehoods.

7

u/poopyhelicopterbutt Sep 23 '22

The civil war or the war of independence?

1

u/SkyNightZ Sep 23 '22

Same. I was just tired as fuck when I typed.

6

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

Civil war? I'm talking about the war of independence lol what

1

u/pants_mcgee Sep 23 '22

If it’s any of the Irish or Scottish uprisings then that actually worked.

1

u/fezzuk Sep 23 '22

You can cross out Scottish there

1

u/pants_mcgee Sep 23 '22

Jacobites don’t count?

1

u/agrajag119 Sep 23 '22

Well, it worked out fine with the convicts.

1

u/xander012 Sep 23 '22

You forget the bit where they were taxing the rest of the empire far more and didn't give them representation either. This is why so many British houses have missing winows for example, good ol tax evasion.

0

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

Is this a thing? People who talk about the American Revolution like this?

Like how people get all up in arms about how the civil war was about states' rights?

Well akshully 🤓 they were also taxing other people without giving them representation so it's ok that the colonies were paying them.

Lol

1

u/xander012 Sep 23 '22

There's a big difference here between this and those lot. I am actually providing something that is historically interesting and I also don't defend the actions of either side of the rev war as I don't give a fuck, I only care about the "no taxation without representation" as it is generally blind to the nature of Britain in 1776 as a highly undemocratic society.

1

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

It's not that serious. I'm Canadian and repeating a line I heard in fallout 4 being said by the 1950s revolutionary war museum thing.

Also, and I don't know why I'm arguing this when I never cared in the first place, but Britain 1776 being undemocratic isn't really an argument that "no taxation without representation" was an unfair complaint. If anything it makes it make more sense.

I just thought it was funny how many people rushed to correct me on this like arguing about the revolutionary war is actually still a thing. Crazy.

1

u/xander012 Sep 23 '22

Arguing about history will always be a thing.

1

u/AndyTheSane Sep 23 '22

Well, we also put all of the religious nutcases over there on the understanding that they'd never survive.. how's that working out?

1

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

Fucking awfully for the other half of non religious nutcases.

Is that true by the way or just a joke? Because if so that's an interesting fact

1

u/AndyTheSane Sep 23 '22

Just a joke, although I expect that the authorities in England at the time were happy to wave them off.

1

u/iconredesign Sep 23 '22

Salutary neglect worked out I suppose. A prison with bountiful resources and no warden.

1

u/ZedTT Sep 23 '22

You're thinking of another colony 🇦🇺🪃

104

u/Loggerdon Sep 22 '22 edited Sep 23 '22

My wife's maternal grandfather was Shanghai'd from China to Singapore in the 1940s. He stayed and built a fortune by selling ice cream cones (not the ice cream, just the cones). My wife didn't get any of the fortune though because it all went to the first (idiot) son, not her mother.

38

u/Big-Letterhead-4338 Sep 23 '22

Primogeniture and daughters are destined for other families mentality. Too bad the family business wasn't passed to the better hands (assuming) of your wife's mother.

24

u/boytekka Sep 23 '22

Same thing happened to my mother in law, her family has some big coconut plantations in the Philippines and when her chinese father went back to mainland china to his family (original) he gave everything to her only sibling (older brother). My wife’s still pretty salty about it since her mother was not given even a plot of land or small amount of money

1

u/TominatorXX Sep 23 '22

So your mother-in-law was the side chick?

3

u/Caster-Hammer Sep 23 '22

I mean, she should at least have gotten a lifetime supply of them.

Just not all at once.

3

u/dangerislander Sep 23 '22

Damnn I thought it was gonna be like Crazy Rich Asians kinda story lol

147

u/OppositeYouth Sep 22 '22

Sucks, they could have at least sent you to Australia

123

u/clintCamp Sep 22 '22

I went to Jamaica once and met a whole bunch of Jamaicans with my same last name. I have to assume that great great uncle wasn't so great and had a plantation long ago. That is where he got banished to.

100

u/cogra23 Sep 22 '22

Not necessarily, Irish names in Jamaica existed because there were Irish indentured servers there for example.

18

u/dangerislander Sep 23 '22

And a lot of the Irish actually taught the African slaves how to speak english. Hence why they say Jamaican accent is heavily influenced by Irish.

2

u/Pihkal1987 Sep 23 '22

Not necessarily but definitely not even remotely out of the question. This was pretty common practice for freed slaves (to take the plantation owners last name because they didn’t know their own.)

2

u/gimpwiz Sep 23 '22

The brits sent other whites to Jamaica and other islands in the Caribbean as slaves or indentured servants. Convicts, etc. Of course, "convict" does not necessarily mean "guilty of a crime"...

Plantation owners bought them to work the plantations, obviously.

So I guess somewhat less of a banishment, and more of a ... being sold as a slave or into indenture. Banishment is milder, you get to the same place (or elsehwere) but without the chains.

2

u/clintCamp Sep 23 '22

But do other slaves get your family name?

1

u/gimpwiz Sep 23 '22

Ah, you know, I misread your comment. It's entirely possible you're fairly closely related to a plantation owner. Of course, it's also entirely possible that you're not, depending on how common your last name is ;)

2

u/clintCamp Sep 23 '22

Campbell is a bit Scottish and only a couple of them ended up in Jamaica in the 1600s.

-25

u/accountno543210 Sep 22 '22 edited Sep 23 '22

All plantation owners weren't assholes. Some of them actually followed some semblance of decency and only made enough money to send their kids to university and sell the plantation to a merchant to launder into other corporations.

Edit: awh come on, I'm not supporting slavery guys! I'll accept my punishment, but I'm not deleting anything.

11

u/Fruehdom Sep 23 '22

Slave, serf, and indentured servitude must have been had great pay and rights then correct?

6

u/DuskyDay Sep 23 '22

Aren't plantation owners people who worked slaves?

2

u/clintCamp Sep 23 '22

I mean, there is a chance that they paid people fairly and they got to go live their own lives off the clock, but this was Jamaica, where the island is mostly African descent now, and they mostly moved across the Atlantic in the late 1600s by one method of travel accomodations. Chains.

27

u/Wide-Pen-6647 Sep 22 '22

Lol, if you’re relying on slave labour (and in the West Indies the turnover for slaves was even higher than in America because people were worked to death), you’re still an asshole imho.

6

u/mikekowa Sep 23 '22

I mean, Russia has more slaves now than anyone else ever, but that's rarely talked about. Siberia is MASSIVE.

1

u/JeebusChristBalls Sep 23 '22

Are you engaging in whataboutism?

9

u/producerofconfusion Sep 23 '22

Oh they only owned human beings for their kids college fund that’s okay then how sweet

-7

u/w3bar3b3ars Sep 22 '22

This would be a funny joke if Australia wasn't absolutely dependant on America for security in the Pacific.

But yeah, America bad.

25

u/FuckingKilljoy Sep 22 '22

Careful with all that salt, Americans already have a high sodium diet

30

u/Robotlolz Sep 22 '22

Damn, best of all worlds. You get Medicare and America handles the security.

3

u/FinndBors Sep 23 '22

America handles the security.

Against the poisonous animals?

1

u/Burningrain85 Sep 22 '22

Some people call it security others call it protection money so they don’t burn your store down.

-4

u/w3bar3b3ars Sep 22 '22

Interesting perspective. Do you always take advantage of friends or...?

5

u/mikekowa Sep 23 '22

Bro you know this comment is lame as fuck. Taking advantage of a government is literally what the government is there for, to make your life better and easier in exchange for our tax dollars and votes.

A personal friendship has far more factors and is far more intricate to make that connection.

There are no morals when dealing with government services, they should just exist for our benefit. Not the same with friends.

0

u/w3bar3b3ars Sep 23 '22

Who was talking about taxes and government services?

1

u/mikekowa Sep 23 '22

Governments aren't meant to be our friends. They are meant to be our servants in exchange for tax dollars.

1

u/w3bar3b3ars Sep 23 '22

Your tax dollars don't go to foreign governments. What are you talking about?

6

u/Quackagate Sep 23 '22

As an American i hate how much we spend on our military. And yes we have a bad track record. And the same time your welcome. Dictate9rs and despots around the globe have been know to shut up and step in line when a US battle group shows up on there door. Not saying were perfect or we do no wrong but lots of people forget that our ovesized military has let other countries lean on it and reduce there defense spending, or at least not increase it(well to horribly much) so that it takes up a smaller % of there nations gdp than say 50 years ago. This alloying them to raise there standered of liveing. Not saying its always the case or has always been true but it dose play a part. But ya America bad.

1

u/PartTimeZombie Sep 22 '22

Security from who?

5

u/JumpyButterscotch Sep 23 '22

China is right there waiting for an empty Pacific.

2

u/PartTimeZombie Sep 23 '22

You're deluded if you think China is invading Australia. How would they even do that?

1

u/JumpyButterscotch Sep 23 '22

Wouldn’t have to invade. Just control the seas. There’s a reason the tensions are already high in those seas. And a reason Australia and the US just signed that naval pact.

1

u/PartTimeZombie Sep 23 '22

What does controlling the seas mean? China is trading nation.

1

u/JumpyButterscotch Sep 23 '22 edited Sep 23 '22

Same as the US. And British Empire. Guess what? Both controllled the seas. It’s a power move and China has eyes on a larger sphere of influence with more control over markets. Dozens of not hundreds of articles, not to mention threads in the relevant subs.

→ More replies

4

u/w3bar3b3ars Sep 23 '22

Is this a serious question? Why establish AUKUS if there are no threats? How much weight would that alliance carry without the US?

2

u/vmBob Sep 22 '22

If you need to ask you won't even try to understand the answer.

-2

u/svullenballe Sep 22 '22

America not country

1

u/Sigmars_Toes Sep 23 '22

I mean, then you're just living on an American military base.

1

u/Equivalent_Yak8215 Sep 23 '22

Pffft. If he made it to California or Hawaii he's golden.

1

u/Spidey209 Sep 23 '22

Here tried to kill the king. Australia / NZ was for bread stealers.

11

u/Squeaky_Lobster Sep 22 '22

Jacobite?

2

u/Tosir Sep 23 '22

No, a Stuart.

1

u/Squeaky_Lobster Sep 23 '22

Kinda the same. Jacobites wanted to put the Stuarts on the throne. That's were the name comes from. Jacob=James. James Stuart AKA The Old Pretender and his son Charles AKA Bonnie Prince Charlie, who led the 1745 Jacobite uprising from Scotland.

8

u/f4stEddie Sep 23 '22

Lol. You made this sound like it happened last week to your ancestor

2

u/clintCamp Sep 23 '22

Oh, sometime a couple of years ago. Like the 1600s?

12

u/Lone_Wanderer989 Sep 22 '22

Congrats on the defeat?¿?

2

u/CharlieHume Sep 23 '22

I mean if you're gonna be stuck in one of the two worst imperialism humping nations at least you got the one with blackjack and hookers?

4

u/tbone8352 Sep 23 '22

On a down note laws on drugs are very strict in Australia even compared to the US. Sucks because those things go hand in hand lol

1

u/randomnameandanumber Sep 23 '22

The laws are strict, but the punishments for breaking those laws aren't.

1

u/ThebirdsRscroungeing Sep 23 '22

I feel like that's an important point. You hear about folks in the U.S. getting sentences for possession of weed. Whereas I've heard a number of stories from friends getting caught and just getting sent to a 'drug diversion' course. Which apparently isn't terribly effective, but I'd say it's better than getting locked up for getting high.

1

u/Garfield-1-23-23 Sep 23 '22

I'm really surprised that the whole drawing-and-quartering thing didn't seem to be a more effective deterrent.

1

u/JohnGillnitz Sep 23 '22

Mine got tired of a civil war and came to Texas. Right before the Civil War. Doh!

1

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '22

We cannot lament the past, for we are made by it. We cannot lament the future, for it is made by us.

1

u/P00PMcBUTTS Sep 23 '22

That's actually a really cool claim to fame and neat that your family has been in America that long.

1

u/Swag92 Sep 23 '22

Oh my god I’m so sorry to hear

1

u/theflyingpupusa Sep 23 '22

Sooooo it worked out?

1

u/fotomoose Sep 23 '22

That sucks.

1

u/tesseract4 Sep 23 '22

Which king? I'll bet it was Charles II. After what happened to his dad, he didn't fuck around.

1

u/clintCamp Sep 23 '22

Looking at Archibald Campbell and the Argyll rebellion, sounds about right.

1

u/tesseract4 Sep 23 '22

It looks like Argyll's Rebellion was against James II and VII, the son of Charles II, who would later be ousted by the Glorious Revolution.

1

u/gregorydgraham Sep 23 '22

The Levee En Masse was famously successful