British Guy Reacts to The AMERICAN REVOLUTION - Oversimplified - 'THEY DID WHAT?!'
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ค. 2021
- ORIGIONAL VIDEO: • The American Revolutio...
INSTAGRAM: / jbickertonuk
British Guy Reacts to 'The American Revolution - Oversimplified (Part 1)
American Revolution and beginning of the US war of independence. - บันเทิง
Thanks for watching! I hope you enjoyed :)
You may well hope never to be troubled by me again, in which case I entirely understand and sympathise. However if, for some strange reason, you want more of me in your life, here are my social media accounts:
INSTAGRAM instagram.com/jbickertonuk/
TWITTER twitter.com/JBickertonUK
Thanks!
1 tip if I may, you are hard to understand when talking if the video is playing. Perhaps put the microphone closer or pause the vid (which I realise might be annoying)
Most of your video was great! :D You've got to pause sooner though! LOL!
Also, you should say your first name in the intro moment-
I'm American, in Arizona's capital!
I too wear glasses! :)
I get a real kick out of seeing different people processing mentally our U.S.A.'s history.
I know things about history too.
Canadians were a little more loyal to the British crown- as per your question about if they could of been swayed by the colonies.
Although my favorite UK reactors is 'Office Blokes React'- it's nice to see _one_ guy's sole reaction vs. three half the time!
KEEP
THE
VIDEOS
COMMINING
M8!
The tea killed the poor fishies and the ecosystem for some time.
Question,do you have a blinking issue?
If you are having trouble pausing a video, try using the space bar instead of your mouse.
Tearing down a statue of the king and then turning it into bullets to shoot at his soldiers with has got to be the most American thing ever!
Bologna did this with a statue of the Pope. Michelangelo was glad as he hated making a bronze statue of the fake general Pope.
Hell yeah brother!
Almost as American as when they welded the barricades on the front of their tanks after landing at Normandy.
What about using hymnals as ammunition cartridges?
Melting down the dominion voting machines into prison bars is next.
They didn't cover this, but before war broke out, when a lot of Americans still wanted to try to patch things up with Britain, Benjamin Franklin traveled to England to petition King George in person. He had a list of the three most pressing concerns of the American colonies. Keep in mind this was a three month journey each way. He still considered himself a British loyalist at the time, and wanted to help the UK to calm things down. I've read that he had a rather elegant and dignified speech. King Edward told him to get out and return to the colonies. If he wasn't gone by the next day, he would have him executed. When Ben Franklin returned, he was a staunch separatist.
King Edward told him to get out and leave? I think you mean King George.
@@Dragon_Lair Sorry, I get the two confused.
@BattleAngelFan That certainly would have changed history. I doubt that would have changed the outcome of the war though.
@@Trifler500 That would have turned Ben Franklin into a martyr, would have definitely strengthened separatist resolve. But yeah, would have had a major impact on history with his loss at that point.
Yeah but America was talked out of it by the French government which were at large with Britian at the time hence why America got alot of help from the French
The problem with the whole “we protected you” thing, is that we weren’t protected, we were fighting as well and it wasn’t even our war really. It was not uncommon for frontier militia serving the Crown to return to murdered families. Great protection ol boy. The war was started by Great Britain’s alliance with Prussia who was fighting Austria, and Austria was allied with France. It would be akin to us fighting Iraq then making the UK pay for it all, because “yeah we started it and you had no say in it, but well you’re on our team and we are bigger than you, and we need the money. Also you have no choice.”
"They get a bad rap, and there was a little bit of genocide, but thank god for the turkey!"
Priceless.
Columbus didn't genocide though... He actually was removed from being governor because he was too nice to the natives.
@@huntclanhunt9697 "too nice" is a relative thing.
@@huntclanhunt9697 Yep. Columbus was far from perfect but most of the hate is exaggerated. An "overcorrection" of the whitewashing would be putting it nicely, but in practice, it really just amounts to smears from history revisionists who don't like traditional Western values and culture.
@@timmorris2048 He made a law that the Spaniards had to give something to the natives, rather than just take gold. The natives saw gold as worthless and thus were more than happy to just give it away for nothing, meaning they were constantly screwed over. Collumbus made laws against this and against stealing land without paying for it, and so the spaniards on the island mutinied and arrested Columbus, sending him back to Spain and accusing him of all the crap they had been pulling. He was found innocent, and several of the men who accused him actually were arrested by the Spanish crown for their crimes.
Then the Conquistadors happened.
@@huntclanhunt9697 Me thinks you are way overreacting to a simple joke. Its cute.
On the retreat from Concord, the British sent reinforcements out from Boston to assist. One Minuteman saw them come out, and though his wife asked him not to intervene, he went outside and made a one man attack from behind a stone wall. He killed one Redcoat with a shot from his musket, and shot and killed two more with his pistols, then drew his sword and attacked. The Redcoats were nonplussed and he got shot in the face, bayonetted at least six times, clubbed and left for dead. Later the Patriots found him trying to reload his musket! A doctor was summoned, and he wasn't expected to live. Samuel Whittemore did die 18 years later, aged 96. The oldest Patriot to engage in combat during that war.
Woah, he was a madlad lol. Thank you for telling us.
How lucky do you have to be to be stabed six times presumably by difrent people and not once have nothing important hit??
@@orioncraddle1174 On top of all that, he was 78 at the time he was getting stabbed six times and clubbed an untold number of times.
@D P ... not going to lie, if that is true... I would like to go back to that
@@sparemobius7430 same lmao
The Boston Tea Party single-handedly explains one of the reasons why Tea isn't as big in the U.S. compared to the UK. For years after the event, it was EXTREMELY frowned upon to drink tea, making room for coffee to enter the playing field.
Although I would note that’s becoming more prominent in the U.S now.
Go to Texas tea is big here (edit always has been)
@@RandomRothbardian sweet iced tea is basically the ultimate middle finger to our hot tea drinking oppressors
@@whoathatsalotofdamage3718 that’s the epic part
Wait UK drinks hot tea sounds pretty good ngl
Disclaimer on Thomas Jefferson's ownership of slaves, according to Virginia Law (in those days), upon release slaves must be provided with a sum of money to help them integrate into society.
Thomas Jefferson, despite being an abolitionist wasn't a hypocrite for keeping slaves because he was in such huge debt that he literally couldn't afford to release any of them.
I'd have to disagree he is still at least to some degree a hypocrite since he purchased them in first place and it being a fundamental right as he described means he should do more to free them. That said it's still a good info because it explains why Jefferson could be against slavery while having slaves and having context for these things is useful.
Acknowledging he wasn't perfect doesn't make him evil. It makes him historically accurate person most of which have some beliefs or did somethings we abhor today. It's better to just admit those rather pretend they were paragons of modern virtues.
@@matthewsaari6577 He probably inherited most of his slaves. But good try.
He believe there's writings that show he wanted to end slavery in the founding documents, and the hold back was the heavy slave states would withdraw support and turn to king george thus jeopardizing the war effort.
ever notice how the path to end it was always in there just waiting for everyone of that time to come to their senses and demand the practice be ended.
Hell...we even fought a civil war with it at a core amongst other issues.
@@matthewsaari6577 he inherited most his slaves from his father
This man is so respectful towards our nation I love it. Lots of love from,The USA. 🇺🇸 ❤️ 🇬🇧
7:38 Oyster shells are large, heavy, and sharp. A cheap and effective riot weapon in a fishing town like Boston. I think the John Adams miniseries also specifically mentions them. (John Adams was the soldiers’ (mostly successful) defense attorney).
12:51 The area to the east of Fort Ticonderoga is called the Green Mountains (vertes montagnes), and eventually split off from New York and became the state of Vermont.
19:08 There’s a famous quote by Ben Franklin at the time: We must now all hang together, or else we will most assuredly all hang separately.
He definitely doesn't realize the Green Mountain boys are named after the area, not the color of their uniforms. But it's understandable given that they were animated green in the video.
Shells were, and sometimes still are, used as a paving material over dirt roads in New England and for a crowd might be just as ready to hand as stones.
I've shucked 10's of thousands of oysters over the years in the restaurant industry ...They can be sharp as glass and they will cut you and they will infect your wound with slime from the bottom of the ocean if you don't respect them.
I think everyone who's ever tried to open a gulf oyster before has gotten bit at least once. It's not something you rush if you've been burned before.
I'd definitely not want them thrown at me with malice. It's almost like having obsidian shards thrown at you.
And they were bigger then, because they hadn''t been over-fished.
Yeah oysters at that time were basically peasant food, not to mention quite a weapon lol
Oysters were a very very common food during that time period. Many old house locations have oyster shells near them which is a good way to identify an old homestead location. So oysters were easy to get ahold of
Quicklime - used in the manufacture of masonry mortar and whitewash - was made by burning oyster shells.
@@andrewcharles459 very interesting, never knew that either. Who would've guessed that oyster shells were such an important resource
Might as well just get a rock. Super easy to find those.
This does leave out that until the 7 years war, the colonies were autonomous. We were British citizens, but we also had been governing ourselves for over a century without British interference.
Thanks to the policies of the debatable first Prime Minister, who's name was Walpole. Famously, said individual is only four steps removed from anyone in the last 500 years.
What's wild is that they weren't even that mad about that ending, they were mad about it not being replaced by Parliamentary representation. The entire thing could have been avoided by offering a compromise at allowing the colonies seats in Parliament.
I mean, it still would've happened eventually when Britain abolished slavery, but it could have been avoided for a generation or 2.
They did mention the US had been governing themselves until that point. That was when the colonies were jumping up and down in the mud.
@@Alphasnowbordergirl "I was born an American, I have lived an American, and I shall die as an American!"
-Webster
@@kabobawsome Funny thing about Slavery, several of the northern states, all of them north pf Virginia save NY, cited slavery as a reason for leaving.
Massachusetts has attempted to outlaw it in the 1730s and the King vetoed it.
14:30 "The battle lasted three hours until the Continentals finally ran out of ammunition."
Note to self: When we ever get around to writing a constitution, we need to add an unlimited ammo cheat code.
Loved the touch of British sarcasm regarding Alexander Hamilton. Was not expecting that tbh 😂
That certainly explains why the guy in the history book is played by a white dude instead.
The whole affair was based on the musical "1776."
@@johnjamesbaldridge867 are you joking?
@@cloudcraft7153 (Referring to comment made after 9:15) Have you seen 1776? It's terrific. I'm saying that that all of the characters mentioned are based on that musical. Hamilton is a derivative work.
@@johnjamesbaldridge867 ohhhhhhhhh, thats clever!
Common Sense is taught in High Schools, and law schools and is required reading in many college level social studies courses. in its historical context, Common Sense is to America what the Magna Carta is to Britain in terms of its importance and influence (not in terms of legality). It is still in print today and is still the greatest selling American book in history, yes even in terms of total copies sold.
EDITED TO ADD: No, it actually does not matter that you were not taught it, nor does it matter if you did not know about it. It IS exactly what I posted above. Your lack of knowledge of it does not change that, your school going against national curriculum does not change that. Ignorance does not change reality. Deal with it. You either went to a bad school or you knew about Common Sense in high school.
Interesting. I grew up in the midwest, we didn't have Common Sense in any of my education, but we did read the Federalist Papers. Honestly, I found it more thought provoking than Plato for sure.
@@chrisbaldwin8570 lol, you should reword that comment 🤣
@@chrisbaldwin8570 Not sure what to tell you, all 4 of my old siblings had to read it in high school also. 2 different schools between the 5 of us. Also, even the pamphlets wikipedia page talks about how its taught in law courses and others at the college level.
@@r13hd22 I live in Midwest as well and haven’t read it in high school yet (technically never since it’s my senior year next year and I won’t have any history classes)
I was about to say since when?? But I realized you meant the pamphlet 'Common Sense' and not the concept.
Every Brit that I have seen react to this video is legitimately appalled by the Boston Tea Party and it cracks me up every single time.
You'd think they would be appalled by a tax on tea as well :P
@@nicholaspeterman9111 I guess that's why they're not Americans.
I know right? Hilarious!!!
Seeing a brit saying how glad they are that the USA came into being warms my heart. I'm an American who lived and worked in England for three years. I'm so glad we're besties again!
4:35 The thing I think some people don’t realize is that the British weren’t protecting anybody from the French, they protecting their land from the French, for the colonists it would have made no different who was their oppressor, so the colonies didn’t feel it was right to make them pay for the “protection” they never asked for.
They did ask and often. Mostly of the British Navy to defend shipping from the French Navy over say land based issues, but it was requested and the British did provide it.
Are you sure? That's partly true, but I think they preferred to remain British.
It’s definitely an oversimplification. The early English colonization of North America was driven by private companies. Parliament didn’t really care about the colonies until the late 18th century when they became profitable. The original protests against the taxes from parliament argued that there should be American representation in Parliament, like any other Englishman’s right, but parliament kept refusing them, which led to the movement for independence. I think the commonwealth system was forged from lessons learned from the American revolution
They had to spend a lot of money defending America from others like the French. The colonists also wanted the army to fight the Indians. So they thought they should contribute. The taxes weren't apparently high. After independence the taxes were much higher.
I think a good framework of the revolution is also that independence was certainly an afterthought until the declaration of independence was written and released. Until then, the war was seen mostly as a civil war between English compatriots. If the rebels won, they wanted to patch relations with Britain, while also gaining all the rights of the people on the home isle.
@@starrynight1657 It wasn't about the amount of money owed. It was about the taxes, and how they were applied. The colonists in the time period wanted to determine how the taxes would be levied that would pay off America's debt to the Crown. There was a very specific reason the framers originally wrote in that ban on Direct an unapportioned taxation into the constitution. The same situation as how the 3rd Amendment prohibited the future U.S. Government from issuing a law similar to the quartering act.
@@thomasgibbons1935 Common Sense was what got the whole conversation revolving around Independence. Prior to Paine's publishing of common sense, the conversation revolved around reconciling with the Crown. The Declaration of Independence, was more so a byproduct of this massive fervor that surrounded independence kicked up by Common sense.
It's estimated that 1/5th of Americans had read common sense themselves, or had it read to them in a tavern/pub. In modern population that's roughly 66 Million people.
@@starrynight1657 but as soverign citizens of the empire they had a right to vote on how and wjere theyre taxed.
The USA: An amazing force for, um, generally good things.
Touché.
This man blinks so hard that my mind automatically plays the vine boom every time he does.
At this time, "American" wouldn't have been an identity per se, just a geographic label. The Congress was like a prototype for the United Nations in how fractious it was, and people trying to bring it closer together thought of their ideals as "Continental." But their country was their state/colony. It stayed that way for another century at least.
Yer there's a fascinating alternative history in which the 13 states didn't stay together for sure!
@@britishguyreacts in a way the 50 states are a union of 50 countries and counties are more like provinces
@@britishguyreacts the anime code geass is set in world where the UK stayed as a world empire. But then europe united to kick england out of europe. So instead (its based about 100 years in the future) the empire of brittanias capital is in america.
@@britishguyreacts I think it's unfair to blame the colonists for not ending slavery. They already had to fight the greatest military power in the world. Adding the southern states to that would be insane. And at that time nobody was free. Kings ruled and a lot of people were in various degrees of slavery. Not only blacks in America.
@@britishguyreacts Check out the history right after the Revolution because they really didn't. A few of them went to war with each other immediately.
this brit tea guys blinking says he is being held captive in morse code has anyone noticed
It's actually Effington-Smythe code, which predates Morse code by some 23 fortnights.
He's saying his crumpets require more marmalade, with just a touch of vegemite.
its not Vegemite over here, its marmite. (I don't know why they are different names)
Seriously! Blink blink blink
Americans wanted to get into Canada so bad. We tried in the 7 Years War, the Revolutionary War, and again in the War of 1812, failing each time. Your question of why Canada never joined the United States, for a while, was religious. Americans all over hated Catholics. There were laws in several states banning practicing Catholics from holding office, and lots and lots of Canadians were...well, Catholic.
Not entirely true. Nova Scotia wanted to join the revolution, but they were too isolated from the rest of the colonies and couldnt send or receive support
@@maregondrako I did not know that. Thanks, I'll have to look that up. Most of the books I have access to are from the US perspective. I always wanted to get my hand on some Canadian history books, just to see their POV.
horse hockey! Maryland was well known for its Roman Catholic tolerance. Just sayin.
@@terrylopez5452 1699, Virginia, Catholics are deprived of the right to vote. A fine of 500 lbs. of tobacco for breaking that law. In 1705, Catholics are declared as unable to be a witness at a trial. By 1753, this was extended to all cases. In Massachusetts, between 1647 and 1700, laws banned Catholic priests from living in the colony, with penalties ranging from fines to execution. New Hampshire, per Royal Commission of 1679, Catholics were denied the rights if freemen, unless they took the Oath of Supremacy, which, which was a Church of England thing from the English Reformation, which drove Catholics from England. By 1696, people were forced to take a "test oath" to make sure Catholics weren't secretly about. I can keep going but...
In Maryland, things were great for Catholics, as you say. But after the Royalist's defeat in the English Civil War (you know, Cromwell, and that whole mess) in 1646, laws started popping up against Catholic education, and Jesuits started getting extradited from the colony. The Jesuits kept on keeping on in secret. But Virginia imposed Anglicism (Church of Emgland) as mandatory and Puritans started flowing in. By 1650, the Puritans revolted against the proprietary government and set up their own. Tat new government outlawed BOTH Anglicanism and Catholicism. In 1655, Gov. William Stone, 2nd Lord Baltimore, tried to put down the revolt, but was defeated at the Battle of the Severn. But, the Puritan Revolt WAS finally put down and the Tolerance Act was enforced.
So anti-Catholic sentiments were rife in the US. When JFK ran, there was a huge flare-up of anti-Catholic sentiment. So there's much more to this story. Certainly not "horse hockey"!
Fun fact: Americans now drink coffee instead of tea because they not only boycotted tea but also because they didnot want to be associated with Britain or British culture. Thats why coffee is pretty much drunk in the US
Oddly though. I hate coffee. Much prefer tea.
@@lastwolflord same
@@lastwolflord IMHO, tea tastes like hot, thin, puddle water.
Coffee tastes hot, burned, puddle water.
Either one needs a bunch of adjuncts to make them palatable.
@@lastwolflord I hate both.
@@Unpainted_Huffhines lol. I used to think that. But now im in my 40s and seem to have gotten use to tea with out anything in it. Though I will use sugar if I want. But I can't handle the harder tea's like Earl Grey. I don't know who likes that shit.
'Americans, your inginuity in violence is unparalleled'.
America: Yes we are the Founding Fathers.
All the best Patriot generals were trained by the British.
About 80 years later, all the best Confederate generals were trained by the Union.
@@protorhinocerator142 clearly not the best seeing how they got slapped
@@forgivememama2833 Considering the technological and industrial imbalance, the South slapped the North pretty hard.
It was this imbalance, much more than the quality of the generals on each side, that doomed the South.
@@protorhinocerator142 not really the south had good general’s and better trained troops and a amazing economy just they were beaten by better generals and new strategies
Long live the union
@@protorhinocerator142 the south got their shit pushed in,
Cant wait for part 2!
Can’t wait for the next part.
Love how genuinely excited you seemed to watch this, subbed and look forward to more
The whole of New York City was contained to the Southern tip of Manhattan. Manhattan had forests, farms, creeks and streams. Harlem was a rocky elevation. The island was narrower with the Hudson river coast running through about where the World Trade center is now. You can find maps of 1760s NYC online.
Looking forward to part 2!
Great Job! Keep them coming!
Us tossing tea in the harbor is a big reason why we still drink coffee. Tea in the colonial period was extremely unpatriotic. Only traitors drank tea.
If you ask me, it's still an unpatriotic drink.
Due to the shape of the harbor, not a lot of water gets circulated out of it. For that reason that tea is still detectable in the water.
Also the tea that was delivered to the colonies tended to be moldy, old and bad because of the monopoly.
I imagine the sore throats and colds were awful back then lol. Or maybe you just drank some tea on the sly
@@nate.draws.things lemon juice and honey
Also Tea tastes like crap
Common Sense is quite well written and inspiring. Definately worth reading.
"Americans have a habit of tearing down statues" at least we returned that one, I mean, it wasn't *quite* in the same condition as when we got it, but it's the thought that counts
ya it was returned to them all right in a vary deadly way
This was the best reaction to the american revolution oversimplified videos thank you kind sir loved your very british commentary thank you! it was exactly what i was looking for.
There are a few reasons why the Bostonians would throw oyster shells in my opinion: 1) it's a port city with a strong fishing trade, so they're easy to find and readily on hand, 2) they stink like crazy after a period of time so it'd be akin to flinging dung at someone, 3) they can shatter and the fragments are small, sharp, and can get anywhere.
Having been raised in Texas on the Gulf Coast where there are many many oyster beds , I can verify all you have said !
Thanks for taking your time to watch a video about our great nation’s history! I can’t wait for part 2 as well as other Oversimplified vids like The Civil War ones!
You're welcome! Looking forward to it :)
We are definitely a nation, but what makes us "great" exactly?
@@jameslane2326 it’s more of an opinion thing if you ask me. But if you don’t agree with my wording it’s not that big of a deal. I enjoy living here and always will.
@Brandon D democrat has nothing to do with it.
We have a crumbling infrastructure, most Americans can't afford medical care, are one paycheck or disaster or medical emergency away from crippling debt, racism division, the political arena and of course (ugh) the pandemic issue.
@Brandon D Actually im a Libertarian
Keep them coming. This was great. Gotta see part 2
We need to see your part 2!
The British Empire became the largest drug dealers on earth over tea. Literally nothing shocks me when it comes to tea
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you mean the opium war
@@sovietyr1864 Wars. Plural. But yeah
@@sovietyr1864 The Opium crops became necessary because the Chinese insisted on being paid for tea in silver. So it was go broke or grow and sell drugs. Even though “Heisenburg” is German *, they understood his ideas, and chose to sell drugs.
* Breaking Bad reference if you don’t get it, furriners.
@@Egilhelmson bruh you can just you know not buy the tea, its not like tea is a necessary good or addictive substance lol
Le Indians, *why do we have to grow opium in our fertile soil just so that y'all can continue with your tea addiction*
I love this! History reacts are my favorite! Since you've asked a couple "what ifs" in your reaction, I can recommend reacting to the Alternate History Hub channel. They do videos on a lot of popular "what if" scenarios and extrapolate them out as far as they reasonably can.
Thanks - yer I love that channel!
I normally don't watch these type of videos but you made it enjoyable to watch. On to part 2
great reaction! thanks for it, very entertaining
How to pause the easiest way:
Step 1: Turn off Scroll Lock
Step 2: while playing a YT video, press Spacebar
Step 3: press it again whne you wanna resume
Alternatively you can just click the letter K
There was actually a decent number of French Canadiens who joined the rebellion when Richard Montgomery invaded Quebec. Of the combined force of Montgomery and Arnold that attempted to capture Quebec City, they were probably around 20% of the force. The ones who served through the end of the war could not return home and were given plots of land by the state of New York near Lake Champlain.
This is great. Hope to see more.
Being Tarred and feathered was done with hot tar. It was torture. It caused massive skin burns, that often became infected, and was occasionally fatal.
exactly, it also left the person physically and mentally scarred for life
Your reactions are so much fun to watch, I adore how enthusiastic you are about the historical content. I'd love to see a video with the Texas revolutionary war too, where we had to fight Mexico.
I’ll have you know sir. I almost choked to death when you just yelled out “he looks like a fuckin ghost wit a red coat” while I was eating 💀😂 loved it
Yeah that got me too ...and when he had to pause on the screen with the tea in the harbor and the quote "hurry drink it!" on the screen. And he said that cuts him to the bone lol, i felt that.
great reaction
That was fun. Looking forward to part 2.
cant wait to see your next reaction. looking forward to it.
If not for those brave americans ,we would all be speaking English now.
Lol
There was and always has been a desire to include Canada into the United States, basically the country got its independence by Brits scared they were going to join the USA. Several issues prevented this overall. In particular once the war ended many loyalists flooded north to escape the USA, and settled Ontario which is the primary population center even today. This is why the Anglo Canadians surround the French on all sides, and defines the culture still to this day.
Interesting! I def need to do more on the history of Canada at some point!
Benedict Arnold's descendants settled in Canada. Direct descendants that is. Many other Arnolds remained in what became the USA. Their descendants included Generel Hap Arnold of WWII fame.
America invaded Canada in 1812 hoping they'd join them. They didn't and fought back.
There were American sympathizers, to a lesser or greater extent, throughout the 1775-1812 period in Upper Canada, so there was always some reason, however, slight, to think they might be able to sway things toward the rebels (and afterwards, the U.S.). But there were never that many, and they were never that organized. I think the very act of invading (twice) probably brought out more resistance than anything else. And in the end, another main goal of attacking the Canadas (both times) was to take the fight to the British and potentially remove British troops from the northern flank of the U.S.
@@starrynight1657 A couple things wrong there. The war of 1812 wasn't actually fought in 1812. The war was instigated by the British. It was essentially the revolutionary war part 2 as the British thought they had a strong alliance with Canadian militias and Native American tribes to take the colonies back. Every tribe except for 1 lost their battles against the USA and the Canada militias lost as well (Canadians were fighting because they were told to while Americans were fighting for home and survival). The British troops could some military successes in (Including sailing up the Delaware river and setting Washington D.C. on fire), but overall the British lost on every front. The USA expanded westward into native territory that had been claimed by Britain and Britain relinguished their claims to lands west of the Appalachian mountains.
Love your reactions and your comments/input good sir! Keep it up!
Amazing first video for a channel subbed and cant wait for part 2.
One of the reasons that the colonists were able to achieve military superiority in many battles was that the Americans broke the rules of conventional warfare and waged guerrilla-style tactics. They knew the local geography, and instead of lining up all gentlemanly in a field to receive every Britsh advance, they frequently relied on ambush tactics, with hit and fade harrying action throughout the rugged wilderness that the Americans knew as locals, but the British were completely unfamiliar with.
So, that's not really true and is a common bit of American historical propaganda. Skirmishers and scouts were common (if not always official) part of warfare in the time period. And in point of fact, there are several very valid reasons for the "lining up in the field" and one of the major turning points in the war was Von Stuben instilling the "conventional warfare" training that allowed the Colonials to win most of their major engagements.
While the Colonials did have a disproportionate amount of hunting rifles (due to the rugged wilderness) accuracy and rate of fire were so poor with muzzleloaders that combat casualties were proportionately low, most losses were due to disease, desertion (I'm from NJ where many of the much demonized Hessians disappeared into the native German populations) and in the case of one of the deadliest single engagement of the war (Monmouth) sunstroke. The death of armies came not from death or capture...but from desertion after harsh conditions, lack of pay or a rout. The shock value of concentrated and steady salvos (to say nothing of a massed charge) from one of those line formations that modern Americans are so dismissive of was the most effective military tool of the day...and the discipline to stand firm against the same. Typically, if an undisciplined army panicked, it never (or at least very slowly) recovered.
However, the Continental Army defied that convention. They kept regrouping and volunteering (notably the troops under Washington) despite losses and retreats. Skirmishers and guerilla warfare (which were lamentably more concerned with terrorizing Tories and Natives loyal to the British) did play a valuable role, both in harassing the increasingly long supply lines and then the retreating British Armies as they pulled back to the coastal towns, but it was the determination of the Colonial volunteers and the officers that they believed in (okay, and the fact that the Colonies were a massive frontier across an ocean supported financially and militarily by several of the Empire's rivals) that turned the tide.
@@saberstrike000 "Skirmishers and guerilla warfare (which were lamentably more concerned with terrorizing Tories and Natives loyal to the British) "
Were the Tories and Natives loyal to Britain offering the marquis of Queensbury style warfare to the rebels ?
@@bluebird3281 First, let me clarify that such behavior was not unique to the Colonials, especially among those units charged with hunting down irregular raiders. The Patriot is entertaining nonsense (William Tarelton is significantly more villainous than his historical inspiration, Banastare Tavington, and of the five or so men that are compiled into Benjamin Martin at least three of them would be considered criminals by modern standards of warfare), but the kinds of information gathering and supply disruption both sides used skirmishers for frequently bled over into harassment/terrorizing the opponents political supporters. Long before Sherman espoused total war, skirmishers and irregular troops were informally used to devastate enemy industry, farmland and morale. (And despite neo-Confederate propaganda, the March to the Sea was far more organized and judicious than the typical behavior of such units.)
Second, disproportionate reprisals against Native settlements regardless of their allegiance in conflicts or presence of belligerents was the norm for Colonial/American armies for the preceding and following centuries. Washington was infamous amongst the Iroquois for ordering the mass burning of Iroquois settlements, ostensibly to deter their capacity to wage war, but with the actual effect of destruction of their civilization and opening of Ohio to Colonial settlement. It is of note that two of the confederated tribes of the Iroquois were allied to the Colonials.
But in the end, many skirmishers/irregular fighters throughout history have found it easier (and more profitable) to target civilians than armed forces that could actually defend themselves. Most frequently, their actual 'battles' are against opposing skirmishers. While the Colonial irregulars certainly caused no end of frustration by harassing the British regulars, their efficacy against British morale is debatable. The devastation to native populations and the loss of life and property to Crown Loyalists is not. The extent to which that contributed to the Colonial victory (and its justification under total war) is not a debate which can be carried in a TH-cam comment.
In other words, they used smart military tactics instead of marching through in nice rows to die on a field because of stupid manners that didn't make much sense they were using guns instead of swords
They also had much more morale than the british
Imagine how different the world would be today if the British simply let the colonists be 'equals' in that they could have representation in Parliament so they had some say in the laws that ruled them.
We would end up just like Canada
That wouldn’t have been workable in the long run. Many more colonial MPs in Parliament than British one’s eventually. The tail would wag the dog. Best thing would’ve been to found a “Kingdom of British North America” Add a crown to George III’s head and have dues paid via treaty. Then they could let the American Parliament figure out how to pay by themselves.
@@mrmadness2699 Pretty much! I said we would’ve end up just like Canada in a similar way to how Canada eventually ended up being a desperate country decades later in the long run. In matter of fact, lots of the colonists who were loyal to the British moved up to Canada where their colonies weren’t revolting against those whom they were loyal to (not all of them, of course).
We would have probably ended up just like Canada. As a result, Germany would probably have won ww2.
@@wmason1961 Maybe. Maybe not. But you can’t argue that the establishment of the U.S as a country did not have an effect on other countries. France, for example (French Revolution).
Great react video British Guy! I'm looking forward to your future videos.
Great first video !
I'm looking forward to your reaction to part II, and your future content.
"Alexander Hamilton was really cool because his name was based on the musical."
Everybody: I... Wha... How did you.... What?
Straight facts though.
Fun fact: Columbus insisted that he had reached "India" (really, Indonesia) for all his life. The first person to realize that it was NOT India but, in fact, a separate continent was.... Amerigo Vespucci. And a friend of Vespucci who was a cartographer (map maker) decided to make a map with the continent named after his friend. And that's where the name "America" came from -- the female, Latinzied version of Amerigo's first name.
Can't wait for part 2. Also Congrats on having such a successful first video!
Loving your reaction to this.
"Where would we be on Christmas without Turkey?"
Geese and Ducks would like to say hello.
I've never eaten a goose or a duck. But I have eaten turkey and ham on Easter, Thanksgiving and Christmas every year that I can remember. I was born in the 1960s.
(But yeah, I'd love to try goose and turducken at least once.)
Potatoes! And chocolate! Where would you Brits be without chippies and Cadbury!
@@kellyalves756 Fun fact, I'm actually from the USA.
@@Armygirlsdad Ham comes from the eurasican supercontinent, so you wouldn't have missed out on that.
@@kennyholmes5196 ( ok) Where would them Brits be without their…
It's nice to see a brit reacts channel with a brit who knows his shit.
Just wanted to send some encouragement, the video was excellent and look forward to part 2!
please do a part 2!!
The thing about the American Revolution that is somewhat overlooked is that both sides were right and had legitimate grievances
Yeah
I mean, imperial powers trying to keep autonomy, representation, or basic human rights out of their subjects hands are always wrong and their grievances are never legitimate, but ok. Keep apologizing for a literal monarchy or whatever
@@charlieparker5346 this is so simpleminded.
Hello British Guy, I came across your channel in recommendations. I have to say, I believe being tarred and feathered is probably considered Torture... lol I love how Oversimplified breaks down everything and his humour keeps you interested. After doing part2, you should follow up with the "American Civil War - Oversimplified(Part1 and 2)" and if your interested this is a video on "Star Spangled Banner as you've Never Heard It Before." I look forward to your next video... and you have a good rest of your day too. Cheers!
Thanks so much for watching! American Civil War is a great idea and I'll definitely check out the Star Spangled Banner video. Have a great day :)
@@britishguyreacts that Star spangled explained video is more propaganda than historical fact
Yeah, not as innocent as it sounds. Turns out the tar was so hot that it would cause burns and melt people's clothes into their skin do definitely torture and potentially deadly.
@@Opie2099 Yes I've heard of this. I've heard of the tar getting in peoples' eyes and causing permanent blindness.
This is an action reserved for someone the whole town really really hates, and want to make perfectly clear that they really really hate.
Can't wait for more uploads
Great video, American here, keep up the great work subscribed from across the pond my blinky brother!
Taxing tea caused far less anger than taxing molasses (needed for Rum and we needed our rum) and sugar (needed for whiskey and we needed our whiskey)
Jack Sparrow: Hide the rum.
WHY IS THE RUM GONE??!!😂🤣😂🤣
Thomas Paine was actually the best founding father.
He was also an atheist
I think Benjamin franklin and george Washington were the best.
@@BiasN Ben Franklin gets my vote. It took a long time for Washington to earn the respect he deserves.
He also didn't know when to stop.
After the war the rest of the founding Fathers went back to stealing Indian land , selling slaves and being lawyers. Tom Paine went to France and started preaching liberty there. Eventually they threw him in jail.
@NO LUCK HERERussia? Dang!!! I had my money on China.
Besides, it's not criminal if it's part of your culture.
Very well done...especially for your first vido!
Looking forward to the reaction part 2
I agree that slavery was horrid, but Britain started it in the colonies and supplied it. Then the Lincoln abolished it. Thankfully. Here is how American migration works. On my dad's side, we are related to General Butler, who gave his life for freedom, on my mom's side I am second generation German immigrant. My german great uncle survived Stalingrad and after being pow in Soviet Union. America is a land of immigrants. It makes us strong.
History tells us the last British slave was freed in 1927 when the last slave owner died. The US Constitution was drafted up in a way to push for putting an end to slavery over time. The South wouldn't sign for an immediate end to slavery but eventually agreed with the wording changed to indicate freedom of all men without calling for an immediate end to slavery. It was always the intent to end slavery. The British were slow to end slavery in their remote colonies and didn't fully abolish it until 1927. American began the process with the Constitution framework which finally came to a head with the 1863 emancipation. And was fully implemented by 1865.
England had ten times more slaves than america.
@Bennie yeah but it took till the 1900s to get rid of all English slaves
Right, Britain set the precedence for it for the colonies to follow. Nobody ever seems to want to admit that or accept it.
@Bennie You're right the British stopped having slaves when they subjugated the people of the Indian subcontinent lol.
During the battle of Breed's Hill the colonials were specifically targeting officers and once they were all dead, they targeted the sergeants, eliminating the chain of command. This greatly disturbed the British aristocratic officers and they basically cried victim. They didn't like being unduly targeted and saw that as a violation of the rules of war.
Murica before Murica.
Even tho they (the english) won they felt like they lost.
@@BuzryHaproMandalorianHunter I would too with that kind of casualty rate.
Hey man great vid
I've watched these with a few reactors, sometimes the shock factor is entertaining but your knowledge of history is a huge plus. New Sub
"Is it 'Fifty Shades of Grey'? I don't know."
Me: "No. But it is 'Fifty Shades of Common Sense'."
This man is a god.
He has the Union Jack
He’s not afraid of Yankee’s
First video and it's already popping off. You will surely do well in TH-cam. Wish you best of luck!
Oh yeah!
One of the first 39K to visit this channel!
Great video!
To answer your “what if” question about the Canadians joining the Americans in rebellion against Great Britain, there were a small minority of folks in some places along the Eastern Canadian Seaboard who were sympathetic at least-and openly supportive at best-of the rebels to their south. But there weren’t enough of these people to stoke a wider rebellion against the British like the American colonists, and there were at least two reasons why:
1. Those living in Canada didn’t form a separate type of “colonist” identity like many of the Americans did. They were under direct rule from Britain, and as such, had a closer relationship with Britain and considered themselves subjects of the British crown. In their eyes, to rebel against the mother country would have been like taking up arms against your own siblings or parents. So very few British Canadians were keen on the whole “let’s fight the British” shtick.
2. Canadian colonial towns like Halifax were heavily dependent on trade ships from Great Britain for supplies and livelihoods, and saw more commercial traffic because they were closer geographically to London than the American colonies, who became more self-sufficient out of necessity. Had those parts of Canada joined the American struggle, they would have suffered devastating economic consequences which would have caused the Eastern Canadian colonies to collapse within a couple years.
Thank you for answering this! As an American, I had always wondered why Canada didn’t join the revolution. I figured there had to be a good reason. Have to admit that simple geography was a reason that hadn’t occurred to me. Many thanks.
For the algorithm!
I generally don't subscribe to a channel on the basis of a first show, but here we are. Keep 'em coming, please.
so happy that your first video is getting views! you seemed to genuinely enjoy making this and I'll certainly watch more from you down the road
Back then, Canada was mostly British soldiers and military outposts, so there weren't enough civilian colonists to push it toward joining the colonies to the South.
The Lower Canada French population actually did revolt too but much later (1837-1837). It wasn't so much as a conflict for independence as for representative reforms. While the idea of independence floated up a lot (and some smaller groups tried it), it wouldn't have been profitable enough in the immediate time after the conflict to work (economical sanctions and retributions would have sunk an independent government in a year or two). The British were very, _VERY_ keen on not screwing it up the same way as they did with the lower American colonies 45 years prior and they put a lot of effort in simply setting down the field right to make independence untenable.
@@axelord4ever Was that a few years, after the British kicked the Arcadian French out to Louisiana? I remember reading the Longfellow poem, "Evangeline". Perhaps, if those French were still around, they'd have had the critical mass needed?
@@sparky6086 Acadians were effectively completely separate from the other French colonies, if only because of geography (though they were also separate in other ways too). The fighting during the Lower and Upper Canada Revolts (1837-1838) were about, and around the St-Lawrence river and its affluent. The _Patriots_ involved unfortunately had to fight their little war alone, without help from oversea or from the then-young United States of America.
Very few Acadians fought in the Seven Year War (1756-1763 (though it really started in 1754)), and only in other regions of the Maritimes territories. Acadia had long since been under British rule at that point, and their presence in the conflict was about as mercenary as it was out of sentiment (which was why they were very few Acadians that engaged in battle). Those actions are mostly what led to the British doing the ol' _ethnic cleansing_ in Acadia (1755-1764).
P.S. All this said, the Acadians' hatred of the British Crown, and Protestant in general, was pretty great. Not unwarranted, either, and they very well might have done the arduous voyage to help their French cousins during the Revolts. No clue how that would have changed anything, though.
@@axelord4ever Thanks for the info.
...Probably, The War of 1812 was still fresh enoungh in the United States' mind, to where they didn't feel like taking the risk, to help their French speaking neighbors to the North.
@@sparky6086 You also have to know that, until recently (relatively speaking), the French Canadian were treated like a quasi second-class by the rest of English-speaking Canada. If you spoke primarily French in 19th Century Canada, the odds of you being an actual land-owner in cities/towns, businessman, high-learned in any way, lawyer, politician, you name it, were low in comparison to _the squares._ Even today, we 'frogs' have a pervasive underdog mentality which really doesn't help us much. Think about a whole people afflicted with Crab Bucket syndrome; success was suspicious because only exploitative people were successful. A rich French-speaking Québecois in 1850? That's a paddlin'!
The internet (god bless Al Gore lol) is seriously eroding this problem, thankfully, as the newer generations learn English much easier and aren't as likely to be stuck in the ol' French-speaking media bubble. It's bringing in other problems but an overall positive change.
All this to say that the old French population was _not worth investing in_ in those days, and they wouldn't have readily accepted outside help either as they understood it would only be switching from one master to another. The US, or France for that matter, had nothing to gain in helping in the 1837-38 revolt. They were not in a position to _form_ a new country, and they knew it.
The amount of times this dude blinks upsets me so much.
That Hamilton joke is fantastic! Understated British humor at its finest!
Keep up the awesome my dude
We’d still be British if you guys gave us representation in Parliament. As that would undermine our Casus Belli.
It's not like the idea wasn't ever considered. There were a few hurdles. One was just logistical. At the time it took a month to cross the Atlantic. The war of 1812 could have been avoided if not for the months long delay because Britain had elected a new Parliament friendlier to the Americans and the final battle during that war happened two weeks after the peace treaty was signed. So getting representatives for the colonies back and forth would have been a nightmare, especially if Parliament needed to meet asap. Another big issue was would the British want to share a parliament with a people who many ways were very culturally different with very different values and concerns. This would be seen as undermining Britain and it's people's sovereignty. The British never gave Canada, or Australia representation and actually instead did what the American Olive branch had proposed which was domestic autonomy, with Britain in charge of foreign policy.
@@ShamanMcLamie Too little, way too late
Great reaction, lots of fun. Oversimplified is always entertaining.
Since you are a history buff, and the slavery subject was touched on - were you aware that the British Government actively aided and abetted the (Pro- Slavery) Confederates during the American Civil War?
Yup, many Confederate troops were armed with the British Enfield Musket (arguable the best rifled musket in the world at that time) that had been purchased directly from England.
@@frenchfan3368 I was thinking more about the fact that the most famous seagoing vessels of the Confederate Navy were built in British Yards, Armed with British cannon, and to a significant extent, crewed by British seamen.
Brits badly needed the cotton grown in the South for their mills. They old the cloth all over the world. It not only created jobs, it also made them a great deal of money. (Of course the poor mill workers so little of the proceeds. It mostly went to the owners, stockholders and the government.)
Two vids and already a buttload of subs, plus me. Congrats on the quick growth!
1 video and 2,000 subscribers bro you need to keep it up!
The whole, “can we please have some money” at the beginning thing is completely inaccurate. The British just went strait into taxing the colonies and the colonies were pissed because they didn’t get any say in the decision and that was on top of them being fed up with a system where all of their raw goods where shipped to English factories and then have the factory products shipped back to them at exorbitant prices. Needless to say they had every right to be pissed.
It’s not completely inaccurate, just “Oversimplified.”
yea this is a anti american video seems to be the norm to twist history to change the narrative
@@stucclikechucc Have you even watched the video? I think you're not getting the jokes of the video. He even outright said they had no say in the taxes.
And yet, with the Breton Woods Accords, we've been encouraging other countries to do exactly that. Take raw goods (from wherever), manufacture it into something of value, and sell it in America for a huge markup.
@@protorhinocerator142 George Washington also said we should mind our own business when it comes to other countries (essentially don't become the world police) while Ben Franklin said we should war with ourselves every few years to kill off corrupt politicians. It's an oversimplification to keep with the theme of "Oversimplified" but regardless, there's a lot of things we've screwed up in 200 years, we need to get back to the basics.
I did love the, "well, no! the Vikings were the first to discover the Americas" conveniently bypassing the fact that ... there were people already there when the Vikings landed. ;)
It did say first European to be fair
Entertaining. we want another!
Dude this was fun. Where is part 2?