Hi VTH, Im the lead Animator for Things I care about, I and the team really enjoyed animating and putting this video together so thank you for your great reaction. Been a fan of your channel now for years so its great to have a video i worked on reacted to by yourself
@@VloggingThroughHistory Thank you i really appricaite that (being a fan of yours for years now) Our next video will be coming soon on the Opium wars, so i would love to see you check that out too!
As a history major and having 51 years of experience and gained knowledge, this video is the most accurate, concise, and entertaining telling of the War of 1812. Definitely got my sub.
You're doing a great job. It's hard to emote with the limited art and animation style you're working with, but you still manage to get it across clearly.
Just wanted to say thank you VTH. My brother in law (who was in the gifted and talented program because he is like a super genius with an photographic memory) he said he is jealous how much I know about history. So thank you for teaching me more about history VTH. I was so happy when he praised my history knowledge since I struggled with my learning disability throughout history. GO VTH.
15:30 I assume that the words are backwards as a nods to a Simpsons episode about subliminal, liminal and superliminal boy band messaging... I just realized how ridiculous that sounds. But the boy band sings the words "join the navy" backwards to enlist into the military.
This is exactly it. A pretty memorable episode of The Simpsons so it's a reference to that. Though the boy band wasn't ANY boy band. If was N'SYNC! With Justin Timberlake constantly saying "werd"
Coming from a Canadian perspective, it really can't be overstated how influential this war was on the beginnings of our national identity. The video focused on atrocities, and while violence in your homeland always leads to strong feelings, there were two other major factors that I would stress. The first is Sir Isaac Brock, whose death at Queenston Heights lifted him to mythical status, as Canada's first great martyr. He wasn't a beloved official by the people of Upper Canada, especially as he drove the colony hard to prepare for and execute the war, but he was deeply respected, and became a rallying symbol for the people of Upper Canada in death. Upper Canadian militias were relatively sparse and under-equipped early in the war, but after the death of Brock there was a surge of recruitment, outfitting, and particularly drilling that propelled the successes at Stoney Creek, Forty Mile Creek, and elsewhere in repelling American gains on the Niagara and Detroit fronts. On the home front, Brock became a symbol as the epitome of gentlemanly patriotism. Isaac Brock's death was Canada's "remember the Alamo". The second factor is the French Canadienne's involvement in the defense of Montreal and Lower Canada as a whole. During the American Revolution, it was British Regulars (Red Coats) who met American assaults. In the War of 1812, there were pitifully few Regulars in Lower Canada due to the Napoleonic Wars, and so the defense would have to rely on militias. The Americans figured that the Canadiennes would see this as an opportunity to overthrow their British overlords, and both the colonial command and English residents feared the same. Instead, the French militias rallied in droves and fought valiantly to defend their homeland from American incursions, shoulder to shoulder with English militias, British Regulars, and native allies. Without a doubt, there were many more growing pains in French/English partnership in Quebec and Canada as a whole, with tensions persisting to this day, but in the same way that the veneration of Brock formed the seed of Canadian identity in Upper Canada, this defense of Lower Canada was the genesis of the shared Canadian-ness that turned Canada into a nation 50 years later, and that keeps Quebec as an integral part of Canada to this day. We've never been able to agree on what exactly the Canadian national identity is, but what we can ALL agree on is that we Canadians are NOT Americans. That was born in the War of 1812. Oh, and we're not about to become the 51st state, either ;)
@@GregMcNeish I find it very interesting how a conflict can be so important to two of the parties in the development of their national identities, but strangely forgotten by another.
Of course Canada won't become the 51st US State... God knows there's PLENTY OF ROOM up there for at least a hundred other individual states to be formed, after the US is done annexing all of your territory by the end of this century.
9:47 I do love the focus on whether or not Georgia is a state to strive for as much accuracy as possible, while everyone seems to have missed the fact that the partition of Ireland in this representation apparently happened 110 years early.
28:54 very true about setting up our relationship with Canada and United Kingdom. Rush-Bagot agreement a few years after the war helps that too. Luckily some cooler heads prevail in the pig war just before Civil War. Also can be seen when Sitting Bull retreated into Canada. Canadian government did not want this to upset their US neighbors. As a result Sitting Bull and his people were treated differently than other First Nations in Canada at the time.
Who won, lost or whether it was a draw depends largely on perspective. From the British perspective it was a side note to the Napoleonic Wars. They didn’t gain or lose anything and the legacy of the war has not endured. From the US perspective, we cannot argue that we won it. It was a military stalemate and the status quo was restored. However, it did have an impact on the US’s sense of itself and ability to stand up for its sovereignty. It also removed the British attempts to create a buffer zone for its fur trade in the west allowing American westward expansion without British interference. From the Canadian perspective they won the war. True they were not yet a nation, but the Canadian settlers along with the British military successfully repelled the American invasions into upper and lower Canada ensuring their future to develop as a sovereign nation, independent of the US. The legacy of the war is far more important to Canada than it is to the US and Britain. The indigenous peoples were the losers - not on the battlefield, but by being abandoned by all sides and left to the fate of westward expansion in the US and in Canada.
15:45 The reason "join the navy" is backwards is because of an old The Simpson episode where the government was using subliminal messaging (like saying noij eht yvan) to convince people to join the navy.
@29:10 Some lyrics started going through my head at this point. "In 1814, we took a little trip, along with Colonel Jackson down the mighty Mississip..."
I don't usually say this but whenever one of your videos pops up it really does make my day a bit better and i just wanted to thank you for doing what you do.
This is one of the best videos on the war of 1812. And I've done 1813 living history events for almost 30 years. The video goes into some great explanations and influences behind the events.
On the genocide question, there is no doubt that what happened to the indigenous people in westward expansion wasn’t the type of genocide that we saw in the holocaust where there was a state sponsored program of industrial extermination. That said, what happened in the Americas is no less a genocide, just of a different character. Indeed, the genocide began the moment Europeans set foot in the Americas and continued for the better part of 400 years. The same can be said of other places through the history of European colonialism around the world.
Or any colonialism, really. It's the modern prejudice to see colonialism as a European thing - but it's not. It's existed all throughout history, and has been perpetrated by nearly every culture that's ever existed. Whether it's the Moorish conquest and colonization of Iberia or the Japanese conquest and colonization of Korea, it's almost always terrible for the people and cultures whenever they're conquered, as it's often a choice in the best of circumstance: give up their culture and assimilate (and so survive), or be killed or, at the very least, relegated to unimportance. But, in a lot of cases, the conquered or displaced peoples were simply killed outright.
This is a really disingenuous statement. Genocide was a part of Native American culture long before Europeans show up. The Crow Creek Massacre and the massacres of the Mississippian City Dwellers are all good examples of those. In point of fact, the first major conflict between English settlers and natives was a successful genocide carried out by Powhatan against the English in Virginia. He butchered nearly 350 colonists, with the rampant destruction caused by his forces leaving more than 500 more to die, with the final survivors amounting to only 180 people, about an 80% genocide. There's also the genocides carried out by the Iroquois League that saw them exterminate the Chonnonton, Mohican, and Huron peoples entirely. War wasn't a civilized affair in North America before Europeans showed up. "Warfare" between tribes usually consisted of one side sneaking into the village or camp of the other and murdering everyone in their sleep. Usually, the only people spared were very young children and women, who were all forced into slavery.
@@ixdaeliovadi The killing of 300 colonists is a terrible event, but its not genocide, its a massacre. It would be genocide if the natives took on boats, crossed the ocean and wiped out almost the whole populace living on the British islands. Big, big difference there.
ehh didn't know he is my compatriot but i don't know man, i'm from chile and i can assure you that most people here are neutral towards the US, as far as US involvement in the coup goes, everybody knows that here yet the indifference remains, there are some agitators that entertain the idea of US hate but they are mostly leftists. Our countries have had more misunderstandings than an intervened coup though, see the Baltimore Incident, the Panama Canal Crisis (almost went to war there) and the failed Peace Conference to end the Saltpeter War
Stoney Creek resident here. I’m surprised that it wasn’t mentioned that at the battle both of the American Generals in charge of the invasion, Chandler and Winder, were captured and taken off of the field. They were eventually paroled and Winder was put in charge of the forces protecting Washington when the British attacked and burned the Presidential Mansion.
I didn't know much about the war of 1812, other than stalemate and the burning of the mansion. But seeing the invasion of Canada and wondering what the point was made me think of Vietnam, like we never should have there in the first place. Should have left Canada alone
There’s 3 wars that really just aren’t talked about at all, the War of 1812, the Mexican War and the Spanish American War, although the later gets a little publicity mostly due to TR’s exploits. In many ways, the Mexican War might be the most consequential because the Mexican Cession leads quickly to the California issue and that leads to the War Between the States.
Something interesting to think about, between 1807-1811 it was really hard for french canadians because a lot laws were passed and made it especially hard for them on many aspects because of the governor general James Henry Craig. When George Prévost became governor in 1811, he realised how badly the tensions was between English Canadian and French Canadian and quickly did his best to make it better. I find it interesting that if James Henry Craig had been in power longer, maybe French Canadians would have switch and joined the Americans and maybe things would have been drastically different. Also, i find interesting how both USA and Canada found part of their country's identity during the war of 1812, where i think there is no clear loser or winner.
Hope you’ve visited the River Raisin Battlefield. Largest loss of American life in the war. They’re slowly restoring the area. Word is they want to build it out as it was and I did see they removed the modern houses.
I understand that this is an American channel but they are to a few comments on here saying manifest destiny wasn’t a genocide it’s interesting. Now I’m a firm believer in not looking through history in modern eyes but in some points in history this viewpoint can be really tested for me. Like Napoleon, he was a political and military genius but at the same time he was a tyrant who over throw neighbouring country and rule by gun point for some and killed most of his own army trying to take Russia when people advised him not to. Edward the III of England, here is one of England’s greatest kings won some impressive battles on land & sea and made important reforms of his time. But he started 100 years war with France, he closed two Italian bank houses funding his war. Joseph Stalin, probably the most controversial person I will talk about but he dragged Russia into the industrial age, did some Quality of live improvement and helped stop the No No Germans. But he killed millions of his own people and ruled through fear. I know that comparing Napoleon, Edward III, Joseph Stalin is a streach but it brings up important question that nobody has answered. When can you judge people through modern eyes? If the answer is yes judge then on your personal opinion. All three of them were bad and manifest destiny was genocide or no you can’t judge people of the past them all people get a jail free card from bad actions because “the past “ But this is my personal view I know some people aren’t going to agree with me that fine.
England were getting to rely on naval stores from the Great Lakes area of Canada. Besides pitch and tar, logs to be used for masts. The lakes were the means of transport and were difficult in peace time to transit as you couldn’t use a single vessel all of the and transfer loads between especially where there was elevation changes. Just contesting the lakes had an effect on the British Navy.
Just because the US settlers didn't use the term "genocide" doesn't mean that isn't exactly what happened. The intention, as you said, wasn't to literally kill every native, but it was to claim all the (good) land and dispossess the natives. Doing those things IS the genocide. A genocide is what happened TO the natives. Just because it was slow doesn't mean all those people didn't die fighting for their land and way of life.
On a macro level, yes, that was the outcome. But on a micro level, each individual settler didn't set out with the intention to commit genocide as part of their patriotic duty. This was a vast empty wilderness beyond the scale of anything their European ancestors could have imagined. Nobody thought their one plot of land caused a genocide the same way that nobody thinks that one bucket of sewage dumped in the river is going to destroy the environment. Did someone at the government level think it would? I think it's more accurate to say there was a callous disregard to whether it would. There was an expansion competition going on, not just Americans vs. Europeans but Free States vs. Slave States. Nobody could afford to just leave that territory alone.
Agree. We can’t chop up every conquest of a people as “genocide”. It was brutal but intent matters and methods matter. It doesn’t constitute a genocide.
Definitionally, it does constitute a genocide. I think, even in more modern times, the sterilization of native women and the cultural disenfranchisement of native children at boarding schools fit the definition of genocide... even disregarding the more brutal and explicit violence of the past. That doesn't mean random settlers were committing genocide, but I don't see how anyone can seriously argue that the US government didn't commit genocide against Native Americans.
@@lukerudolph880 You can't determine genocide by intent because people obfuscate their intentions. Orders are redacted and destroyed, etc. If a people's culture and way of life are forcibly removed, and the end result is a genocide, then it was genocide.
One of my favorite stories was when the men of machais Maine rowed out to a British warship and took it from the Brits. It's a pretty local story but Its still well known enough that Teddy Roosevelt starts his "War of 1812" with that story.
I'm English, when I was at school in the early 70s, the War of 1812 (not to be confused with the Оте́чественная война́ 1812 го́да, Patriot War of 1812) was taught as the "Stab in the Back" by the US.
Loved the video, and as always am fascinated with the History that you share with us, through the videos you react to and your own inputs! I wanted to add my own input for once, that I don't think there was a clear narrative to paint the Native Americans genocide as the focus of Manifest Destiny. At least from my own perspective, with the last video starting off with America as "insecure", and then landing in the aftermath of the War of 1812, more confident; it felt more like the point being made across this video was the idea that with this war, the identity of being American (and having a strong central government) was reinforced, as well as gaining confidence that came from tussling with the British and Canada once again. I would also point out, again from my perspective, that I would think the numerous "massacres" that occurred throughout the war by Native American hands' definitely would have stoked the flames of vengeance. It certainly is a strong reason for Andrew Jackson's upheaval of the Native Americans within the US's territory, with the tragic Trail of Tears. Just to share my thoughts. All the love and support for your channel!
16:52 Perry jumped on horse back and was served as an aide-de-camp to Harrison during The Battle of the Thames. You have to feel sorry for the regular enlisted man fighting under Procter. The battle line was messed up. The left was the right and the back was the front.
As a Canadian who’s read a fair amount about the war I’ve come to the same conclusion that neither side really won, but the Natives definitely lost. Canadians like to claim victory in the sense that none of the invasion attempts were ultimately successful and no land was permanently lost.
@ 15:42 "Simpsons" reference where Bart, Milhouse, Nelson, and Ralph are made into a boy band. Turns out the promoter was a US Navy recruitment officer and they were using subliminal messages in the music videos and songs to recruit for the navy. A chord line in one of the songs is "Yvan Eht Nioj" which as you pointed out is "Join The Navy" backwards.
The backwards text is a reference to The Simpsons, when they make a boy band and the song they sang had a chorus said "Yvan eht nioj" Join the Navy, because the boy band it was psy-op for recruitment by the Navy!!
My biggest surprises this year was absolutely loving the Hunger Games series and reading all of them in a few months. Biggest letdown was John Dies at the End DNF it was just too dumb.
As an Ojibwe, I would like to say the genocide of the Native Americans by the United States government was, in fact, intentional and must not be downplayed. Arguing against this is not only inaccurate but also harmful. My family and ancestors bear the scars of this genocide, and hearing that we were in the way and how some of these comments agree hurts my heart greatly. 🥺💔😞
Chris seems confused when the St Lawrence was mentioned....it's not referring to the river, it's a 1st Rate ship of the line ( so one with 100+guns, ) the only one built in the war by either side. The problem was the timber was unseasoned so it didn't last long in service.
The US was building two ships of the line on Lake Ontario to combat the threat of the St Lawrence. They were never finished before the end of the war, one had a building over it to protect it till well after the Civil War. They were the Chippewa and the New Orleans.
15:36 That's a Simpsons reference. In one episode, the Navy is using subliminal messages to get more recruits. In a song, they sing "Join the Navy" backwards.
The U.S. wanted to take the west coast of Canada, "54-40 or fight", but the British built Fort Victoria and stationed their navy there, and Poke decided it might not be a good idea.
Chris, if your ancestors were recruited in KY & OH, then there is a good chance that they were in the 7th Infantry and fought under Jackson in the war & 1st Seminole War.
On its face, I agree it is a tie, but I think future relations with Europe deserve more weight. I'm trying to square the circle but it seems off to discount that but we give so much weight to WWI/Treaty of Versailles being a cause of WWII.
the back ward "join the navy" is probably a ref to the simpsons episode where bart and other boys are recruited into a boy band. Their manager is a navy LT who is using them as subliminal messaging, part of the chorus of one of their songs they repeat "yvan eht nioj"
"YvaN eht nioJ" is a callback to a Simpsons episode where they tried to create a "boy band" of Bart, Ralph, Nelson, and Milhouse, to be Def. Dept propaganda!
I thought HMS Victory has been in dry dock since 1922..... Yes commissioned. Even if there is some water under her does she float and she certainly doesn't sail.
It's weird in the war of 1812 the Navy Kicks booty and the army fails greatly ... While I. Europe the Navies of Europe loose major battles but their armies do well...
I don't understand why it's so often said Lundy's Lane was the bloodiest battle of the war. I've even seen it said on repudiable sites. It's almost like a mandala effect. 258 were killed at Lundy's lane 421 were killed at Frenchtown and that's not even counting the native loses becasue they're unknown. 304 were killed at New Orleans.
@@lordsofarnor4128 The total casualty count for Lundy's lane is 1,641 making it 2nd. If you count sieges it's third New Orleans saw 2,108 Siege of Fort Erie 2,626
In that case I have no idea. The only other thing I can think of is the percentage of the two armies that were casualties were close to 50 percent on both sides. So maybe that’s the reason but I don’t know.
@robbygood3458 and @lordsofarnor4128 could it be Lundy's Lane is one battle/one day battle compared to Siege of Fort Erie is over a month long. Your New Orleans figure seems to be Just January 8th which is good for comparison to Lundy's Lane. However if you add the other battles connected to New Orleans it is even more. Could be the percentage factor. only 6,000 at Lundy's Lane and 13,700 at New Orleans. Multiday battle versus single day battle reminds me of comparisons of Civil War battles. Another element you might consider is this like the eastern theater of the Civil War compared to all the other theaters. Or is this because one of the generals at Lundy's Lane lived longer than most and wrote about it. There are some other myths in the 1814 Niagara Campaign that are not fully true, (do not want to say they are wrong since there is a kernel of truth) but are remembered because of one generals writing. That general would be Winfield Scott. Which O.H. Perry admired during the taking of Fort George in 1813.
yvan eht nioj is a song from the Simpsons. Where the Navy use Bart and his friends as a Boy band (voiced by Nsync) to create a subliminal pop song 'Yvan Eht Nioj' in order to recruit to the Navy.
With the majority of these attacks in Canada by US forces, as Clint Eastwood would say in his role in heartbreak Ridge “a cluster fuck“ and quite a few of them too?🇬🇧🏴🇨🇦🇺🇸
Honestly, this is one of those wars where most of the enjoyment of the story comes from the politics that lead up to the war and the war itself is kind of boring with some interesting stories sprinkled in. Much like WW1. Lots of interesting political tension and buildup, few interesting battles Did i just write a review for a historical event like it was a book? Yes I did. Am I sorry? No I’m not
A young brigadier general Winfield Scott was instrumental in making a stand at the Battle of Chippewa and was injured at the Battle of Lundy's Lane. The genius mind of his saw the US Army in its infancy to it's might across the world. Scott should be recognized in modern day for his 40+ years of service to the US Army
I agree! Winfield Scott is an underappreciated and sadly largely forgotten American hero. It was his Anaconda Plan that was the strategy that won the US Civil War for the Union. He was too old and too sick to command a field army by that time though.
@@archivesoffantasy5560 The US force had come down from Lake Ontario by ship and endured potshots from cannons along the way. They were poorly lead as well. They were meant to rendezvous with another US force moving north through the Lake Champlain region and to carry on to attack Montreal. The two US commanders were old revolutionary soldiers who didn't get along well, on top of it all.
Join the navy YVAN EHT NIOJ is a salute to the Simpsons. They were trying to recruit people to the Navy by using "subliminal messages" . Bart joins a boy band, and their songs are to recruit their fans to join the navy. funny episode. LOL
If displacing an entire population from their homeland with no other place to go (cuz the US wanted all the land really) is not genocide in your dictionary, I don't know what is. Genocide is representing an existential threat to a specific group of people which is by all means what the US settlers did. There's no way of sugarcoating it
@@benjaminleonard9588 okay, but taking the land is still okay,right? As long as we agree conquering the land is justifiable. It just needs a better justification than just breaking treaties?
I'm Finnish so I admit that I have a limited understanding of this, but didn't USA consistently try to wipe out Native American identity, pushing them off their lands, removing any notion of their culture and into reserves that often could not support the population? Let's not forget that genocide doesn't have to be the target for it to be genocide. "They were in the way" can also be a reason for genocide, just like pushing Armenians of their lands into intentionally deadly situations in Ottoman empire was a genocide even if it was done because "they were in the way of the war". Maybe I'm just missing something since I'm not very involved in this discussion but it's a bit weird to me how it's often denied that what was done to the Indians was a genocide.
Hi VTH, Im the lead Animator for Things I care about, I and the team really enjoyed animating and putting this video together so thank you for your great reaction. Been a fan of your channel now for years so its great to have a video i worked on reacted to by yourself
Fantastic work on this one! Really enjoyed it.
@@VloggingThroughHistory Thank you i really appricaite that (being a fan of yours for years now) Our next video will be coming soon on the Opium wars, so i would love to see you check that out too!
As a history major and having 51 years of experience and gained knowledge, this video is the most accurate, concise, and entertaining telling of the War of 1812. Definitely got my sub.
You're doing a great job. It's hard to emote with the limited art and animation style you're working with, but you still manage to get it across clearly.
Just wanted to say thank you VTH. My brother in law (who was in the gifted and talented program because he is like a super genius with an photographic memory) he said he is jealous how much I know about history. So thank you for teaching me more about history VTH. I was so happy when he praised my history knowledge since I struggled with my learning disability throughout history. GO VTH.
The words were backwards "Join the navy" because of a famous Simpsons episode lol
15:30 I assume that the words are backwards as a nods to a Simpsons episode about subliminal, liminal and superliminal boy band messaging... I just realized how ridiculous that sounds. But the boy band sings the words "join the navy" backwards to enlist into the military.
This is exactly it. A pretty memorable episode of The Simpsons so it's a reference to that. Though the boy band wasn't ANY boy band. If was N'SYNC! With Justin Timberlake constantly saying "werd"
Yes!
Came here to say exactly this. When I saw it written backwards I instantly remembered that Simpsons episode. What a great reference by the channel lol
🙌🙌🙌 It's such a great easter egg😀
Coming from a Canadian perspective, it really can't be overstated how influential this war was on the beginnings of our national identity. The video focused on atrocities, and while violence in your homeland always leads to strong feelings, there were two other major factors that I would stress.
The first is Sir Isaac Brock, whose death at Queenston Heights lifted him to mythical status, as Canada's first great martyr. He wasn't a beloved official by the people of Upper Canada, especially as he drove the colony hard to prepare for and execute the war, but he was deeply respected, and became a rallying symbol for the people of Upper Canada in death. Upper Canadian militias were relatively sparse and under-equipped early in the war, but after the death of Brock there was a surge of recruitment, outfitting, and particularly drilling that propelled the successes at Stoney Creek, Forty Mile Creek, and elsewhere in repelling American gains on the Niagara and Detroit fronts. On the home front, Brock became a symbol as the epitome of gentlemanly patriotism.
Isaac Brock's death was Canada's "remember the Alamo".
The second factor is the French Canadienne's involvement in the defense of Montreal and Lower Canada as a whole. During the American Revolution, it was British Regulars (Red Coats) who met American assaults. In the War of 1812, there were pitifully few Regulars in Lower Canada due to the Napoleonic Wars, and so the defense would have to rely on militias. The Americans figured that the Canadiennes would see this as an opportunity to overthrow their British overlords, and both the colonial command and English residents feared the same. Instead, the French militias rallied in droves and fought valiantly to defend their homeland from American incursions, shoulder to shoulder with English militias, British Regulars, and native allies.
Without a doubt, there were many more growing pains in French/English partnership in Quebec and Canada as a whole, with tensions persisting to this day, but in the same way that the veneration of Brock formed the seed of Canadian identity in Upper Canada, this defense of Lower Canada was the genesis of the shared Canadian-ness that turned Canada into a nation 50 years later, and that keeps Quebec as an integral part of Canada to this day.
We've never been able to agree on what exactly the Canadian national identity is, but what we can ALL agree on is that we Canadians are NOT Americans. That was born in the War of 1812.
Oh, and we're not about to become the 51st state, either ;)
@@GregMcNeish I find it very interesting how a conflict can be so important to two of the parties in the development of their national identities, but strangely forgotten by another.
Of course Canada won't become the 51st US State... God knows there's PLENTY OF ROOM up there for at least a hundred other individual states to be formed, after the US is done annexing all of your territory by the end of this century.
14:21 thank you for the shout out. We need to have you out again! You did great on Memorial Day!
9:47
I do love the focus on whether or not Georgia is a state to strive for as much accuracy as possible, while everyone seems to have missed the fact that the partition of Ireland in this representation apparently happened 110 years early.
28:54 very true about setting up our relationship with Canada and United Kingdom. Rush-Bagot agreement a few years after the war helps that too. Luckily some cooler heads prevail in the pig war just before Civil War. Also can be seen when Sitting Bull retreated into Canada. Canadian government did not want this to upset their US neighbors. As a result Sitting Bull and his people were treated differently than other First Nations in Canada at the time.
Love your content, sir. Your knowledge is awesome and break stuff down so anyone can understand. Keep up the great work.
Who won, lost or whether it was a draw depends largely on perspective. From the British perspective it was a side note to the Napoleonic Wars. They didn’t gain or lose anything and the legacy of the war has not endured. From the US perspective, we cannot argue that we won it. It was a military stalemate and the status quo was restored. However, it did have an impact on the US’s sense of itself and ability to stand up for its sovereignty. It also removed the British attempts to create a buffer zone for its fur trade in the west allowing American westward expansion without British interference. From the Canadian perspective they won the war. True they were not yet a nation, but the Canadian settlers along with the British military successfully repelled the American invasions into upper and lower Canada ensuring their future to develop as a sovereign nation, independent of the US. The legacy of the war is far more important to Canada than it is to the US and Britain. The indigenous peoples were the losers - not on the battlefield, but by being abandoned by all sides and left to the fate of westward expansion in the US and in Canada.
What I like about Chris is how he can explain a moment in history with such clarity. .The only reaction channel that I watch.
15:45 The reason "join the navy" is backwards is because of an old The Simpson episode where the government was using subliminal messaging (like saying noij eht yvan) to convince people to join the navy.
got chills during the fort mchenry part. got to see the flag again this past summer
@29:10 Some lyrics started going through my head at this point. "In 1814, we took a little trip, along with Colonel Jackson down the mighty Mississip..."
"We took a little bacon and we took a little beans..."
I don't usually say this but whenever one of your videos pops up it really does make my day a bit better and i just wanted to thank you for doing what you do.
Got to love the way "The Star Spangled Banner" commemorates the fact the the US Slaves so hated the Americans that they joined the British.
And yet it was ironically Americans who wound up freeing them. Just half a century later than they wanted.
This is one of the best videos on the war of 1812. And I've done 1813 living history events for almost 30 years. The video goes into some great explanations and influences behind the events.
On the genocide question, there is no doubt that what happened to the indigenous people in westward expansion wasn’t the type of genocide that we saw in the holocaust where there was a state sponsored program of industrial extermination. That said, what happened in the Americas is no less a genocide, just of a different character. Indeed, the genocide began the moment Europeans set foot in the Americas and continued for the better part of 400 years. The same can be said of other places through the history of European colonialism around the world.
Or any colonialism, really. It's the modern prejudice to see colonialism as a European thing - but it's not. It's existed all throughout history, and has been perpetrated by nearly every culture that's ever existed. Whether it's the Moorish conquest and colonization of Iberia or the Japanese conquest and colonization of Korea, it's almost always terrible for the people and cultures whenever they're conquered, as it's often a choice in the best of circumstance: give up their culture and assimilate (and so survive), or be killed or, at the very least, relegated to unimportance. But, in a lot of cases, the conquered or displaced peoples were simply killed outright.
This is a really disingenuous statement. Genocide was a part of Native American culture long before Europeans show up. The Crow Creek Massacre and the massacres of the Mississippian City Dwellers are all good examples of those. In point of fact, the first major conflict between English settlers and natives was a successful genocide carried out by Powhatan against the English in Virginia. He butchered nearly 350 colonists, with the rampant destruction caused by his forces leaving more than 500 more to die, with the final survivors amounting to only 180 people, about an 80% genocide.
There's also the genocides carried out by the Iroquois League that saw them exterminate the Chonnonton, Mohican, and Huron peoples entirely.
War wasn't a civilized affair in North America before Europeans showed up. "Warfare" between tribes usually consisted of one side sneaking into the village or camp of the other and murdering everyone in their sleep. Usually, the only people spared were very young children and women, who were all forced into slavery.
@@ixdaeliovadi The killing of 300 colonists is a terrible event, but its not genocide, its a massacre. It would be genocide if the natives took on boats, crossed the ocean and wiped out almost the whole populace living on the British islands. Big, big difference there.
Him being from Chile definitely explains some of his more anti-American stances, that military coup that was backed by the U.S was not a good time.
ehh didn't know he is my compatriot but i don't know man, i'm from chile and i can assure you that most people here are neutral towards the US, as far as US involvement in the coup goes, everybody knows that here yet the indifference remains, there are some agitators that entertain the idea of US hate but they are mostly leftists. Our countries have had more misunderstandings than an intervened coup though, see the Baltimore Incident, the Panama Canal Crisis (almost went to war there) and the failed Peace Conference to end the Saltpeter War
You do release USA has done some fucked up shit
Stoney Creek resident here. I’m surprised that it wasn’t mentioned that at the battle both of the American Generals in charge of the invasion, Chandler and Winder, were captured and taken off of the field. They were eventually paroled and Winder was put in charge of the forces protecting Washington when the British attacked and burned the Presidential Mansion.
Early. You’re my go to for historical content. Thank you
I asppreciated seeing a reaction relevant to Canada
the flags beating up Napoleon and yeeting him out of there is so funny lol
I didn't know much about the war of 1812, other than stalemate and the burning of the mansion. But seeing the invasion of Canada and wondering what the point was made me think of Vietnam, like we never should have there in the first place. Should have left Canada alone
There’s 3 wars that really just aren’t talked about at all, the War of 1812, the Mexican War and the Spanish American War, although the later gets a little publicity mostly due to TR’s exploits.
In many ways, the Mexican War might be the most consequential because the Mexican Cession leads quickly to the California issue and that leads to the War Between the States.
Thanks to Animaniacs I will forever remember this line: "James Madison never had a son, & he fought in The War Of 1812."
I’ve seen that flag at the Smithsonian, brought tears to my eyes….and my wife is Canadian!
The Battle of New Orleans was awesome. So was McHenry. So was USS Constitution! And Perry!
Something interesting to think about, between 1807-1811 it was really hard for french canadians because a lot laws were passed and made it especially hard for them on many aspects because of the governor general James Henry Craig. When George Prévost became governor in 1811, he realised how badly the tensions was between English Canadian and French Canadian and quickly did his best to make it better.
I find it interesting that if James Henry Craig had been in power longer, maybe French Canadians would have switch and joined the Americans and maybe things would have been drastically different.
Also, i find interesting how both USA and Canada found part of their country's identity during the war of 1812, where i think there is no clear loser or winner.
Hope you’ve visited the River Raisin Battlefield. Largest loss of American life in the war. They’re slowly restoring the area. Word is they want to build it out as it was and I did see they removed the modern houses.
Kentucky Girl here thanks for the don't mess with Kentucky lol.
I had a great time with you in New Orleans.
Yeah, as someone already said, the backwards "join the navy" sign is in reference to an old Simpson's episode about subliminal messaging.
I understand that this is an American channel but they are to a few comments on here saying manifest destiny wasn’t a genocide it’s interesting. Now I’m a firm believer in not looking through history in modern eyes but in some points in history this viewpoint can be really tested for me.
Like Napoleon, he was a political and military genius but at the same time he was a tyrant who over throw neighbouring country and rule by gun point for some and killed most of his own army trying to take Russia when people advised him not to.
Edward the III of England, here is one of England’s greatest kings won some impressive battles on land & sea and made important reforms of his time. But he started 100 years war with France, he closed two Italian bank houses funding his war.
Joseph Stalin, probably the most controversial person I will talk about but he dragged Russia into the industrial age, did some Quality of live improvement and helped stop the No No Germans. But he killed millions of his own people and ruled through fear.
I know that comparing Napoleon, Edward III, Joseph Stalin is a streach but it brings up important question that nobody has answered. When can you judge people through modern eyes? If the answer is yes judge then on your personal opinion. All three of them were bad and manifest destiny was genocide or no you can’t judge people of the past them all people get a jail free card from bad actions because “the past “
But this is my personal view I know some people aren’t going to agree with me that fine.
Ive seen people give reason to why ot cant be called that. May not be the intention
.but taking their land results in genocide
England were getting to rely on naval stores from the Great Lakes area of Canada. Besides pitch and tar, logs to be used for masts. The lakes were the means of transport and were difficult in peace time to transit as you couldn’t use a single vessel all of the and transfer loads between especially where there was elevation changes. Just contesting the lakes had an effect on the British Navy.
Just because the US settlers didn't use the term "genocide" doesn't mean that isn't exactly what happened. The intention, as you said, wasn't to literally kill every native, but it was to claim all the (good) land and dispossess the natives. Doing those things IS the genocide. A genocide is what happened TO the natives. Just because it was slow doesn't mean all those people didn't die fighting for their land and way of life.
On a macro level, yes, that was the outcome. But on a micro level, each individual settler didn't set out with the intention to commit genocide as part of their patriotic duty. This was a vast empty wilderness beyond the scale of anything their European ancestors could have imagined. Nobody thought their one plot of land caused a genocide the same way that nobody thinks that one bucket of sewage dumped in the river is going to destroy the environment. Did someone at the government level think it would? I think it's more accurate to say there was a callous disregard to whether it would. There was an expansion competition going on, not just Americans vs. Europeans but Free States vs. Slave States. Nobody could afford to just leave that territory alone.
Agree. We can’t chop up every conquest of a people as “genocide”. It was brutal but intent matters and methods matter. It doesn’t constitute a genocide.
Definitionally, it does constitute a genocide. I think, even in more modern times, the sterilization of native women and the cultural disenfranchisement of native children at boarding schools fit the definition of genocide... even disregarding the more brutal and explicit violence of the past. That doesn't mean random settlers were committing genocide, but I don't see how anyone can seriously argue that the US government didn't commit genocide against Native Americans.
@@kaseymonroe1063 I would argue boarding schools do not fit the definition of genocide.
@@lukerudolph880 You can't determine genocide by intent because people obfuscate their intentions. Orders are redacted and destroyed, etc. If a people's culture and way of life are forcibly removed, and the end result is a genocide, then it was genocide.
One of my favorite stories was when the men of machais Maine rowed out to a British warship and took it from the Brits. It's a pretty local story but Its still well known enough that Teddy Roosevelt starts his "War of 1812" with that story.
One of Key's daughters was buried in a military cemetery where I sent to med school on Mare Island, CA.
"Let's dive in" and "Now, I will say this" absolutely need to be shirts.
He (you) makes a great point there.
I'm English, when I was at school in the early 70s, the War of 1812 (not to be confused with the Оте́чественная война́ 1812 го́да, Patriot War of 1812) was taught as the "Stab in the Back" by the US.
Loved the video, and as always am fascinated with the History that you share with us, through the videos you react to and your own inputs!
I wanted to add my own input for once, that I don't think there was a clear narrative to paint the Native Americans genocide as the focus of Manifest Destiny. At least from my own perspective, with the last video starting off with America as "insecure", and then landing in the aftermath of the War of 1812, more confident; it felt more like the point being made across this video was the idea that with this war, the identity of being American (and having a strong central government) was reinforced, as well as gaining confidence that came from tussling with the British and Canada once again.
I would also point out, again from my perspective, that I would think the numerous "massacres" that occurred throughout the war by Native American hands' definitely would have stoked the flames of vengeance. It certainly is a strong reason for Andrew Jackson's upheaval of the Native Americans within the US's territory, with the tragic Trail of Tears.
Just to share my thoughts. All the love and support for your channel!
I’m early for once. Wish I had a history like you showing these kind of videos in class
2:40 stephen van rensselaer is also the founder and namesake of rensselaer polytechnic institute, a somewhat prestigious university
16:52 Perry jumped on horse back and was served as an aide-de-camp to Harrison during The Battle of the Thames. You have to feel sorry for the regular enlisted man fighting under Procter. The battle line was messed up. The left was the right and the back was the front.
Went to Put In Bay for my brothers bachelor party. Safe to say it was a rough weekend😂
Slight correction, I believe the HMS Victory is the oldest naval ship still in service, commissioned in 1758
The distinction is HMS Victory is in drydock. USS Constitution is still afloat and being used.
As a Canadian who’s read a fair amount about the war I’ve come to the same conclusion that neither side really won, but the Natives definitely lost. Canadians like to claim victory in the sense that none of the invasion attempts were ultimately successful and no land was permanently lost.
@ 15:42 "Simpsons" reference where Bart, Milhouse, Nelson, and Ralph are made into a boy band. Turns out the promoter was a US Navy recruitment officer and they were using subliminal messages in the music videos and songs to recruit for the navy. A chord line in one of the songs is "Yvan Eht Nioj" which as you pointed out is "Join The Navy" backwards.
The backwards text is a reference to The Simpsons, when they make a boy band and the song they sang had a chorus said "Yvan eht nioj" Join the Navy, because the boy band it was psy-op for recruitment by the Navy!!
My biggest surprises this year was absolutely loving the Hunger Games series and reading all of them in a few months. Biggest letdown was John Dies at the End DNF it was just too dumb.
As an Ojibwe, I would like to say the genocide of the Native Americans by the United States government was, in fact, intentional and must not be downplayed. Arguing against this is not only inaccurate but also harmful. My family and ancestors bear the scars of this genocide, and hearing that we were in the way and how some of these comments agree hurts my heart greatly. 🥺💔😞
1812 was not only the first year of the War of 1812, it was also the score. 18-12.
Chris seems confused when the St Lawrence was mentioned....it's not referring to the river, it's a 1st Rate ship of the line ( so one with 100+guns, ) the only one built in the war by either side.
The problem was the timber was unseasoned so it didn't last long in service.
The US was building two ships of the line on Lake Ontario to combat the threat of the St Lawrence. They were never finished before the end of the war, one had a building over it to protect it till well after the Civil War. They were the Chippewa and the New Orleans.
Schuyler n Rensselaer are also countries in NY
I think another good thing that happened in this war made the US realize they need a professional military or at least they need to improve it
15:36 That's a Simpsons reference.
In one episode, the Navy is using subliminal messages to get more recruits. In a song, they sing "Join the Navy" backwards.
I would like to see more non US history stuff, and something from quality channels.
The U.S. wanted to take the west coast of Canada, "54-40 or fight", but the British built Fort Victoria and stationed their navy there, and Poke decided it might not be a good idea.
"YvaN eht nioJ" is from 'The Simpsons' It was a subliminal message to get the kids to join the Navy.
you can’t deny that the us had a genocidal attitude toward the natives
Chris, if your ancestors were recruited in KY & OH, then there is a good chance that they were in the 7th Infantry and fought under Jackson in the war & 1st Seminole War.
On its face, I agree it is a tie, but I think future relations with Europe deserve more weight.
I'm trying to square the circle but it seems off to discount that but we give so much weight to WWI/Treaty of Versailles being a cause of WWII.
If love to see you react to "The war of 1812 song" by the Canadian band "The Arrogant Worms-" 🙂
the back ward "join the navy" is probably a ref to the simpsons episode where bart and other boys are recruited into a boy band. Their manager is a navy LT who is using them as subliminal messaging, part of the chorus of one of their songs they repeat "yvan eht nioj"
One of the better gags I've seen in a history video 😂
TExt backwards - TIC "Professionalism"
Ah, here is the answer on my question on the last video!
"YvaN eht nioJ" is a callback to a Simpsons episode where they tried to create a "boy band" of Bart, Ralph, Nelson, and Milhouse, to be Def. Dept propaganda!
It was genocide, your hang ups about the term don't change that fact
Otherwise good video and interesting analysis
Pretty sure Hms Victory is older, and it is both still afloat and still commissioned.
I thought HMS Victory has been in dry dock since 1922..... Yes commissioned. Even if there is some water under her does she float and she certainly doesn't sail.
It's weird in the war of 1812 the Navy Kicks booty and the army fails greatly ...
While I. Europe the Navies of Europe loose major battles but their armies do well...
As someone who grew up in the new Orleans area think that's the first time I heard it pronounced like that lol
Here we go!
I don't understand why it's so often said Lundy's Lane was the bloodiest battle of the war. I've even seen it said on repudiable sites. It's almost like a mandala effect.
258 were killed at Lundy's lane
421 were killed at Frenchtown and that's not even counting the native loses becasue they're unknown.
304 were killed at New Orleans.
It’s called the bloodiest battle because of all casualties: Dead captured and wounded on all sides, not just those who died.
@@lordsofarnor4128 The total casualty count for Lundy's lane is 1,641 making it 2nd. If you count sieges it's third
New Orleans saw 2,108
Siege of Fort Erie 2,626
In that case I have no idea. The only other thing I can think of is the percentage of the two armies that were casualties were close to 50 percent on both sides. So maybe that’s the reason but I don’t know.
@@lordsofarnor4128 could be
@robbygood3458 and @lordsofarnor4128 could it be Lundy's Lane is one battle/one day battle compared to Siege of Fort Erie is over a month long. Your New Orleans figure seems to be Just January 8th which is good for comparison to Lundy's Lane. However if you add the other battles connected to New Orleans it is even more. Could be the percentage factor. only 6,000 at Lundy's Lane and 13,700 at New Orleans. Multiday battle versus single day battle reminds me of comparisons of Civil War battles. Another element you might consider is this like the eastern theater of the Civil War compared to all the other theaters. Or is this because one of the generals at Lundy's Lane lived longer than most and wrote about it. There are some other myths in the 1814 Niagara Campaign that are not fully true, (do not want to say they are wrong since there is a kernel of truth) but are remembered because of one generals writing. That general would be Winfield Scott. Which O.H. Perry admired during the taking of Fort George in 1813.
yvan eht nioj is a song from the Simpsons. Where the Navy use Bart and his friends as a Boy band (voiced by Nsync) to create a subliminal pop song 'Yvan Eht Nioj' in order to recruit to the Navy.
and I've had the song stuck in my head since I made this comment
With the majority of these attacks in Canada by US forces, as Clint Eastwood would say in his role in heartbreak Ridge “a cluster fuck“ and quite a few of them too?🇬🇧🏴🇨🇦🇺🇸
Have you thought about reacting to The Peoples Profile channel? Or are they just too long of videos
America the Beautiful would be a much better national anthem than the SSB.
Honestly, this is one of those wars where most of the enjoyment of the story comes from the politics that lead up to the war and the war itself is kind of boring with some interesting stories sprinkled in. Much like WW1. Lots of interesting political tension and buildup, few interesting battles
Did i just write a review for a historical event like it was a book? Yes I did. Am I sorry? No I’m not
mist opertunety to have a animated johnny horton in the battle of new orleans
A young brigadier general Winfield Scott was instrumental in making a stand at the Battle of Chippewa and was injured at the Battle of Lundy's Lane. The genius mind of his saw the US Army in its infancy to it's might across the world. Scott should be recognized in modern day for his 40+ years of service to the US Army
I agree! Winfield Scott is an underappreciated and sadly largely forgotten American hero. It was his Anaconda Plan that was the strategy that won the US Civil War for the Union. He was too old and too sick to command a field army by that time though.
As a Canadian who’s read a great deal about the conflict I would tend to agree.
❤
I grew up within spitting distance of the battle of Crysler Farm on the St Lawrence River, where a US invasion force was repelled in 1813.
The Canadian/British forces that won at Crysler’s Farm were outnumbered around 8/9:1.
@@archivesoffantasy5560 The US force had come down from Lake Ontario by ship and endured potshots from cannons along the way. They were poorly lead as well. They were meant to rendezvous with another US force moving north through the Lake Champlain region and to carry on to attack Montreal.
The two US commanders were old revolutionary soldiers who didn't get along well, on top of it all.
When told that they burned Washington, the British say "I know we burned Joan of Arc, but not George Washington."
Join the navy YVAN EHT NIOJ is a salute to the Simpsons. They were trying to recruit people to the Navy by using "subliminal messages" . Bart joins a boy band, and their songs are to recruit their fans to join the navy. funny episode. LOL
You pronounced Chalmett wrong. Happens a lot with place names in Louisiana.
It's 'shall-met'.
Genocide is a term that is thrown around far too much.
Not every negative occurence involving lots of death is genocide.
If displacing an entire population from their homeland with no other place to go (cuz the US wanted all the land really) is not genocide in your dictionary, I don't know what is. Genocide is representing an existential threat to a specific group of people which is by all means what the US settlers did. There's no way of sugarcoating it
So what should’ve the United States done if they wanted the territory? Taking territory is not genocide.
@@lukerudolph880negotiate with the natives (in good faith) or leave them alone. Period
@@benjaminleonard9588 okay, but taking the land is still okay,right? As long as we agree conquering the land is justifiable. It just needs a better justification than just breaking treaties?
Manifest destiny all the way baby!!!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I'm Finnish so I admit that I have a limited understanding of this, but didn't USA consistently try to wipe out Native American identity, pushing them off their lands, removing any notion of their culture and into reserves that often could not support the population? Let's not forget that genocide doesn't have to be the target for it to be genocide. "They were in the way" can also be a reason for genocide, just like pushing Armenians of their lands into intentionally deadly situations in Ottoman empire was a genocide even if it was done because "they were in the way of the war".
Maybe I'm just missing something since I'm not very involved in this discussion but it's a bit weird to me how it's often denied that what was done to the Indians was a genocide.
👍🏻
Nothing about William Sherman’s dad respecting Tecumseh?
It's a Simpsons joke. A song playing backwards to subliminally get people to join the navy😅
Join the navy backwards is a Simpson’s reference.
4:53 Go O.H. Perry
Yo Chris things I care about is about to release a opium wars this video this month so u should check that out soon.
Please react to Buyuuden Japanese History
Battle of Bannockburn by HistoryBattles3D
Please
I wonder if the British never impressed our sailors does the war of 1812 happen?
Armchair Historian recently did a really good video on "Who won the War of 1812", I highly recommend you check it out.
Yvan eht Noij - see The Simpsons and their 300th episode ;)