@@sms17762000 That explains a lot. I can't even count how many times i've had to explain to an american over the internet how their own government works.
There’s a classic Onion article “Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be.” The Onion has put out some great stuff over the years. They had a recent “Ex-FDA Official Confirms Existence of Vegetables” that, as someone that likes to cook, I found truly frightening.
@@podemosurss8316 "We need a wall that seperates Church and State and the Viceroyalty of New Spain will pay for it!" - Thomas Jefferson, 1776, probably
As a physicist, I much prefer the way scientific arguments proceed than the way social arguments proceed; one of the first thing always discussed is "what do you mean by ___?" A lot of arguments proceed from sloppy lingo.
This. It’s why we start most if not all reports with going over the concepts in the paper to establish what is meant by them, and cover some of the accepted facts of the matter
Agreed. The amount of arguments I've had with others or seen others have with others before they realize that they're saying the same thing from different angles is crazy.
As a physicist, you are used to words being defined within the theories they are used in. And you have no problem with a word doubly defined in different theories and meaning complete different things (like a ring in Algebra is something different from a ring around Saturn). In our everyday environment, we don't argue within fixed sets of theories. Instead, we osmotically draw in the meaing of words when we learn the language, and everyone does it slightly differently.
@@SiqueScarface Yeah, which is why it should be stardand in a discussion to start off my explaining what meanings you are assigning to the words you use.
5:00 Being from Spain, I can tell: overall, Spanish is the official language in all of Spain, but in some Autonomous Regions (kind of our equivalent to the States in the US) they do have other languages which are also official too. Namely: * Catalonia has Catalan. * Valencia has Valencian. * Balearic Islands have Ballear. * Basque Country and Navarra have Euskera/Basque. * Galicia has Galician.
@@GetRidOfCivilAssetForfeiture Kind of? They have the same origins, but Galician also has some traits from Spanish. Also, Valencian and Ballear are dialects of Catalan (but don't try telling that to them, they will get angry).
@@podemosurss8316 linguists have classified Galacian as a dialect/variant of Portuguese and I even knew someone from the region and he said he spoke a type of Portuguese.
My grandparents were from Canton Ohio and were 1st generation immigrants from Germany. My grandfather had to make a difficult choice to fight in WW1 against Germany. He was a Marine in the battle of Mont Blanc
At the point where your grandfather chose to fight for the US he became a true American. I'm a first generation American, born in NYC. My father came to the US from Cuba just before Christmas 1941 to enlist in the Army. He and his older brother were born in Tampa, FL. The rest of his siblings were all born in Cuba. My father had dual citizenship since he was raised in Cuba. He left his teenage bride with her family in Havana. At the moment he enlisted he became a true American. My father never saw action as he suffered severe injuries to both his arms while in training. He decided to stay here and after a year of going through the legal system my mother came over, and so I and my 2 sisters were born here.
@@jimboscooter432 He and his older brother were both born in Tampa, FL. My Dad showed his birth certificate and came to the US towards the end of December 1941. His older brother did not come because his wife was totally blind due to an accident and he did not want to leave her. The reason they were born in Tampa was due to their father working for a cigar company. My grandfather was stationed in Tampa for almost 3 years. The rest of the kids born to Grandpa & Grandma (5 more ) were all born in Havana.
Did he really make "a choice" himself? Because in WW1 the US definitely used heavy conscription to fill its ranks. And did preferably conscript poor clueless immigrant boys. Your gramps fills that bill well. Their parents protested way less than established US wasp families when their boys where sent into the grinder. I´d say chances are 80-90% he was drawn compulsory, not voluntary. Then painted it as elective in his personal biographic narration for a better retrospect. _"Yes I went to war because my parents couldnt afford pay to get me out of it"_ ... sounds much less heroic, yet was very common. More probable than a young penniless new arrival risking his life in some supposed high-minded gesture of national loayalty, anyway.
You sure he "choose"? Because 80% of the US troops in WW1 where conscripted, forced into it by governement. And poor immigrant boys where drafted preferably, their famlies did not make as much fuss as established citizenry. I dont know your gramps of course. But the statistical chances are much higher he got drafted. And re-interpreted his personal narrative in retrospect. _"I had to go to war, because my parents could not buy me free"_ does sound less heroic. Much more probable though.
You don't want more than one official language unless it's constitutionally necessary to keep the country together. As a Canadian who also grew up in North Carolina I can see the benefit to the American way of no official language. Federally in Canada we spend so much effort and money to do everything in two languages for a small portion of the country. It makes sense federally for us. The problem arises here when a province like New Brunswick have two official languages. It becomes it's own beurocratic hell and trying to hire for those offical languages creates a two-tiered citizenry.
Hi, Norwegian here. We've got two official languages, Norwegian and Sami. To make things even more difficult, Norwegian has two official writing systems which have completely different grammatical structures, words, and sometimes even different syntax. Both forms of Norwegian are taught in school, although one of them is understood by everyone and the other one is used by 10% of the population. And even then, there are five different Sami languages that are considered equal. Thus, we technically have 7 different official languages for a country with 5 million citizens. I've never heard anyone use bureaucracy or money-saving as a reason to reduce the amount of official languages over here. It's often just students complaining about having to learn it, but then again, students will complain about having to learn about Shakespeare too, or the pythagorean theorem
Regarding the taxation without representation argument; one could argue that, _theoretically,_ 16 year olds who can work and pay taxes are virtually represented, because representatives should act in the interests of *all* of their constituents, not just the ones who voted for them. However, in contrast, without the possibility of exercising one's vote, representatives are under no obligation to appeal to a demographic that cannot legally vote for them, and that demographic has no leverage over the representative, so it's entirely contingent on that representative's good graces.
That's similar to the argument that "I didn't for X, they aren't MY politician". Those elected represent those that live in the area whether you voted for them or not. Those that can't vote can do exactly what women did, make a compelling argument and those that can vote will be so compelled and by extension, the representatives. In the case of 16yos, they should still have parents that vote or at least know some adults that could advocate on their behalf.
@@jeradw7420 Well, through our nation's progress towards universal suffrage we have indeed decided that this is NOT adequate representation for women, people of color, 18+ year olds, etc. And as the original poster pointed out - there is a difference between being able to vote but not doing so vs. categorically being unable to vote. We can see this by how parties might focus on voter turnout and persuading disaffected potential voters.
@@a.y.g.7464 We have also said that children should not be allowed to smoke or get tattoos because they aren't able to make that kind of life choices. If they can't make good decisions for their own health, they can't be trusted to make good decisions for others and therefore are adequately represented until they are older. The right of adult women and minorities aren't the same as children.
How could one person act in accordance with the wishes of every member of every group on every issue? It's impossible. So to pretend that an elected official truly "represents" you is one of the biggest shams we sell ourselves about "democracy" (which is incorrect as we are a republic not a democracy, so it would be "republicanism", both lowercase not referencing the political parties of the same names).
There is an argument that the innocent until proven guilty comes from Scots Law which is based on Roman Law rather than the Common Law of England. Many of the Founding fathers either had Scottish connections or were influenced by the Scottish Enlightenment
Innocent until proven guilty is a key principle in Roman Law (and the systems derived from it, such as... all the ones currently existing in Europe), and in general it goes further in the principle of "in dubio, pro reo" (when in doubt, favour the defendant).
Not so sure it was due to Scotland, although I haven't looked into that. Many of the most important Founders were huge fanboys of Greece and Rome, and intentionally studied them immensely to learn from where they failed, as well as the political thought of their time.
I mean, in principle, Scots law didn't necessarily prescribe guilt or innocence to a defendant. The original Scottish verdicts were "Proven" and "Not Proven" which referred explicitly to the prosecution's case. Of course in practice a proven case would, by extension, imply guilt on the part of the defendant and vice versa. However the jury themselves never explicitly stated that an individual was guilty or innocent. Of course this changed over time, and after the establishment of the US legal system, with the intrusion of the "not guilty" verdict into Scots law and then the subsequent supplanting of "Proven" with "Guilty".
In comparison, the Spanish 1978 Constitution (the one currently in effect) is 27 pages long. It has 169 articles, 9 additional dispositions, 1 derogatory disposition (abolishing previous laws from Franco's dictatorship) and 1 final disposition. It has been modified 4 times (entry in the EU, abolition of conscription and economic reforms in 2011, and a wording reform last year), but those are technically not amendments, but rather modifications of certain articles. Namely: -Adopting EU laws as part of Spanish legislation. -Abolishing universal conscription. -Economic reforms (article 135). -Updating some terminology that was used in the Constitution and is offensive (on regards to peoples with disabilities).
Wdym "not amendments?" An amendment is a change. When you amend a document, you make a change to it, so any change is an amendment, I would think. The U.S. Constitution just can't easily be amended, so the long, laborious process of getting one passed makes them very few. Why do you say the 4 modifications aren't "technically" amendments?
@@Justanotherconsumer Here we keep most things on the National (you would say Federal) Constitution, with the different Regions (our equivalent to the States) having Statutes which are smaller. For instance, most Spanish Regions don't have their own police force (instead relying on the National Police, the Civil Guard and any urban Local Police for cities), and there's a National Curriculum (albeit with some changes for local issues, specially in Regions with two official languages).
Does anyone find it ironic that the Stamp Act is essentially the same as the modern sales tax; the British subjects in America were not happy with the Stamp Act, so the British had to tax them in other ways.
It wasn’t about being unhappy with the tax but the fact we had no voting rights about taxes. We knew there would be taxes but wanted to control them not have them imposed on us
@@matthewkreps3352 Norwegian here, we had to learn English as as secondary language in elementary school, and then a 3rd language like Spanish, German or French(sometimes italian) when we reached middle school.
@@matthewkreps3352In Germany English is a mandatory subject starting in either Elementary school or middle school while also in middle school (at least in Real and Gymnasium which are the higher forms of middle schooling) you pick a 3rd language which often depends on what the school offers. In most cases its either French, Spanish or Latin but there are schools that offer Russian, chinese, portoguese and almost any other language you can think off.
@@TehIdiotOneIcelander here, we learn English as a second language, Danish as a third language, and then choose French, German or Spanish as a forth language.
Do many people become fluent? Or is it like where I grew up in Utah where people learn spanish in school but not really remember anything of the language other than very basic phrases?
Yeah my cousin in Greece speak multiple languages other than Greek. My dad said some people had hardest to understand when other spoke English were the English.
The Franklin Institute says that while Franklin did favorably compare the turkey to the bald eagle, it was more of a slam on eagles than an endorsement of the turkey to be the national bird.
Also here in Norway democracy started by granting voting rights only to male land owners, which started a trend of men buying tiny pieces of marches and other unuseable land to meet the requirements to vote. These pieces could be just a few square meters of marchland.
I would argue there shouldn’t be an official opening prayer. If members of Congress wanna pray they can go to church before work, meet with the chaplain in the old senate chamber, or meet in the respective chambers before each session begins. However, once the houses of Congress are open for business, no official prayer can be offered. Individual members can invoke their religion and state prayer during speeches though. If the establishment clause said “respecting the establishment of a religion” I’d agree with the more religious people. But it doesn’t
Just going to mention that with your knowledge of American History I have learned a ton of new things (I am South European) and kind of understand some principles Americans have engrained in their culture and why this came to be over the years. Although I am personally less intrigued by your "visiting historic sites" specials, I love all other content you create. Keep up the fantastic work!
If your representative does not have an electoral incentive to protect your interests, you do not have a representative. The technicality that you live in a representative's district does not necessarily mean that said representative actually represents you, or people like you, in Congress.
But I don’t think it’s that simple. What do you define as “an electoral incentive?” Losing reelection if they don’t adequately represent your specific group? Your definition would imply that Republicans in downtown New York City don’t have a representative nor Democrats in rural Appalachia. Those districts are so overwhelmingly one party that there’s no risk of ignoring the desires of the other side.
Yep, we have English and French as official languages in Canada, but also unofficially we have Inuktitut, Cree, Tlingit, and many other Indigenous languages, as well as languages brought by immigrants (Tagalog, Hindi, Cantonese, Low German (my heritage language), etc). And Finland has Finnish and Swedish as official languages.
Regarding No Taxation without Representation I was shocked, "shocked", to discover that Americans in US Territories do not have representatives in Congress or the Senate and cannot vote for the President. Why? In Australia everyone in Australian states or territories MUST vote at all levels of government. No one is excluded. But in the USA, "Home of Democracy" residents of Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories do not have voting representation in the United States Congress, and are not entitled to electoral votes for president. Washington, D.C., 6.3 million residents are, on the federal level, politically disenfranchised since the city's residents do not have voting representation in Congress; the city's residents elect a single non-voting congressional delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. How does this happen?
@EmptyDisc1 It's pretty pointless anyway because almost everyone pays taxes. Whether it be local, state, or federal likely everyone pays some form of tax.
@@EmptyDisc1 No. You said it, you answer it. Why is it important? Could we not as easily have a democracy where any taxpayer could vote, "citizen" or not?
@RickJaeger Allowing anyone at all, citizen or not, to vote would drastically reduce the integrity of our elections. Also, it kind of defeats the point of being a nation if citizenship means nothing.
worked at night clubs for years and the one sign that was always there was " the management reserve the right of admission " ,pointed at many times by the door staff when persons wanted to go in and were refused ,usually drunks or barred persons ,but any one the door staff thought could cause problems ,it was a quick easy stop to any arguments .There were the classics of " smart dress only " or Collars must be worn or Ties ,those went when arguments of these Clothes cost £££££££, there are many more OLD ones that disappeared over time .
My mother who was born in this country as well as both of her parents, first spoke German before English. Now my mother remembers almost none of the German she once knew. She can say every word of a dinner prayer that they said when she was young, but she can't tell you what the words mean.
With the language thing I do find it interesting to see many people in America who only speak Spanish or only speak mandarin, I have even seen people who only speak Yiddish. They were stuck in their communities but they seem relaxed about it. I myself do like been bilingual and wish to learn more about languages. I especially wished my school had an easily accessible sign language class
I definitely agree with you about the English thing. It reminded me of one time, when I was at my first job, a racist old lady yelled at my Latino grill workers behind their back, saying, "This is America. They can't even speak English." I was on my break when that happened, and upon hearing that, I got really mad and thought to myself, "Hey. Just because they're a different ethnicity, doesnt mean they're not American." And most recently, at my current job, a man accidentally hit Spanish on the cashing machine, and got really mad about it not being in English, and basically said, "People who speak Spanish need to get out." That shocked me to the core.
@@jeffslote9671 Who says they don't, but if both are native Spanish speakers and more comfortable in that language I'd rather they use that when communicating with each other in a kitchen where things can get loud and chaotic as it would reduce mistakes.
@@jeffslote9671Listen I ain’t no SJW who cries about “racism and sexism” all the time, but that is a clear cut sign of discrimination or just disrespect in general. Yes I believe if you’re coming to live in a country you should learn the predominant language. Such as if an English speaker moves to Mexico they should learn Spanish or if they move to South Korea they should learn Korean, that is just something that will make your life and the locals around you much easier by not knowing or not caring to learn the language. However, that doesn’t give someone the right to tell people they shouldn’t speak their native language with other native speakers (such as family, friends, or coworkers) or that they can’t speak it to themselves. It would be like someone who speaks English going to Saudi Arabia, then finds a coworker that speaks English who you communicate in English with, and than some local Saudi screams at both of the employees to speak Arabic even though they’re not talking to a native Arab speaker. It’s just common sense and respect.
@@jeffslote9671Where in that statement did they say that they refused to learn English? Just cause someone feels more comfortable speaking Spanish, doesn't mean they don't know English.
Hey Chris, I just wanted to leave you a potential channel you could maybe just look at. Cooking history with Max Miller. I prefer middle ages history and I'm fairly learned in cocktail history but I find this one kind of neat. Thanks for what you do! Also I was gonna try to meet you in NOLA this summer but I got a job on a cruise ship so I hope you enjoy your time here!
Some things that aren't in the constitution: The US is a Judeo-Christian nation (nope we have freedom of religion we don't have religious laws) Texas is allowed to secede (nope they tried that before. Ended poorly for them in a civil war)
The U.S. was absolutely founded on Judeo-Christian values. Just because we don't stop people from worshipping other false gods doesn't invalidate that.
@@Xeno_SolarusThe US was based around Enlightenment era principles of self determination and basic freedoms. If we were based around Biblical Christian law then we'd look a lot more like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan in terms of our rights as people.
Hello. I’d like to make a video suggestion. The Operations Room made a post about the Australian Army making a series of the major military involvements. Episode 1 is WW1. I think you would really enjoy it.
The US is an imperial isolationist/exceptionalist country, why would there be an encouragement to dilute the imperial culture by learning foreign language, other than the purpose of doing business and war?
9:02 My mom was born and raised in the Philippines, and English was required to learn as a second language when she was growing up, so I can see the argument for the necessary of learning another language. 25:50 For a while, I thought that the Separation of Chruch and State meant no religion at all. Glad to know that I was wrong about that
Remarkably, not only does the SA not have an official language (albeit laws are written in English), few Americans speak a second language. The USA is also the first nation to not have an official religion (Christian nationalism is counter to the Constitution).
Where does it say in the constitution that outlaws removing mattress tags on pain of death? Oh there it is. What remarkable foresight by the Founding Fathers. Well, errr, I’m in, uhh, a little bit of trouble….
Graduated from Chicopee Comp Highschool in 1983 went to a friends for a giant graduation party and a lot of the parents or grandparents were speaking Polish in the backyard, I thought that was pretty cool.
In Wales the voting age is 16 for Senedd (Welsh Parliament) elections and Welsh local elections. Also, in Scotland, it's 16 for the Scottish independence referendum, all Scottish Parliament elections and Scottish local government elections.
My parents grew up in Lakewood Ohio. My Mother’s family was german. She always said her German grandmother made the best spaghetti she ever had. They had moved to the US in early 1800’s. My parents moved to King County Washington at the end of WWII, where my brothers and I were born & raised.
My grandparents moved from Germany in 1913. I cannot say say that I recall her ever cooking spaghetti for dinner. She was, however, quite the cook. I grew up hearing German spoken in the home.
Hey man really like you're videos, a good video idea for you could be the battle of bloodriver, since its not really known and I feel like my ancestors were like the spartans with muskets 😂👍
My middle school offered Spanish, French, Mandarin, and German (I went back as a substitute teacher and they had dropped German), while my high school offered Spanish, French, Mandarin, and Italian. Collectively, I took 4 years and 12 weeks of Spanish (2 years and 9 weeks in middle school and 2 years and 3 weeks in high school) and 9 weeks of German. In college, I took 5 semesters of Latin for my language requirement, but my initial plan was to do 2 semesters of Latin and 2 semesters of Ancient Greek. I was also told that due to having the smallest vocab list, a number of football players took Swahili for their language requirement.
5:40 My grandfather, born in 1899 on a Southeastern Ohio farm in a German speaking house-hold, claimed to have learned English in elementary school. "A person who speaks two languages is bi-lingual. A person who speaks more than two languages is multi-lingual. A person who speaks one language is American." A comment I heard somewhere.
I think this video is an important reminder. Most people haven't engaged actively in history since high school. And apparently most people didn't pay much attention. I took AP world and US history and had great teachers that made it fun and enjoyable, but not everyone gets those. Most people actually get a really bad experience in history. I say that as a private history tutor for high schoolers, and having been a teacher's assistant for intro to history courses in college. I was genuinely shocked when I read the answers students gave on the test. Kids aren't dumb. They just don't really apply themselves, or really pay attention, and rarely care about the material, beyond the grade.
After departing for some time, Chris, I return and can only declare you a saner man than many; especially regarding such ones who may claim 'certain things' about the Civil War and Slavery - you know of the one I speak... God bless you, sir - I had to just endure and watch that.
I think Canada has shown the folly of double official languages. Most Canadians are locked out of high level government jobs that require the holder to know french and English
2:02 Yup you're right VTH, that's Karl Marx 3:18 Acts 4:35 6:42 Malthusianism is the theory that population growth is potentially exponential, according to the Malthusian growth model, while the growth of the food supply or other resources is linear, which eventually reduces living standards to the point of triggering a population decline.
My Hich School in Anne Arundel County offered Spanish (which I took), French, German, Latin (which was taught in English), ASL, and at one point we offered Japanese, but you had to go to the Community College for that. After I graduated, we started to offer Mandarin.
I learned a bit of Mandarin before a three week trip to China for work. That is a /very hard/ language to learn for a native English speaker. The tones are a nightmare because the notation for writing them get very hard and some of the pronunciation is outright goofy (water looks like it should be shui but it’s more like shuay). I gave up trying to say anything beyond good morning (tsao shang hao, but get the tones right) and thank you (shie shie). That said it was about as challenging as Thai, which has oddities like including your own gender when saying thank you (korp kun krap for me as a guy). Again tonal, and the writing system was… difficult. I never tried Hindi, turns out it’s not very useful anyway as it’s about as frequently understood as English (every state in India has its own language… except for Andrha Pradesh and Telangana which share Telugu and split from each other very recently).
A similar, slightly interesting point about official languages is in New Zealand. While recognised as a de-facto language, and is the most widely-spoken language in the country, English is not an official language, the two official languages as recognised by the government are Māori and NZ Sign Language.
DC is very specifically not supposed to have representation. The problem is that people moved there, not that there isn't representation. I'm not saying throw all the people out but people who move there should be fully aware beforehand. It's nobody's fault if someone moves to DC and either is unaware of or disregards the fact that they will not be represented in Congress.
@@Adamdidit that completely ignores the fact that DC very specifically should not have a rep. That's just begging for corruption. DC not having a rep was the right call. My whole point is that people should be fully aware of this fact and as such have willingly waived that right. You can't complain about it when the document that stipulates that DC not get a rep is free to read, literally ALL OVER DC, and written at a middle school reading level. If I were currently wallowing in feces while a shower is 3 feet away, that's my problem.
@@c.h.y the what if game isn't very useful. Nobody is forcing people in either of those scenarios to stay so they're irrelevant to begin with, but more importantly outliers are not a legitimate basis for a counter argument. When we move into this realm of what if, we open the door to infinite hypotheticals that just get us lost in the weeds. It's a tactic used draw focus away from the initial and more valid point. Try again
I just want to commend you on your presentation of the facts and your thoughts/opinions. I’ve watched your channel for a while and I didn’t know you were a conservative until this video. My political affiliation is more left-leaning so I always appreciate when people who provide commentary (no matter what side of the aisle they’re on) provide the facts first then their opinions, and make that clear. Bravo.
It the universe of TH-cam lawyers, those who are acknowledged as accomplished attorneys, do reaction videos of this Legal Eagle guy, and to put it mildly... they universally mock and ridicule him.
One of the best arguments against having an official language is that legal documents can be in any language. You can write a contract in Klingon if you want and it is still legally binding.
I'm onboard with the Turkey being our national bird! :) The eagle is a scavenger, a thief and coward. A symbol of over ten centuries of European mischief. The Turkey is a truly noble bird. Native American, a source of sustenance to our original settlers, and an incredibly brave fellow who wouldn't flinch from attacking a whole regiment of Englishmen single-handedly!
I grew up in Gahanna, ohio and our highschool had spanish, french, german and even manderin chinese. It was a high quality school that was comstantly trying to improvein a lot of ways so thats a factor.
About the language, the US government banned french in Louisiana in most part of the 20th century. Nowadays, France tries to help and preserve the french language in Louisiana
I can't help but wonder if the surveys on what was in the Constitution were simply asking 'is this in the Constitution?' and average people, not knowing either way, just figured it probably was. Perhaps the questionnaire could've asked, 'is this in the Declaration of Independence' or 'in the Gettysburg address' and average people would've also answered yes.
My American Civics class in high school was filled with football players and the teacher was known to give a pass to anyone. What we covered the entire semester, the other teacher that was tougher, covered in two weeks. I don't think many in that class would have passed a quiz from this video.
Good point on the common misperception among many people that if something is not explicitly in the federal constitution then it does not exist or is even forbidden. (And a lot of people will say they reject referring to any other non-native corpus of Law ... but will then turn around and say that our laws come from the 10 Commandments.)
The primary issue is the constitutions clarity on matters is hilariously vague to the point that even it's cheat-sheet is way out of date, who can really blame us looking at it today and thinking "ya know, well over HALF of this just doesn't hold up anymore" Will updating the constitution take literal years to safeguard our basic rights? Absolutely. But it's a task that's just GOT to get done at this point.
True. We are the oldest continual Democracy. And that has come at a price. The constitution was revolutionary and amazing for it's time but almost 2 and a half centuries have passed. We need a drastic update at least
The problem with asking if a quote is in any document is the bias in the question. If the person recognizes the quote but not where its from, they will say yes. The people that dont recognize the quote will also say yes. The only people that will say no are the people that both know the quote an where its from. So you are only really finding out who knows the quotes origin.
Great video about these misconceptions. Unrelated to this video, I would love to see you do a full JWB Manhunt series review once it’s done airing since it’s Civil War related!
I can remember as a twenty-something when that Constitution quiz came out, just being apalled. I had American History in the 5th grade, 8th grade, and 11th grade in Connecticut. All of them covered the Constitution to the level of ability of that age group. Is it just students not caring, or being bored?
I think kids often retain very little of what they are taught in schools in the long run. Often the only things that are retained (IMHO at least) are ones reinforced by a persons own studies and activities after school. If you're into history and read more books on it, watch documentaries, etc then you are more likely to retain that knowledge. Though even as someone who delves into history a bunch these days I actually remember very little from my classes themselves. As too why it's a tough question to answer. I think mostly it's how education is presented and enacted. In a way often just to memorize what you need until your quiz or tests, then discard that knowledge. A lack of teaching understanding rather than memorization. With that said there may be factors beyond that, like a simple reality that at that age you will only retain so much. Also a lack of people often engaging in the study and interest in history after school. The blame for that one might fall on our culture here in the US that really doesn't value history and that knowledge as much as those of us here (watching videos like these) probably think it does. I know when I geek out about history to friends, family etc most of them are just not that interested. It's just part of the culture unfortunately. I strongly believe that this causes people repeat many historical mistakes made in their own lives and to lack the understanding of many things that would indeed have if they valued history and it's lessons for us.
What confuses me the most is whether or not the Constitution originally implied that there was a right to secession because before the Civil War, there was no straightforward answer as to whether or not secession was constitutional but the north did not recognize the south as a separate country, it was only post Civil War that the Supreme Court Texas V. White case declared that no state could just willy nilly leave the US
Hey Sam Nixon, thanks for the great video. Given you are such a history nerd like me, and you specialize in India of course, you might know that the Indian Constitution does declare itself to be a socialist state just as the USSR had to each according to their needs, from each according to their ability.
5:25 I descend from a German speaking Prussian who fought for the New York 1st regiment in the Revolutionary War! I don’t know how much English he could speak but I definitely know how much English he could write and that was nada.
While I do understand DC should have some form of real representation in government since regular people live there. I am 100% behind the argument that no state should claim ownership over the head of the federal government.
Residents of DC should be considered residents of Maryland and Virginia so far as Congress and the Electoral College are concerned. DC itself shouldn't have ANY members in either body.
There was some legislation (HR 51) in the 117th Congress (2021-2022) to move all of the non-federal government areas of DC to a new state called Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, or Washington, DC; not to be confused with Washington, District of Columbia.
I lived in Northern Virginia and used to hear that DC Taxation Without Representation bullcrap all the dang time. If taxation without representation is such a huge deal, just move to Maryland or Virginia. Problem solved.
Doesn't the 13th amendment enable slavery (unpaid, forced labor) in US prisons? With the whole "duly convicted" exception thing. The innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental human right (article 11). Interestingly article 4 bans slavery.
That's not what slavery has meant in our history, though. "Slavery" implies that the beneficiary of the labor owns the laborer, that there is no necessary tie between this status and any misconduct by the slave, and that this status is heritable. Penal servitude, on the other hand, doesn't assert any ownership over the laborer. It is also retributive, requiring at least notionally that the laborer be found guilty of some misconduct that demands a compensation. It is also not directly heritable, though of course there is likely at least a correlation between the incarceration of a parent and his or her children. Now, penal servitude can certainly be abused, and I think it has been abused and is probably being abused now. This abuse can make it essentially the same thing in practice. But they are fundamentally different concepts.
@@jdotoz but they don't work for the community or something. They make products that companies make profit from. And if they don't, they are forced with solitary confinement or worse. Beyond some legal fineprint i don't see the difference. And neither does the 13th Amendment! It bans slavery with that definitiion and then literally (!) makes an exception for prisons. So if what it bans is "slavery", than what they allow is also slavery. It is the same thing! There is no new definiton for the exception. If you're "duly convicted" you can be put into what it moved slaves out of. One to one. And that's excluding the discussion of how (many) and who goes to prison in the US for what (3 strike rule is a gross human rights violation in itself). So even the "misconduct" that demands a compensation itself is often extremely controversial. Years of forced labor for shoplifting a DVD. If you connect the two you have extremely crowded prisons, that are easily refilled and produce profit from unpaid and forced labour. You have to go to China for something similar.
@@jdotoz @jdotoz but they don't work for the community or something. They make products that companies make profit from. And if they don't, they are forced with solitary confinement or worse. Beyond some legal fineprint i don't see the difference. And neither does the 13th Amendment! It bans slavery with that definitiion and then literally (!) makes an exception for prisons. So if what it bans is "slavery", than what they allow is also slavery. It is the same thing! There is no new definiton for the exception. If you're "duly convicted" you can be put into what it moved slaves out of. One to one. And that's excluding the discussion of how (many) and who goes to prison in the US for what (3 strike rule is a gross human rights violation in itself). So even the "misconduct" that demands a compensation itself is often extremely controversial. Years of forced labor for shoplifting a DVD. If you connect the two you have extremely crowded prisons, that are easily refilled and produce profit from unpaid and forced labour. You have to go to China for something similar.
@@jdotoz the 13th Amendment bans slavery with a definitiion and then literally (!) makes an exception for duly convicted. So if what it bans is "slavery", than what they allow is also slavery. It is the same thing! There is no new definiton for the exception. as for "duly convicted" i recommend (on youtube) QI where are 1% of all americans.
On the subject of language, while English is kind of the official language of the UK, it's not super enforced, it's more like everybody learns it. In Wales, for example, you'll find most sign postage is in Welsh and English, but the people speak it interchangably. Scotland has Gaelic of course, Ireland has Irish. And all official documentation is almost always multi lingual, not just our languages but also a good portion of European ones and these days including Arabic and Hindi. Depending on the area, schools might also have classes exclusively in other languages (mine had one that taught entirely in French, for example). Basically, we expect people who live here to learn it at least enough to vaguely understand. Interesting, although not surprising sadly, that the US doesn't forbid denying service based on sexual orientation because we do. Here it's explicitly clear that it's illegal to deny service to someone based on gender, race, religion, nation of origin, age or sexual orientation, even if the good or service is aimed specifically at one or none of those groups. There was a big scandal a few years ago where a couple ordered a wedding cake, but the baker tried to refuse once they found out the couple were gay. Pretty sure the baker tried to use his religious beliefs as excuse then too, but the court's opinion was essentially, "Skill issue"
Interesting language discussion. As a reference, the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand, which described the rights and obligations of native Maoris and European settlers, was written in both English and Maori. Unfortunately each language text was different, causing legal issues that continue to this day.
I was surprised at these too. Most people don't study this stuff though. To us all, this is the basics. Your average American spends more time watching CSI reruns than learning.
I've got one. I'm doing an essay on this in Canada and I checked to see if it is the same in the states (spoiler alert, it is). And that is parent's rights. In the context of rights as granted by a Charter (for Canada) or a Constitution (in the US), parent's rights are not a thing. Sorry parents, but no where in the constitution does it say that parents have any right to make decisions about what they're children do. As VTH has noted, the interruption by courts on a federal or state level may be different, but as far as the wording of the Constitution itself goes, parents rights are not a thing.
![ประสบการณ์ จ้าง Developer ที่ผมจะไม่มีวันลืม [ภาค1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bzivN4KDg-k/mqdefault.jpg)
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're accurate or not." - Abraham Lincoln
Love it 😂
Actually, the quote is "You can believe anything you read online"
Actually actually, the quote is "this play had raving reviews on yelp"
Actually actually, the quote is "This play had raving reviews on yelp!"
@calvinneason3059 "Apart from all that, I actually enjoyed the play"--Mrs. Lincoln
It’s heartwarming to see just how much faith you have in the average Americans civics understanding.
It'd help if civics was actually taught in US public schools.
@@sms17762000 I remember us touching on certain civics topics in 5th grade US History. But that's about it
@@sms17762000 That explains a lot. I can't even count how many times i've had to explain to an american over the internet how their own government works.
So true VTH naïveté of the education of Americans is adorable
Better to be naive than cynical.
DC tried to have "No taxation without representation" on their quarter in the State Quarters series. The U.S. Mint refused the design.
They put it on their license plates, if I remember right.
Thats a dangerous though you cannot let get out, huh?
Either make DC a state or let Maryland conquer it but either way, the status quo for DC is not sustainable!
There’s a classic Onion article “Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be.”
The Onion has put out some great stuff over the years. They had a recent “Ex-FDA Official Confirms Existence of Vegetables” that, as someone that likes to cook, I found truly frightening.
11:30 “I just took for granted that people just understood…”
Say no more 😂
Thomas Jefferson: We need a wall that separates Church and State, and Mexico will pay for it!
John Adams: What is Mexico?
Thomas Jefferson: Wait about 25 more years.
Death: About that. You guys are gonna find this funny.
@@Adamdidittop tier comment and most definitely how it all went down
@@Adamdidit It was called Viceroyalty of New Spain back then.
@@podemosurss8316 "We need a wall that seperates Church and State and the Viceroyalty of New Spain will pay for it!" - Thomas Jefferson, 1776, probably
As a physicist, I much prefer the way scientific arguments proceed than the way social arguments proceed; one of the first thing always discussed is "what do you mean by ___?" A lot of arguments proceed from sloppy lingo.
This. It’s why we start most if not all reports with going over the concepts in the paper to establish what is meant by them, and cover some of the accepted facts of the matter
Agreed. The amount of arguments I've had with others or seen others have with others before they realize that they're saying the same thing from different angles is crazy.
When I coached debate the first thing I told the kids was: "Define your terms!"
As a physicist, you are used to words being defined within the theories they are used in. And you have no problem with a word doubly defined in different theories and meaning complete different things (like a ring in Algebra is something different from a ring around Saturn). In our everyday environment, we don't argue within fixed sets of theories. Instead, we osmotically draw in the meaing of words when we learn the language, and everyone does it slightly differently.
@@SiqueScarface Yeah, which is why it should be stardand in a discussion to start off my explaining what meanings you are assigning to the words you use.
"The limits of my language mean the limits of my world."
- Ludwig Wittgenstein
5:00 Being from Spain, I can tell: overall, Spanish is the official language in all of Spain, but in some Autonomous Regions (kind of our equivalent to the States in the US) they do have other languages which are also official too. Namely:
* Catalonia has Catalan.
* Valencia has Valencian.
* Balearic Islands have Ballear.
* Basque Country and Navarra have Euskera/Basque.
* Galicia has Galician.
And in reality Galacian is a dialect of Portuguese.
@@GetRidOfCivilAssetForfeitureIn reality, English is just a dialect of German.
@@GetRidOfCivilAssetForfeiture Kind of? They have the same origins, but Galician also has some traits from Spanish. Also, Valencian and Ballear are dialects of Catalan (but don't try telling that to them, they will get angry).
@@podemosurss8316 linguists have classified Galacian as a dialect/variant of Portuguese and I even knew someone from the region and he said he spoke a type of Portuguese.
Don't Valencia and the Balearic Islands also speak Catalan?
My grandparents were from Canton Ohio and were 1st generation immigrants from Germany. My grandfather had to make a difficult choice to fight in WW1 against Germany. He was a Marine in the battle of Mont Blanc
At the point where your grandfather chose to fight for the US he became a true American. I'm a first generation American, born in NYC. My father came to the US from Cuba just before Christmas 1941 to enlist in the Army. He and his older brother were born in Tampa, FL. The rest of his siblings were all born in Cuba. My father had dual citizenship since he was raised in Cuba. He left his teenage bride with her family in Havana. At the moment he enlisted he became a true American. My father never saw action as he suffered severe injuries to both his arms while in training. He decided to stay here and after a year of going through the legal system my mother came over, and so I and my 2 sisters were born here.
@mikealvarez2322 was your father born in Cuba or Tampa?
@@jimboscooter432 He and his older brother were both born in Tampa, FL. My Dad showed his birth certificate and came to the US towards the end of December 1941. His older brother did not come because his wife was totally blind due to an accident and he did not want to leave her. The reason they were born in Tampa was due to their father working for a cigar company. My grandfather was stationed in Tampa for almost 3 years. The rest of the kids born to Grandpa & Grandma (5 more ) were all born in Havana.
Did he really make "a choice" himself?
Because in WW1 the US definitely used heavy conscription to fill its ranks.
And did preferably conscript poor clueless immigrant boys. Your gramps fills that bill well.
Their parents protested way less than established US wasp families when their boys where sent into the grinder.
I´d say chances are 80-90% he was drawn compulsory, not voluntary.
Then painted it as elective in his personal biographic narration for a better retrospect.
_"Yes I went to war because my parents couldnt afford pay to get me out of it"_ ...
sounds much less heroic, yet was very common.
More probable than a young penniless new arrival risking his life in some supposed high-minded gesture of national loayalty, anyway.
You sure he "choose"?
Because 80% of the US troops in WW1 where conscripted, forced into it by governement.
And poor immigrant boys where drafted preferably, their famlies did not make as much fuss as established citizenry.
I dont know your gramps of course.
But the statistical chances are much higher he got drafted. And re-interpreted his personal narrative in retrospect. _"I had to go to war, because my parents could not buy me free"_ does sound less heroic.
Much more probable though.
Thanks for a very level headed video on the topic. Your references to things being up to interpretation is important and I realised how far it goes.
Stuff like this shouldn't be.
The 2nd amendment is an example of thst
You don't want more than one official language unless it's constitutionally necessary to keep the country together. As a Canadian who also grew up in North Carolina I can see the benefit to the American way of no official language. Federally in Canada we spend so much effort and money to do everything in two languages for a small portion of the country. It makes sense federally for us. The problem arises here when a province like New Brunswick have two official languages. It becomes it's own beurocratic hell and trying to hire for those offical languages creates a two-tiered citizenry.
Hi, Norwegian here. We've got two official languages, Norwegian and Sami. To make things even more difficult, Norwegian has two official writing systems which have completely different grammatical structures, words, and sometimes even different syntax. Both forms of Norwegian are taught in school, although one of them is understood by everyone and the other one is used by 10% of the population. And even then, there are five different Sami languages that are considered equal. Thus, we technically have 7 different official languages for a country with 5 million citizens.
I've never heard anyone use bureaucracy or money-saving as a reason to reduce the amount of official languages over here. It's often just students complaining about having to learn it, but then again, students will complain about having to learn about Shakespeare too, or the pythagorean theorem
Regarding the taxation without representation argument; one could argue that, _theoretically,_ 16 year olds who can work and pay taxes are virtually represented, because representatives should act in the interests of *all* of their constituents, not just the ones who voted for them. However, in contrast, without the possibility of exercising one's vote, representatives are under no obligation to appeal to a demographic that cannot legally vote for them, and that demographic has no leverage over the representative, so it's entirely contingent on that representative's good graces.
"I'd love to help you, Son, but you're too young to vote" -- Summertime Blues
That's similar to the argument that "I didn't for X, they aren't MY politician". Those elected represent those that live in the area whether you voted for them or not. Those that can't vote can do exactly what women did, make a compelling argument and those that can vote will be so compelled and by extension, the representatives. In the case of 16yos, they should still have parents that vote or at least know some adults that could advocate on their behalf.
@@jeradw7420 Well, through our nation's progress towards universal suffrage we have indeed decided that this is NOT adequate representation for women, people of color, 18+ year olds, etc.
And as the original poster pointed out - there is a difference between being able to vote but not doing so vs. categorically being unable to vote. We can see this by how parties might focus on voter turnout and persuading disaffected potential voters.
@@a.y.g.7464 We have also said that children should not be allowed to smoke or get tattoos because they aren't able to make that kind of life choices. If they can't make good decisions for their own health, they can't be trusted to make good decisions for others and therefore are adequately represented until they are older. The right of adult women and minorities aren't the same as children.
How could one person act in accordance with the wishes of every member of every group on every issue? It's impossible. So to pretend that an elected official truly "represents" you is one of the biggest shams we sell ourselves about "democracy" (which is incorrect as we are a republic not a democracy, so it would be "republicanism", both lowercase not referencing the political parties of the same names).
There is an argument that the innocent until proven guilty comes from Scots Law which is based on Roman Law rather than the Common Law of England.
Many of the Founding fathers either had Scottish connections or were influenced by the Scottish Enlightenment
Innocent until proven guilty is a key principle in Roman Law (and the systems derived from it, such as... all the ones currently existing in Europe), and in general it goes further in the principle of "in dubio, pro reo" (when in doubt, favour the defendant).
Not so sure it was due to Scotland, although I haven't looked into that. Many of the most important Founders were huge fanboys of Greece and Rome, and intentionally studied them immensely to learn from where they failed, as well as the political thought of their time.
I think the system they set up was actually closer to the British system set up by the Declaration of Right
I mean, in principle, Scots law didn't necessarily prescribe guilt or innocence to a defendant. The original Scottish verdicts were "Proven" and "Not Proven" which referred explicitly to the prosecution's case. Of course in practice a proven case would, by extension, imply guilt on the part of the defendant and vice versa. However the jury themselves never explicitly stated that an individual was guilty or innocent. Of course this changed over time, and after the establishment of the US legal system, with the intrusion of the "not guilty" verdict into Scots law and then the subsequent supplanting of "Proven" with "Guilty".
In comparison, the Spanish 1978 Constitution (the one currently in effect) is 27 pages long. It has 169 articles, 9 additional dispositions, 1 derogatory disposition (abolishing previous laws from Franco's dictatorship) and 1 final disposition. It has been modified 4 times (entry in the EU, abolition of conscription and economic reforms in 2011, and a wording reform last year), but those are technically not amendments, but rather modifications of certain articles. Namely:
-Adopting EU laws as part of Spanish legislation.
-Abolishing universal conscription.
-Economic reforms (article 135).
-Updating some terminology that was used in the Constitution and is offensive (on regards to peoples with disabilities).
Much of the equivalent content is in state constitutions.
Alabama’s is the biggest at 389k words (federal is
Wdym "not amendments?" An amendment is a change. When you amend a document, you make a change to it, so any change is an amendment, I would think. The U.S. Constitution just can't easily be amended, so the long, laborious process of getting one passed makes them very few. Why do you say the 4 modifications aren't "technically" amendments?
@@Justanotherconsumer Here we keep most things on the National (you would say Federal) Constitution, with the different Regions (our equivalent to the States) having Statutes which are smaller. For instance, most Spanish Regions don't have their own police force (instead relying on the National Police, the Civil Guard and any urban Local Police for cities), and there's a National Curriculum (albeit with some changes for local issues, specially in Regions with two official languages).
Oklahoma's Constitution defines the formula for kerosine.
Does anyone find it ironic that the Stamp Act is essentially the same as the modern sales tax; the British subjects in America were not happy with the Stamp Act, so the British had to tax them in other ways.
The educated knew that the American government would tax as much as the British. They fought to have a say in their taxation.
It wasn’t about being unhappy with the tax but the fact we had no voting rights about taxes. We knew there would be taxes but wanted to control them not have them imposed on us
@@matthewkreps3352also, the whole “don’t go west guys, we made deals with the natives” didint rub the early Americans the right way
8:50 In most European countries we are taught English as second language.
I have heard that they will learn the native language of the country, plus some combination of German, French, or English.
@@matthewkreps3352 Norwegian here, we had to learn English as as secondary language in elementary school, and then a 3rd language like Spanish, German or French(sometimes italian) when we reached middle school.
@@matthewkreps3352In Germany English is a mandatory subject starting in either Elementary school or middle school while also in middle school (at least in Real and Gymnasium which are the higher forms of middle schooling) you pick a 3rd language which often depends on what the school offers. In most cases its either French, Spanish or Latin but there are schools that offer Russian, chinese, portoguese and almost any other language you can think off.
@@TehIdiotOneIcelander here, we learn English as a second language, Danish as a third language, and then choose French, German or Spanish as a forth language.
Do many people become fluent? Or is it like where I grew up in Utah where people learn spanish in school but not really remember anything of the language other than very basic phrases?
Big fan! Lots of love from the Philippines
Yeah my cousin in Greece speak multiple languages other than Greek. My dad said some people had hardest to understand when other spoke English were the English.
The Franklin Institute says that while Franklin did favorably compare the turkey to the bald eagle, it was more of a slam on eagles than an endorsement of the turkey to be the national bird.
Also here in Norway democracy started by granting voting rights only to male land owners, which started a trend of men buying tiny pieces of marches and other unuseable land to meet the requirements to vote. These pieces could be just a few square meters of marchland.
Great video, as always! Much love from Ann Arbor
Even if English were made the official language, due process would still require services rendered in other languages.
I would argue there shouldn’t be an official opening prayer. If members of Congress wanna pray they can go to church before work, meet with the chaplain in the old senate chamber, or meet in the respective chambers before each session begins. However, once the houses of Congress are open for business, no official prayer can be offered. Individual members can invoke their religion and state prayer during speeches though.
If the establishment clause said “respecting the establishment of a religion” I’d agree with the more religious people. But it doesn’t
Just going to mention that with your knowledge of American History I have learned a ton of new things (I am South European) and kind of understand some principles Americans have engrained in their culture and why this came to be over the years. Although I am personally less intrigued by your "visiting historic sites" specials, I love all other content you create. Keep up the fantastic work!
If your representative does not have an electoral incentive to protect your interests, you do not have a representative. The technicality that you live in a representative's district does not necessarily mean that said representative actually represents you, or people like you, in Congress.
But I don’t think it’s that simple.
What do you define as “an electoral incentive?” Losing reelection if they don’t adequately represent your specific group?
Your definition would imply that Republicans in downtown New York City don’t have a representative nor Democrats in rural Appalachia. Those districts are so overwhelmingly one party that there’s no risk of ignoring the desires of the other side.
Yep, we have English and French as official languages in Canada, but also unofficially we have Inuktitut, Cree, Tlingit, and many other Indigenous languages, as well as languages brought by immigrants (Tagalog, Hindi, Cantonese, Low German (my heritage language), etc). And Finland has Finnish and Swedish as official languages.
Regarding No Taxation without Representation I was shocked, "shocked", to discover that Americans in US Territories do not have representatives in Congress or the Senate and cannot vote for the President. Why? In Australia everyone in Australian states or territories MUST vote at all levels of government. No one is excluded. But in the USA, "Home of Democracy" residents of Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories do not have voting representation in the United States Congress, and are not entitled to electoral votes for president. Washington, D.C., 6.3 million residents are, on the federal level, politically disenfranchised since the city's residents do not have voting representation in Congress; the city's residents elect a single non-voting congressional delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. How does this happen?
I don’t get the whole “if you pay taxes you should vote” argument. That would mean any tourist who pays sales tax on a nick-nack gets to vote
It comes from the same people who think that there should be effectively no taxes too.
@@EmptyDisc1Why do you have to be a citizen
@EmptyDisc1 It's pretty pointless anyway because almost everyone pays taxes. Whether it be local, state, or federal likely everyone pays some form of tax.
@@EmptyDisc1 No. You said it, you answer it. Why is it important? Could we not as easily have a democracy where any taxpayer could vote, "citizen" or not?
@RickJaeger Allowing anyone at all, citizen or not, to vote would drastically reduce the integrity of our elections. Also, it kind of defeats the point of being a nation if citizenship means nothing.
worked at night clubs for years and the one sign that was always there was " the management reserve the right of admission " ,pointed at many times by the door staff when persons wanted to go in and were refused ,usually drunks or barred persons ,but any one the door staff thought could cause problems ,it was a quick easy stop to any arguments .There were the classics of " smart dress only " or Collars must be worn or Ties ,those went when arguments of these Clothes cost £££££££, there are many more OLD ones that disappeared over time .
D.C. dropped the "no" for the license plates. It's just "taxation without representation."
Another fascinating video. Thank you!!!
My mother who was born in this country as well as both of her parents, first spoke German before English. Now my mother remembers almost none of the German she once knew. She can say every word of a dinner prayer that they said when she was young, but she can't tell you what the words mean.
And much later, Martin Van Buren, our only non-native English speaking president. His mother tongue was Dutch.
He is correct lol even the experts say " I believe the writer meant" "from my experience I think" lol
With the language thing I do find it interesting to see many people in America who only speak Spanish or only speak mandarin, I have even seen people who only speak Yiddish. They were stuck in their communities but they seem relaxed about it.
I myself do like been bilingual and wish to learn more about languages. I especially wished my school had an easily accessible sign language class
I definitely agree with you about the English thing. It reminded me of one time, when I was at my first job, a racist old lady yelled at my Latino grill workers behind their back, saying, "This is America. They can't even speak English." I was on my break when that happened, and upon hearing that, I got really mad and thought to myself, "Hey. Just because they're a different ethnicity, doesnt mean they're not American."
And most recently, at my current job, a man accidentally hit Spanish on the cashing machine, and got really mad about it not being in English, and basically said, "People who speak Spanish need to get out." That shocked me to the core.
@jeffslote9671 Literally how is it disrespectful?
@@zombieoverlord5173His racism is showing.
@@jeffslote9671 Who says they don't, but if both are native Spanish speakers and more comfortable in that language I'd rather they use that when communicating with each other in a kitchen where things can get loud and chaotic as it would reduce mistakes.
@@jeffslote9671Listen I ain’t no SJW who cries about “racism and sexism” all the time, but that is a clear cut sign of discrimination or just disrespect in general. Yes I believe if you’re coming to live in a country you should learn the predominant language. Such as if an English speaker moves to Mexico they should learn Spanish or if they move to South Korea they should learn Korean, that is just something that will make your life and the locals around you much easier by not knowing or not caring to learn the language. However, that doesn’t give someone the right to tell people they shouldn’t speak their native language with other native speakers (such as family, friends, or coworkers) or that they can’t speak it to themselves. It would be like someone who speaks English going to Saudi Arabia, then finds a coworker that speaks English who you communicate in English with, and than some local Saudi screams at both of the employees to speak Arabic even though they’re not talking to a native Arab speaker. It’s just common sense and respect.
@@jeffslote9671Where in that statement did they say that they refused to learn English? Just cause someone feels more comfortable speaking Spanish, doesn't mean they don't know English.
Hey Chris, I just wanted to leave you a potential channel you could maybe just look at. Cooking history with Max Miller. I prefer middle ages history and I'm fairly learned in cocktail history but I find this one kind of neat. Thanks for what you do! Also I was gonna try to meet you in NOLA this summer but I got a job on a cruise ship so I hope you enjoy your time here!
Not a bad idea. Probably given his preferences in history, he might go for one of the Civil War recipes, like burgoo or hard tack.
@@RickJaeger clack clack!
My grandmother could speak Latin and she had an eight grade education but it was an education from the early 1900s.
Some things that aren't in the constitution:
The US is a Judeo-Christian nation (nope we have freedom of religion we don't have religious laws)
Texas is allowed to secede (nope they tried that before. Ended poorly for them in a civil war)
The U.S. was absolutely founded on Judeo-Christian values. Just because we don't stop people from worshipping other false gods doesn't invalidate that.
@@Xeno_SolarusThe US was based around Enlightenment era principles of self determination and basic freedoms. If we were based around Biblical Christian law then we'd look a lot more like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan in terms of our rights as people.
Hello. I’d like to make a video suggestion. The Operations Room made a post about the Australian Army making a series of the major military involvements. Episode 1 is WW1. I think you would really enjoy it.
Would love to get some more historia civilis content especially because of your trip
The US is an imperial isolationist/exceptionalist country, why would there be an encouragement to dilute the imperial culture by learning foreign language, other than the purpose of doing business and war?
It's like the DPRK teaching English in school
Great analysis as always.
9:02 My mom was born and raised in the Philippines, and English was required to learn as a second language when she was growing up, so I can see the argument for the necessary of learning another language.
25:50 For a while, I thought that the Separation of Chruch and State meant no religion at all. Glad to know that I was wrong about that
Remarkably, not only does the SA not have an official language (albeit laws are written in English), few Americans speak a second language. The USA is also the first nation to not have an official religion (Christian nationalism is counter to the Constitution).
I had no idea you were a Baggies fan! love it! BOING BOING
Where does it say in the constitution that outlaws removing mattress tags on pain of death?
Oh there it is. What remarkable foresight by the Founding Fathers. Well, errr, I’m in, uhh, a little bit of trouble….
Dormant commerce clause.
Sleeping commerce clause, perhaps?
Graduated from Chicopee Comp Highschool in 1983 went to a friends for a giant graduation party and a lot of the parents or grandparents were speaking Polish in the backyard, I thought that was pretty cool.
In Wales the voting age is 16 for Senedd (Welsh Parliament) elections and Welsh local elections. Also, in Scotland, it's 16 for the Scottish independence referendum, all Scottish Parliament elections and Scottish local government elections.
My parents grew up in Lakewood Ohio. My Mother’s family was german. She always said her German grandmother made the best spaghetti she ever had. They had moved to the US in early 1800’s. My parents moved to King County Washington at the end of WWII, where my brothers and I were born & raised.
My grandparents moved from Germany in 1913. I cannot say say that I recall her ever cooking spaghetti for dinner. She was, however, quite the cook. I grew up hearing German spoken in the home.
Hey man really like you're videos, a good video idea for you could be the battle of bloodriver, since its not really known and I feel like my ancestors were like the spartans with muskets 😂👍
My middle school offered Spanish, French, Mandarin, and German (I went back as a substitute teacher and they had dropped German), while my high school offered Spanish, French, Mandarin, and Italian. Collectively, I took 4 years and 12 weeks of Spanish (2 years and 9 weeks in middle school and 2 years and 3 weeks in high school) and 9 weeks of German. In college, I took 5 semesters of Latin for my language requirement, but my initial plan was to do 2 semesters of Latin and 2 semesters of Ancient Greek. I was also told that due to having the smallest vocab list, a number of football players took Swahili for their language requirement.
The first one I'm with you I've never thought that was in the Constitution
5:40 My grandfather, born in 1899 on a Southeastern Ohio farm in a German speaking house-hold, claimed to have learned English in elementary school.
"A person who speaks two languages is bi-lingual. A person who speaks more than two languages is multi-lingual. A person who speaks one language is American."
A comment I heard somewhere.
In my high school back in the ‘60s, I had four years of Latin and German.
I think this video is an important reminder. Most people haven't engaged actively in history since high school. And apparently most people didn't pay much attention. I took AP world and US history and had great teachers that made it fun and enjoyable, but not everyone gets those. Most people actually get a really bad experience in history. I say that as a private history tutor for high schoolers, and having been a teacher's assistant for intro to history courses in college. I was genuinely shocked when I read the answers students gave on the test. Kids aren't dumb. They just don't really apply themselves, or really pay attention, and rarely care about the material, beyond the grade.
After departing for some time, Chris, I return and can only declare you a saner man than many; especially regarding such ones who may claim 'certain things' about the Civil War and Slavery - you know of the one I speak... God bless you, sir - I had to just endure and watch that.
I think Canada has shown the folly of double official languages. Most Canadians are locked out of high level government jobs that require the holder to know french and English
2:02 Yup you're right VTH, that's Karl Marx
3:18 Acts 4:35
6:42 Malthusianism is the theory that population growth is potentially exponential, according to the Malthusian growth model, while the growth of the food supply or other resources is linear, which eventually reduces living standards to the point of triggering a population decline.
Different quotes with different meanings
I enjoy Devin's content. It's pretty obvious from some of his content that he at least leans left but most of his information is pretty solid.
My Hich School in Anne Arundel County offered Spanish (which I took), French, German, Latin (which was taught in English), ASL, and at one point we offered Japanese, but you had to go to the Community College for that. After I graduated, we started to offer Mandarin.
I learned a bit of Mandarin before a three week trip to China for work.
That is a /very hard/ language to learn for a native English speaker. The tones are a nightmare because the notation for writing them get very hard and some of the pronunciation is outright goofy (water looks like it should be shui but it’s more like shuay). I gave up trying to say anything beyond good morning (tsao shang hao, but get the tones right) and thank you (shie shie).
That said it was about as challenging as Thai, which has oddities like including your own gender when saying thank you (korp kun krap for me as a guy). Again tonal, and the writing system was… difficult.
I never tried Hindi, turns out it’s not very useful anyway as it’s about as frequently understood as English (every state in India has its own language… except for Andrha Pradesh and Telangana which share Telugu and split from each other very recently).
A similar, slightly interesting point about official languages is in New Zealand.
While recognised as a de-facto language, and is the most widely-spoken language in the country, English is not an official language, the two official languages as recognised by the government are Māori and NZ Sign Language.
DC is very specifically not supposed to have representation. The problem is that people moved there, not that there isn't representation. I'm not saying throw all the people out but people who move there should be fully aware beforehand. It's nobody's fault if someone moves to DC and either is unaware of or disregards the fact that they will not be represented in Congress.
Hear, hear!
Well yes. That's why people call for a change. If it was already viable they wouldn't be calling for a change.
@@Adamdidit that completely ignores the fact that DC very specifically should not have a rep. That's just begging for corruption. DC not having a rep was the right call. My whole point is that people should be fully aware of this fact and as such have willingly waived that right. You can't complain about it when the document that stipulates that DC not get a rep is free to read, literally ALL OVER DC, and written at a middle school reading level. If I were currently wallowing in feces while a shower is 3 feet away, that's my problem.
What if they were born there? Or they had to move there for work?
@@c.h.y the what if game isn't very useful. Nobody is forcing people in either of those scenarios to stay so they're irrelevant to begin with, but more importantly outliers are not a legitimate basis for a counter argument. When we move into this realm of what if, we open the door to infinite hypotheticals that just get us lost in the weeds. It's a tactic used draw focus away from the initial and more valid point. Try again
I just want to commend you on your presentation of the facts and your thoughts/opinions. I’ve watched your channel for a while and I didn’t know you were a conservative until this video. My political affiliation is more left-leaning so I always appreciate when people who provide commentary (no matter what side of the aisle they’re on) provide the facts first then their opinions, and make that clear. Bravo.
It the universe of TH-cam lawyers, those who are acknowledged as accomplished attorneys, do reaction videos of this Legal Eagle guy, and to put it mildly... they universally mock and ridicule him.
Yup. He's quite the joke.
Can you name them?
I personally have never thought the first quote was in the constitution but I have heard people quote it that way
As for languages, in southern Louisiana, you'll hear not only Creole, but you'll hear a lot of French as well.
One of the best arguments against having an official language is that legal documents can be in any language. You can write a contract in Klingon if you want and it is still legally binding.
I'm onboard with the Turkey being our national bird! :) The eagle is a scavenger, a thief and coward. A symbol of over ten centuries of European mischief. The Turkey is a truly noble bird. Native American, a source of sustenance to our original settlers, and an incredibly brave fellow who wouldn't flinch from attacking a whole regiment of Englishmen single-handedly!
Is 1776 your favorite play?
@@Dan4CW Definitely up there 🙂 I'm also a huge Benjamin Franklin fan.
I grew up in Gahanna, ohio and our highschool had spanish, french, german and even manderin chinese. It was a high quality school that was comstantly trying to improvein a lot of ways so thats a factor.
About the language, the US government banned french in Louisiana in most part of the 20th century. Nowadays, France tries to help and preserve the french language in Louisiana
I can't help but wonder if the surveys on what was in the Constitution were simply asking 'is this in the Constitution?' and average people, not knowing either way, just figured it probably was. Perhaps the questionnaire could've asked, 'is this in the Declaration of Independence' or 'in the Gettysburg address' and average people would've also answered yes.
My American Civics class in high school was filled with football players and the teacher was known to give a pass to anyone. What we covered the entire semester, the other teacher that was tougher, covered in two weeks. I don't think many in that class would have passed a quiz from this video.
4:00 LBJ also said this when he announced that he would not seek another term in office on march 31, 1968
Good point on the common misperception among many people that if something is not explicitly in the federal constitution then it does not exist or is even forbidden. (And a lot of people will say they reject referring to any other non-native corpus of Law ... but will then turn around and say that our laws come from the 10 Commandments.)
The primary issue is the constitutions clarity on matters is hilariously vague to the point that even it's cheat-sheet is way out of date, who can really blame us looking at it today and thinking "ya know, well over HALF of this just doesn't hold up anymore"
Will updating the constitution take literal years to safeguard our basic rights? Absolutely.
But it's a task that's just GOT to get done at this point.
True. We are the oldest continual Democracy. And that has come at a price. The constitution was revolutionary and amazing for it's time but almost 2 and a half centuries have passed. We need a drastic update at least
Yeah no
The problem with asking if a quote is in any document is the bias in the question. If the person recognizes the quote but not where its from, they will say yes. The people that dont recognize the quote will also say yes. The only people that will say no are the people that both know the quote an where its from. So you are only really finding out who knows the quotes origin.
Great video about these misconceptions. Unrelated to this video, I would love to see you do a full JWB Manhunt series review once it’s done airing since it’s Civil War related!
I can remember as a twenty-something when that Constitution quiz came out, just being apalled. I had American History in the 5th grade, 8th grade, and 11th grade in Connecticut. All of them covered the Constitution to the level of ability of that age group. Is it just students not caring, or being bored?
I think kids often retain very little of what they are taught in schools in the long run. Often the only things that are retained (IMHO at least) are ones reinforced by a persons own studies and activities after school. If you're into history and read more books on it, watch documentaries, etc then you are more likely to retain that knowledge. Though even as someone who delves into history a bunch these days I actually remember very little from my classes themselves.
As too why it's a tough question to answer. I think mostly it's how education is presented and enacted. In a way often just to memorize what you need until your quiz or tests, then discard that knowledge. A lack of teaching understanding rather than memorization. With that said there may be factors beyond that, like a simple reality that at that age you will only retain so much. Also a lack of people often engaging in the study and interest in history after school. The blame for that one might fall on our culture here in the US that really doesn't value history and that knowledge as much as those of us here (watching videos like these) probably think it does.
I know when I geek out about history to friends, family etc most of them are just not that interested. It's just part of the culture unfortunately. I strongly believe that this causes people repeat many historical mistakes made in their own lives and to lack the understanding of many things that would indeed have if they valued history and it's lessons for us.
What confuses me the most is whether or not the Constitution originally implied that there was a right to secession because before the Civil War, there was no straightforward answer as to whether or not secession was constitutional but the north did not recognize the south as a separate country, it was only post Civil War that the Supreme Court Texas V. White case declared that no state could just willy nilly leave the US
Isn't the DC licence plate slogan taxation without representation, not the other way around, unless i misheard him
Hey Sam Nixon, thanks for the great video. Given you are such a history nerd like me, and you specialize in India of course, you might know that the Indian Constitution does declare itself to be a socialist state just as the USSR had to each according to their needs, from each according to their ability.
5:25 I descend from a German speaking Prussian who fought for the New York 1st regiment in the Revolutionary War! I don’t know how much English he could speak but I definitely know how much English he could write and that was nada.
While I do understand DC should have some form of real representation in government since regular people live there. I am 100% behind the argument that no state should claim ownership over the head of the federal government.
Residents of DC should be considered residents of Maryland and Virginia so far as Congress and the Electoral College are concerned. DC itself shouldn't have ANY members in either body.
@@twylanaythias I like that idea actually. Good compromise.
@@twylanaythias So Maryland, as none of DC is on the western bank of the Potomac River.
There was some legislation (HR 51) in the 117th Congress (2021-2022) to move all of the non-federal government areas of DC to a new state called Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, or Washington, DC; not to be confused with Washington, District of Columbia.
I lived in Northern Virginia and used to hear that DC Taxation Without Representation bullcrap all the dang time. If taxation without representation is such a huge deal, just move to Maryland or Virginia. Problem solved.
So happy that you are doing a review of Legal Eagle. I love his channel... and I love your channel also. Thank you. Nice video.
He's a far left shill. There are far better and way less biased lawyers out there to listen to.
That’s great that your kids are learning ASL in school.
“I’m not going to say throw up” followed by “I’m gonna throw some links up” 😂 (these are paraphrased)
Doesn't the 13th amendment enable slavery (unpaid, forced labor) in US prisons?
With the whole "duly convicted" exception thing.
The innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental human right (article 11). Interestingly article 4 bans slavery.
That's not what slavery has meant in our history, though. "Slavery" implies that the beneficiary of the labor owns the laborer, that there is no necessary tie between this status and any misconduct by the slave, and that this status is heritable.
Penal servitude, on the other hand, doesn't assert any ownership over the laborer. It is also retributive, requiring at least notionally that the laborer be found guilty of some misconduct that demands a compensation. It is also not directly heritable, though of course there is likely at least a correlation between the incarceration of a parent and his or her children.
Now, penal servitude can certainly be abused, and I think it has been abused and is probably being abused now. This abuse can make it essentially the same thing in practice. But they are fundamentally different concepts.
@@jdotoz but they don't work for the community or something. They make products that companies make profit from. And if they don't, they are forced with solitary confinement or worse. Beyond some legal fineprint i don't see the difference. And neither does the 13th Amendment! It bans slavery with that definitiion and then literally (!) makes an exception for prisons. So if what it bans is "slavery", than what they allow is also slavery. It is the same thing! There is no new definiton for the exception.
If you're "duly convicted" you can be put into what it moved slaves out of. One to one.
And that's excluding the discussion of how (many) and who goes to prison in the US for what (3 strike rule is a gross human rights violation in itself). So even the "misconduct" that demands a compensation itself is often extremely controversial. Years of forced labor for shoplifting a DVD. If you connect the two you have extremely crowded prisons, that are easily refilled and produce profit from unpaid and forced labour. You have to go to China for something similar.
@@jdotoz @jdotoz but they don't work for the community or something. They make products that companies make profit from. And if they don't, they are forced with solitary confinement or worse.
Beyond some legal fineprint i don't see the difference. And neither does the 13th Amendment! It bans slavery with that definitiion and then literally (!) makes an exception for prisons. So if what it bans is "slavery", than what they allow is also slavery. It is the same thing! There is no new definiton for the exception.
If you're "duly convicted" you can be put into what it moved slaves out of. One to one.
And that's excluding the discussion of how (many) and who goes to prison in the US for what (3 strike rule is a gross human rights violation in itself). So even the "misconduct" that demands a compensation itself is often extremely controversial. Years of forced labor for shoplifting a DVD. If you connect the two you have extremely crowded prisons, that are easily refilled and produce profit from unpaid and forced labour. You have to go to China for something similar.
@@jdotoz the 13th Amendment bans slavery with a definitiion and then literally (!) makes an exception for duly convicted. So if what it bans is "slavery", than what they allow is also slavery. It is the same thing! There is no new definiton for the exception.
as for "duly convicted" i recommend (on youtube) QI where are 1% of all americans.
@@5Andysalive It makes an exception for involuntary servitude, not for slavery.
On the subject of language, while English is kind of the official language of the UK, it's not super enforced, it's more like everybody learns it. In Wales, for example, you'll find most sign postage is in Welsh and English, but the people speak it interchangably. Scotland has Gaelic of course, Ireland has Irish. And all official documentation is almost always multi lingual, not just our languages but also a good portion of European ones and these days including Arabic and Hindi. Depending on the area, schools might also have classes exclusively in other languages (mine had one that taught entirely in French, for example). Basically, we expect people who live here to learn it at least enough to vaguely understand.
Interesting, although not surprising sadly, that the US doesn't forbid denying service based on sexual orientation because we do. Here it's explicitly clear that it's illegal to deny service to someone based on gender, race, religion, nation of origin, age or sexual orientation, even if the good or service is aimed specifically at one or none of those groups. There was a big scandal a few years ago where a couple ordered a wedding cake, but the baker tried to refuse once they found out the couple were gay. Pretty sure the baker tried to use his religious beliefs as excuse then too, but the court's opinion was essentially, "Skill issue"
Interesting language discussion. As a reference, the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand, which described the rights and obligations of native Maoris and European settlers, was written in both English and Maori. Unfortunately each language text was different, causing legal issues that continue to this day.
Liked this one a lot better than the first LegalEagle reaction. Hopefully there are more of his videos that pertain to your knowledge.
Is that a West Bromwich Albion top?!!!
English is not the official language....I'm been saying this for years
I don’t know if this video exists or not, but it might be cool to look at (or make yourself) a version of this for the Magna Carta
Have fun with the Justiciars of the Forest.
I was surprised at these too. Most people don't study this stuff though. To us all, this is the basics. Your average American spends more time watching CSI reruns than learning.
I've got one. I'm doing an essay on this in Canada and I checked to see if it is the same in the states (spoiler alert, it is). And that is parent's rights. In the context of rights as granted by a Charter (for Canada) or a Constitution (in the US), parent's rights are not a thing. Sorry parents, but no where in the constitution does it say that parents have any right to make decisions about what they're children do. As VTH has noted, the interruption by courts on a federal or state level may be different, but as far as the wording of the Constitution itself goes, parents rights are not a thing.
Can you do Historia Civilis new vid? Sequel to congress of Vienna.
Pres. VanBuren's native language was Dutch.