| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - What if the Americas never existed?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


What if the Americas never existed?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 08:53
I think it is here too much taken for granted we have a meaningfull question adn that we know the meaning. Taken litterally it would have been an entirely different planet (much more ocean? or a much smaller one?) and we cannot sure such a planet could support life.
Or we could imagine there was still practically no contacts as untill the end of the 15.th century, which seems a lot more plausible. In the later case the modern world could of course not have been anything like we know it! If we took a look at the world at the beginning of that century I see there would be no definite reason the modern world as we know it should come within the next 4 to 6 centuries, since humans had been on earth for tens of thousands of years without(such parts of modern society as modern natural sciences, most machinery and technologies, the "global community", the "mapped" and "explored" planet world - even mass media starting with Gutenberg).
(I cannot help add a remark on gift from Chile to humanity: Fertilizers and Copper)


Edited by fantasus - 14 Dec 2009 at 08:56
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7830
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 09:08
If the Americas did not exist, then Colombus would have reached the Indies, or at least the Philipines, rather than the west indies. Spain will still have been able to exploit wealth, through trade with the East, and probably have set up a reasonable Empire in Indonesia and South East Asia.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 11:47
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Why do you assume we would have none of those things if there were no Americas (other than the organic bio things)?
 
Not only those things. Europe wouldn't be what is today without the Am
ericas. Samples:
 
(1) Democracy was put in practise in the modern world for the first time in the Americas. Without the U.S. experiment, Europe may still be ruled by kings Wink.
Try the Dutch Republic. Anyway, what's with the modern world particularly? Democracy has been around since prehistory.
 
And when, incidentally, did the US become a democracy?
Quote
 
(2) The federal system was also introduced by the U.S. constitution, and political entities from the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation were based on that. And the inspiration for the federal system was the Native American Iroquois Confederation.
Try Switzerland. And for that matter various experiments in the classical world.
Quote
 
(3) Without the Americas men probably wouldn't have reached the moon as yet. Russians failed.
Complete non-sequitur. Apart from anything else von Braun would have stayed in Germany.
Quote
 
(4) Without the Americas, tropical Africa wouldn't be conquered by the colonial powers. For that you needed quinine, and quinine comes from the Andes.
Without the Americas, Africa would have been conquered much earlier because people wouldn't have been distracted by the Americas. Malaria only seriouosly affects a few regions of Africa, and those not the richest (and therefore most desirable).
Quote
 
(5) Without the Americas popular music may be frozen in Polka. No jazz, rock, salsa, tango and any of those exotic musical styles would have existed. The Beatles may have sounded like an Octoberfest band LOL... And of course forget about Pink Floyd.
You don't appear to know what the polka is. American popular music (i.e. as oppsoed to jazz) was essentially an import from Europe (as was Irving Berlin himself) and as late as the twenties American musical comedies were being written and developed by Europeans (even someone as German as Kurt Weill).
 
Jazz is a little different (not that it was ever popular in the US outside a few areas for a short while). However like the other styles you mention what isn't European about it is African, and the two would have got together at some point. It's the parents of the child that count, not the midwife.
Quote
 
(6) Without the Americas, Germany, Italy and Japan would have won WWII
 
It will continue.
Without the Americas there probably wouldn't have been a WWII.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 11:50
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Of course civilisation could not have continued without the big contributions from the americas: Tobacco, Guinea Pigs, Disney.
 
Hardly. Without the money that Europe extracted from the Americas, that continent would have never converted in an economical, scientific and industrial power. You can't imagine how much money Europe substracted from around the world, from the silver of the Americas, to the goods of Asia, and the explotation of Africans.
 
pinguin do yourself a favour and try and understand what money is.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Mixcoatl View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Location: Poyais
Status: Offline
Points: 5042
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mixcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 12:20
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


(6) Without the Americas, Germany, Italy and Japan would have won WWII


Without the Americas, Eichmann, Barbie and Pavelić would have had no place to escape to (well, maybe Spain) either.

What's the point of this topic anyway, to claim merit something created by plate tectonics?
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 12:56
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

...(I cannot help add a remark on gift from Chile to humanity: Fertilizers and Copper)
Well, besides strawberries and the copper-T.Wink
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 12:58
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

If the Americas did not exist, then Colombus would have reached the Indies, or at least the Philipines, rather than the west indies. Spain will still have been able to exploit wealth, through trade with the East, and probably have set up a reasonable Empire in Indonesia and South East Asia.
 
Perhaps, but under East Asian terms. I wonder though from where Spain would have gotten the money -the silver- to pay for Asian goods. Besides, transporting African slaves to Asia may have been impractical and too expensive, so the British-Portuguese colonial economical dynamic wouldn't have existed.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 12:59
Originally posted by Mixcoatl Mixcoatl wrote:

Without the Americas, Eichmann, Barbie and Pavelić would have had no place to escape to (well, maybe Spain) either.
True. And Von Braun would have remained unemployed Wink
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 13:02
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

 
Without the Americas, Africa would have been conquered much earlier because people wouldn't have been distracted by the Americas. Malaria only seriouosly affects a few regions of Africa, and those not the richest (and therefore most desirable).
Harly. The fact is tropical Africa killed the settlers with theirs contagious disseases.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 15:31
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by Mixcoatl Mixcoatl wrote:

Without the Americas, Eichmann, Barbie and Pavelić would have had no place to escape to (well, maybe Spain) either.
True. And Von Braun would have remained unemployed Wink
 
No, he would have been working in Baikanour insteadWink.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 15:41
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

 
Without the Americas, Africa would have been conquered much earlier because people wouldn't have been distracted by the Americas. Malaria only seriouosly affects a few regions of Africa, and those not the richest (and therefore most desirable).
Harly. The fact is tropical Africa killed the settlers with theirs contagious disseases.
Only a small part of Africa is tropical. And malaria is only one contagious disease. And quinine is only one protector against it. If they could cope with malaria at home, they could cope with it abroad.
 
And at least none of them would have died of syphilis. What mainly killed Europeans and Asians and Africans were their local diseases, like the plague.
 
Malaria in Africa would have had no more have stopped colonisation than yellow fever did. Yellow fever also didn't stop colonisation in the Americas. And cholera didn't in India.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 17:02
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

...Only a small part of Africa is tropical. And malaria is only one contagious disease. And quinine is only one protector against it. If they could cope with malaria at home, they could cope with it abroad.
 
And at least none of them would have died of syphilis. What mainly killed Europeans and Asians and Africans were their local diseases, like the plague.
 
Malaria in Africa would have had no more have stopped colonisation than yellow fever did. Yellow fever also didn't stop colonisation in the Americas. And cholera didn't in India.
Well, Syphilis is another European disease.
 
In any case, without quinine whites died like flies in Africa. That's a fact.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 19:48
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

...Only a small part of Africa is tropical. And malaria is only one contagious disease. And quinine is only one protector against it. If they could cope with malaria at home, they could cope with it abroad.
 
And at least none of them would have died of syphilis. What mainly killed Europeans and Asians and Africans were their local diseases, like the plague.
 
Malaria in Africa would have had no more have stopped colonisation than yellow fever did. Yellow fever also didn't stop colonisation in the Americas. And cholera didn't in India.
Well, Syphilis is another European disease.
That we owe to the Americas.
Quote
 
In any case, without quinine whites died like flies in Africa. That's a fact.
No it isn't. If they were going to 'die like flies' from malaria, they would have died like flies from it at home. It's been arouind everywhere since prehistory: in fact it's probably older than the human race. It's oinly more common in Africa now than most places, because African countries don't on the whole have the funds and resources with which to combat it.
 
At one time, by the by, doctors treated patients with syphilis by deliberately infectiing them with malaria, because malaria is much the less serious disease. 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 23:21
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

(I cannot help add a remark on gift from Chile to humanity: Fertilizers and Copper)
 
But, Fantasus, the guano they stole from Peru and all those copper mines came from territory the Chileans seized from Bolivia!
 
Now that ought to ruffle some penguin feathers...
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 03:36
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

...
But, Fantasus, the guano they stole from Peru and all those copper mines came from territory the Chileans seized from Bolivia!
 
Now that ought to ruffle some penguin feathers...
 
Guano? I bet you are not very well informed. Saltpetre is not guano but a mineral. Chile exploted salpetre.
 
In second place, that territory was Bolivian only in theory. It was colonized by Chileans even before we took it. And we payed it with blood. If the damn Tiahuanacans and Incas invaded us first, well, we may say that the southerners won this time Wink
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 03:46
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Well, Syphilis is another European disease.
That we owe to the Americas.
[QUOTE]
 
Not true. Syphilis existed in Europe at pre-contact times. It was called the French dissease because it seem French "invented" it Confused.
 
[QUOTE=gcle2003]
No it isn't. If they were going to 'die like flies' from malaria, they would have died like flies from it at home. It's been arouind everywhere since prehistory: in fact it's probably older than the human race. It's oinly more common in Africa now than most places, because African countries don't on the whole have the funds and resources with which to combat it.
 
You better check Jared Diamond series. He can explain it better to you.
 
Why the white man didn't settled in tropical Africa.
 
 
And please take a look at this article.
 

The Lancet, 1846, vol I, page 244-5 (28 February):

ON THE VALUE OF QUININE IN AFRICAN REMITTENT FEVER.

By THOMAS R. H. THOMSON, Esq., M.R.C.S. Eng, R.N., Edin.

HAVING noticed some valuable remarks on the subject of yellow fever, by Mr. Birtwhistle, Surgeon R.N., in THE LANCET of the 3rd Jan., and in which he refers to the use of quinine in that disease, I beg to add a few statements of its efficacy as a remedy in African remittent fever, and confirmatory of Mr. Birtwhistle's observations. While acting surgeon of H.M.S. "Soudan," engaged on the Niger Expedition, in 1841-2, I had an opportunity of trying it in conjunction with chloride of mercury, in a few cases of primary fever. It certainly answered fully; but I believe it would have proved more valuable had I not restricted the quantity to two or three-grain doses.

Of its effect in the secondary and tertiary attacks of African remittent, which are certainly attended with worse-looking and more violent symptoms than the primary, it may almost be considered a specific. The first trials I made of it were at Fernando Po, in Dec. 1841, when left in charge of the sick. At that time the "Harmattan" prevailed, and although this is considered a healthy season on other parts of the West Coast, it was most decidedly the reverse at that island. All the few Europeans (old residents and well-seasoned, as far as this can be accomplished by prior attack, &c.) were laid up with remittent fever of a low character; and in all their cases I gave the quinine in doses of eight and ten grains daily, with perfect success. This induced me to try it in other cases of secondary fever, on board ship; and although in some of them the tongue was dry, foul, and cracked, with every indication of high febrile excitement, yet it had the effect of arresting the bad symptoms. Let me give you one short extract from the official journal forwarded to Sir William Burnett, Medical Director-general H.M. navy, (from the case of Mr. Anderson, entered on the sick list, April 30th, 1842.) - " May 10th. - The remissions have become very obscure; skin burning hot; occasional low delirium; rapid, jerking, but weak pulse; the bowels have been kept freely opened by seidlitz, &c. The tongue remarkably foul and dry. And both Dr. Pritchett (who also saw him at my request) and myself began to entertain unfavourable views of his recovery. I therefore determined to try the effects of quinine; and accordingly ten grains were given on the evening of the 10th.

"Continued restless during the night, but slept a little towards morning, and was relieved by a gentle perspiration. On the 11th, a very perceptible remission took place, and the quinine was again administered at noon, in an eight-grain dose. This was repeated for the three following days, when the fever gradually declined; and on the 20th, he was so far recovered, as to be discharged to partial duty, there being no other executive officer on board at the time.

"In this case, as in all the secondary attacks of remittent fever in which this remedy was tried, it produced a most marked and beneficial effect; and, strange to mention, although the tongue was in most of them foul and dry prior the administration of the quinine, it very soon became moist and clean."- (From H.M.S. Soudan's medical journal, 1841-2.)

Subsequently, in 1844, while employed in the Rio de la Plata, I was induced to try it in some slight cases of typhoid fever, in whom there existed considerable depression, a rapid pulse, and foul tongue, unaffected by purgatives; and it had the most rapid and satisfactory effect: and I think it well worthy of a fair trial in this country in typhus; but I should hesitate to use it in small doses, say two or three grains: my impression, as deduced from observations on its modus operandi, being, that in small quantity it only acts as a temporary stimulant, thereby producing more harm than good - given in a full dose, from six to ten grains, it would seem to have a different and specific action.

In all the cases in which I tried it in the African remittent, it reduced the number, but increased the momentum and roundness of the pulse. Connected with this subject, I would wish to bring under the consideration of medical officers serving on the West Coast of Africa - whether quinine in full doses has the power or not of warding off entirely the remittent fever ?

It had long been known that persons affected with any form of intermittent fever on that coast enjoyed a certain immunity from the remittent, as pointed out by the late Mr. Boyle in his work on diseases of Africa; I therefore reasoned that if quinine was known to overcome the intermittent, that remedy might be used in full doses, and produce such an effect on the system as would prevent the attack of the other and worse form of fever, which is warded off by the presence of intermittent.

On my return to the West Coast from Ascension, in 1842, I determined to commence the experiment in my own person, taking daily one or two full doses of quinine; and although I may with truth say that I was more exposed than any other person to the exciting and predisposing causes of remittent fever - being almost continually on shore and in the woods, collecting specimens of natural history, and in obtaining information about the natives at Fernando Po, Bimbia, Cameroons, &c. - I quite escaped both forms of fever. On being ordered to England, in August 1842, I considered it necessary to reduce gradually the quantum of quinine; and just before arriving home, had left it off entirely: when, strange to say, I was for the first time attacked with tertian ague in England, under which I suffered for some time; and it returned again at the same season, September, in the following year.

It must not be supposed that, in thus calling attention to the trial of quinine, I wish to advocate its indiscriminate use in all forms of fever. On the contrary, my opinion has always been, that nothing tends to bring discredit sooner on our best remedies, than attempting to place them on the footing of general specifics, or quack nostrums.

- Montague-street, Edinburgh, Jan. 1846.

 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 03:55
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Try the Dutch Republic. Anyway, what's with the modern world particularly? Democracy has been around since prehistory.
 
Why not the Venecian Republic Confused?
 
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Try Switzerland. And for that matter various experiments in the classical world.
 
That's better.
 
Yes, Americans copied certain small scale experiments in Europe, indeed. However, the first large escale experiment on a democratic country was the U.S.
 
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

You don't appear to know what the polka is. American popular music (i.e. as oppsoed to jazz) was essentially an import from Europe (as was Irving Berlin himself) and as late as the twenties American musical comedies were being written and developed by Europeans (even someone as German as Kurt Weill).
 
Jazz is a little different (not that it was ever popular in the US outside a few areas for a short while). However like the other styles you mention what isn't European about it is African, and the two would have got together at some point. It's the parents of the child that count, not the midwife.
 
Africans and European united would never be defeated ? ConfusedConfused
 
Nope, I am afraid you don't have a clue. Music has more path than Europe. Modern Hispanic culture has a long tradition with one branch in Arabia and the Muslim countries. The Blues of the United States comes from  Mali and other West African Muslim countries, and also have a strong Muslim origin.
 
Eurocentrism, particularly in music, is pathetic, specially when European Middle Ages music (the one that was the foundations for classical music) was also heavily influenced by Arabs and Muslim music.
 
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 07:35
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


 
That's better.
 
Yes, Americans copied certain small scale experiments in Europe, indeed. However, the first large escale experiment on a democratic country was the U.S.
 
You can wriggle all you want, but you're still wrong Tongue See my post on Sweden. The Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland all had similar or larger populations than the US in 1776.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 15 Dec 2009 at 07:36
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 11:08

Well, if you want to include every single proto-democratic experiment, then yes.

Read:

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?ParagraphID=fwe

And not only in northern Europe. This happened in 12th century's Spain:

 
A second reason for the development of communes is colonization. Newly founded towns in frontier regions sometimes begin life with charters and privileges already granted them by a ruler. This is particularly true on the eastern frontiers of Germany, where settlers are needed to hold territory won from the Slavs, and in Spain where there is a similar requirement in previously Muslim areas.
 
Parliaments are held fairly frequently in England from 1246. By that time the Spanish Cortes ('courts') are well established as parliaments in Léon, Castile and Catalonia. In Portugal a Cortes is summoned in 1211, and commoners are included as the third state from 1254.

 
But this is what is different from the United States, that no European proto-democracy has:
 
A democratic Constitution: AD 1788
 
The Constitution of the United States of America, adopted in 1788, provides the world's first formal blueprint for a modern democracy. In the first flush of the new nation's enthusiasm, the compromises inherent in normal democracy are not required. George Washington is elected unopposed as president in 1789, and again for a second term in 1792.
But by 1796 political parties are in the field. The result of that year's election is a Federalist president (John Adams) and a Democratic-Republican vice-president (Thomas Jefferson). In 1800 Jefferson and Federalist candidate Aaron Burr tie in the presidental election. Congress declares Jefferson to be the winner, begnning a long spell of Democratic-Republican rule.
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 15 Dec 2009 at 11:10
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 11:12
By the way, at least in the Americas, Latinos may have some differences with the U.S. but we usually recognize the importance of the U.S. constitution in the creation of modern democracy.
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 11:35
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


 
The Constitution of the United States of America, adopted in 1788, provides the world's first formal blueprint for a modern democracy. In the first flush of the new nation's enthusiasm, the compromises inherent in normal democracy are not required. George Washington is elected unopposed as president in 1789, and again for a second term in 1792.
But by 1796 political parties are in the field. The result of that year's election is a Federalist president (John Adams) and a Democratic-Republican vice-president (Thomas Jefferson). In 1800 Jefferson and Federalist candidate Aaron Burr tie in the presidental election. Congress declares Jefferson to be the winner, begnning a long spell of Democratic-Republican rule.
 
That's only a point of view. Scandinavian democracy does not stem from the American, but from the local version, whose foundations and first constitutions were written during the 1721-1760s, but have much older roots than that. Most of the world's democracies are based on the British parliamentarism, while in the Americas the US version might have been the model. 

As for republican constitutions, the Corsican predates the American with four decades.

   
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 11:38
In the Americas and Asia, at the very least, the model is the American. The important point is that the French Revolution followed the U.S. Independence, and not the other way around. Besides, there aren't kings in the Americas, not even as touristic attractions.

Edited by pinguin - 15 Dec 2009 at 11:39
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 11:50
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

In the Americas and Asia, at the very least, the model is the American. The important point is that the French Revolution followed the U.S. Independence, and not the other way around. Besides, there aren't kings in the Americas, not even as touristic attractions.
Japan, India, Thailand, Australia and New Zealand have the British model, and I probably forget some. I'm not sure which Asian democracies you mean. Not to downplay the importance of the US, but there's no need to overstate it either.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:10
Hmm...didn't the French Revolution end in the First French Empire?  And as for politically representative assemblies forever invoking rights and privileges, I do believe our dear Pinguin needs a refresher course in the Cortes of the Iberian peninsula and the evolution of Fueros during the Middle Ages. The American Revolution and its quirkiness over rights and taxes was hardly unique in that respect and one can not understand the political history of urban Europe during the years 1000-1500 without encountering the theme! Within the realm of interpretative history, many view the American events of 1765-1785 as little more than a continuation of British politics during the years 1624-1688! Let's hear it for the Whiggish Tradition in politicsEvil Smile!

Edited by drgonzaga - 15 Dec 2009 at 15:11
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:19
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Well, Syphilis is another European disease.
That we owe to the Americas.
 
Not true. Syphilis existed in Europe at pre-contact times. It was called the French dissease because it seem French "invented" it Confused.
There's a minority view that it existed in pre-contact times. Somehow though it was never diagnosed.
Syphilis wasn't called 'the French Disease' until quite a while (forty years or so?) after contact.
Quote
 
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

No it isn't. If they were going to 'die like flies' from malaria, they would have died like flies from it at home. It's been arouind everywhere since prehistory: in fact it's probably older than the human race. It's oinly more common in Africa now than most places, because African countries don't on the whole have the funds and resources with which to combat it.
 
You better check Jared Diamond series. He can explain it better to you.
 
The rest of the post is immaterial, because no-one is disputing that (a) quinine is effective against malaria and other fevers and (b) that Europeans didn't settle in tropical Africa. (In fact only a rare few settled in tropical anywhere: even in the Americas the most tropical zones were least occipied, apart from areas close to the coast. And that was with quinine available)
 
What is unfounded is your assertion that without quinine Africa (most of which is NOT tropical) would not have been colonised, and that people would have 'died like flies' from malaria. People don't 'die like flies' from malaria and never have done (and counter-measures like using mosquito nets and garlic as an insect repellant were known in ancient Egypt).
 


Edited by gcle2003 - 15 Dec 2009 at 15:20
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:38
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

In the Americas and Asia, at the very least, the model is the American. The important point is that the French Revolution followed the U.S. Independence, and not the other way around. Besides, there aren't kings in the Americas, not even as touristic attractions.
 
But there are a hell of a lot of presidentes invoking the privileges in government ever asserted by viceroys and the "presidentes" of Royal Audiencias! I believe that Evo Morales got it right when he declared his country would do better to invoke its own traditions than any new-fangled talk about "American justice"...Back in the 1820s when John Quincy Adams sought to send US representatives to the original "Pan American Congress", he was vehemently opposed by the so-called "democrats" on the basis that these "republics" constituted  alien cultures and traditions! Besides if one studies the political events of the Americas between 1808 and 1876 and juxtaposes these with what was happening in the Iberian Peninsula during those years, the parallel is so eery that it can not be ignored! By the way, the office and title of presidente has a much longer history in Spanish America than it does in the United States--conciliar government, no matter what Americans might say, goes back to the Middle Ages.


Edited by drgonzaga - 15 Dec 2009 at 15:38
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:46
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Try the Dutch Republic. Anyway, what's with the modern world particularly? Democracy has been around since prehistory.
 
Why not the Venecian Republic Confused?
Because it was even less of a democracy than the United States.
 
Quote
 
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Try Switzerland. And for that matter various experiments in the classical world.
 
That's better.
 
Yes, Americans copied certain small scale experiments in Europe, indeed. However, the first large escale experiment on a democratic country was the U.S.
In 1786+ the United States was not a large country. The population was about a third that of Britain and at a guess not much bigger than that of the Netherlands.
Quote  
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

You don't appear to know what the polka is. American popular music (i.e. as oppsoed to jazz) was essentially an import from Europe (as was Irving Berlin himself) and as late as the twenties American musical comedies were being written and developed by Europeans (even someone as German as Kurt Weill).
 
Jazz is a little different (not that it was ever popular in the US outside a few areas for a short while). However like the other styles you mention what isn't European about it is African, and the two would have got together at some point. It's the parents of the child that count, not the midwife.
 
Africans and European united would never be defeated ? ConfusedConfused
 
Nope, I am afraid you don't have a clue. Music has more path than Europe. Modern Hispanic culture has a long tradition with one branch in Arabia and the Muslim countries. The Blues of the United States comes from  Mali and other West African Muslim countries, and also have a strong Muslim origin.
There's really no such thing as Islamic  music (though there is of course Arab music, and other Muslim countries/regions have their own musical forms).
 
Agreed that Hispanic (including European Spanish, just to be clear) has some of its roots in the Arab conquest, but that's irrelevant: I didn't deny it. It doesn't mean all Hispanic music does. I'll grant you for instance that fado (and yes I know that's not Spanish) has Moorish influences, and yes there are faso singers up there around Rhode Island/New Hampshire. But you didn 't mention fado.
 
The main thing however is what you say there is totally irrelevant to the point, which was that European and African music (with a dash of Arab)  would have met one another directly without any need to do so in the Americas. (And indeed in recent decades have done so more and more - think Todd Matshikiza and King Kong.)
Quote  
Eurocentrism, particularly in music, is pathetic, specially when European Middle Ages music (the one that was the foundations for classical music) was also heavily influenced by Arabs and Muslim music.
Balls. Medieval music was around before there were any Muslims, and the line of descent traces straight from the Greeks. The only miinor contact there was was in Iberia and possibly in Sicily, but I don't know what may have happened there.  
 
[/QUOTE]

Edited by gcle2003 - 15 Dec 2009 at 15:47
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:51
As an aside...the politicians of the American confederation in the 1780s were not operating in an intellectual vacuum, and their vocabulary was far from original. The Lex Hortensia (287 BC) was considered the constitutium of the Roman Republic. For goodness sakes people, learn your Latin and understand the legal inter-relationship between rights and claratory documents.  
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:55
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

A second reason for the development of communes is colonization. Newly founded towns in frontier regions sometimes begin life with charters and privileges already granted them by a ruler. This is particularly true on the eastern frontiers of Germany, where settlers are needed to hold territory won from the Slavs, and in Spain where there is a similar requirement in previously Muslim areas.
 
Parliaments are held fairly frequently in England from 1246. By that time the Spanish Cortes ('courts') are well established as parliaments in Léon, Castile and Catalonia. In Portugal a Cortes is summoned in 1211, and commoners are included as the third state from 1254.
So? 
Quote
 
But this is what is different from the United States, that no European proto-democracy has:
 
A democratic Constitution: AD 1788
 
The Constitution of the United States of America, adopted in 1788, provides the world's first formal blueprint for a modern democracy. In the first flush of the new nation's enthusiasm, the compromises inherent in normal democracy are not required. George Washington is elected unopposed as president in 1789, and again for a second term in 1792.
But by 1796 political parties are in the field. The result of that year's election is a Federalist president (John Adams) and a Democratic-Republican vice-president (Thomas Jefferson). In 1800 Jefferson and Federalist candidate Aaron Burr tie in the presidental election. Congress declares Jefferson to be the winner, begnning a long spell of Democratic-Republican rule.
 
 
It's still just not true even if want to take 'modern' times as starting in 1786. The US at the time was not a democracy (the Senate for instance was not even elected, even by the privileged class that elected Congressmen). Even the Presidential electors did not have to be elected (they still don't although it's become habitual that their appointment follows a popular vote: nevertheless there's no consitutional requirement to do so).
 
In fact the constititution was deliberately designed to minimise and restrain the power of the people at large - otherwise it would have never been ratified.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2009 at 15:57
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

By the way, at least in the Americas, Latinos may have some differences with the U.S. but we usually recognize the importance of the U.S. constitution in the creation of modern democracy.
On the record, one finds it difficult to recognise Latin Americans as authorities on democracy.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.