Actually, the theory that the American Revolution was started by self-centered protesters simply trying to indulge themselves on a sunny, clear, crisp, spring-like day is rather popular up here.

Tax revolts are always about the self.

It was interesting listening to some of the crowd's reaction on C-Span during their replay of Sunday's Darfur demonstration. Apparently a good deal of that group neither knew nor cared about Bush's previous discussions of the problem. They were simply there because it's become the compassionate issue de jour of the caring liberals, and were shocked that Bush had come to the issue two years before they had, when some of the speakers mentioned his name and their meetings with the president on the issue.

Just the mention of his name drew the reflexive "boo" for his warmongering nature from those in the crowd who were there to hear the usual suspects (Al, Jesse, etc.), even though many of the long-term activists on Darfur want Bush to do there what they're protesting he did in Iraq.

Collective interests are first discovered as self-interests. What would you prefer, revolts over meaningless abstractions as in Revolutionary France or Russia?

Tom;

No revolution.

None?Ever? I think you need to pass a law or something requiring always wise, benign and disinterested rulers.

www.brothersjudd.com/blog/archives/2006/04/the_worst_case.html

It's about the costumes and the giant puppets.

Of course, with Code Pink, it's about the giant protestors, too.

Ho-hum.

No draft, no "anti-war" movement. The article doesn't dwell on that simple reality. The quoted language blames "apathy," and "too much television,"--that sort of thing.

Sorry comrades, we learned from Vietnam--you taught us well--not to fight wars of policy with draftees, not to put cowardice in service of treason.

Interesting mental image appropriate for Leftwing demonstrations in general: 'giving Bush the finger" while sucking the same hand's thumb.

OJ:

It should just be called the War of Independence. Personally, I don't consider it a revolution.

Yes, Independence was the mistake.

oj-

Without independence you'd be British, French, Spanish, Russian or Canadian. Be happy you're an American.

Yes, history would have gone better had we stayed British.

Without independence you'd be British, French, Spanish, Russian or Canadian. Be happy you're an American.

The British weren't opposed to a little imperial conquest when it suited their purposes. They'd have found a way to get their ally the tsar to transfer his American holdings, they could have made the Sandwich Islands a protectorate, they'd had a free claim to Oregon, they'd already grabbed the French territory in the north, or forced divestment elsewhere (remember, Lousiiana was Spanish until Napolean persuaded Jefferson to buy some stolen goods, cheap) and they'd probably have found a way to pick up some Spanish holdings (at least Texas and maybe Cuba?) while beating back The Corsican Ogre. By 1820 the only part missing might be California and New Mexico, and the Gold Rush would have taken care of the first.

Meanwhile, remnaining tied to Britain would have forced an end to slavery quicker and the permanent alliance would have prevented things like the Battle of Britain.

Yeah, but we'd have lost baseball for Cricket.

...and the "football" we'd be playing would be even less to Orrin's liking than the NFL.

Blasted other commentators, beating me to the soccer punch.

If the American south had been British, Britain would not have outlawed slavery in the colonies or the slave trade.

This delusion that it's better to be British than American, or that the monarchy can be saved, is bizarre, but you should feel free to emigrate to England (old Hampshire, perhaps), where you can vote for Tony Blair to your heart's content.

Yes, while we would have been saved the Civil War the far greater tragedy is that they would have been saved from socialism and WWI & II. We were easily able to recover, they weren't. In effect, we stayed British while they flirted with Frenchification.

Jim: Isn't the "soccer punch" the one where you fake throwing a punch and then fall down, hold your hand, and pretend to writhe in agony?

david,raoul,

Insight and thoughtfulness are characteristic of both of your commentaries although you guys assume an awful lot. The USA exists because of the fight for independence. The ejection of European interests from most of the continent is directly related to that independence. Without it, who really knows how things would have played out? The revolution in France and the Napoleanic aftermath were little more than distant curiosites to Americans because we were detached. Thankfully.

Britain was next door and didn't fall for the French model in 1789. Though they did by the early 20th century.

Tom: I'm all for the Revolution.

David-

I know. I don't understand oj's belief that we'd be better had we retained closer ties to European ways.

England wasn't Europe. France is Europe. All we are is the English way.