All of politics consists of grabs for power .... you rarely see anyone divvying out power, unless by so doing their own is increased ... there's something natural about this, probably a lot of political theories would work better if it weren't the case, lol ..... but you'd think that after a few centuries of whacking away at attempts, we'd learn what Really Doesn't Work, and do our best to avoid it ..... the risk of going overboard makes useful a constitution, whether written and decided in advance, or developed through trial and error, and held together by familial tradition, respect for rule of law ..... many nations are too large for such bonds though, or too new, too fractious ..... with a parliament of nations, where's the commonality, hmmm .... well, plenty of common interest in that we're clever enough now to wipe out the species, best we get wise enough not to
That's as i understand the Florida situation, pretty much, except they were called at the time the Floridas, plural, divided as to east and west ..... the spanish had very little for garrisons in either, and no colonists, they'd mapped only the coast .... there had been a british claim to it, but only temporarily, i forget how or why .... anyway, it was considered to be spanish still at the time of the grito of Hidalgo, and for years after ... Britain by 1810 was taking the side of the Bourbons against Napoleon, that's where Wellesley made his name, duke of Wellington .... the Floridas had always been a money-hole for them, like Louisiana had been for the french, even more so on ROI terms probably, as there was nothing in the whole coast that lent itself to economies of the time .... and since the natives weren't considered human, they sold it, Monroe bought it, this time as president [he'd been negociator on the Louisiana deal] .... Jackson served as 'persuader', doing a bit of invasion, mostly killing indians but some spanish and other individuals too
Tejas was an altogether different matter, for a number of reasons ...... one was due directly to the Floridas deal, in which the US accepted as final limit of claim on spanish possessions whatever western boundary was in the agreement .... it was specifically noted at the time that this precluded any further encroachment west of Louisiana - O'Donojú, with whom Wellesley had difficulties in Iberia and who later signed for spanish recognition of mexicana independence, has somewhere statements to this effect .... he was one of many, there were a number of statements made in and around the US congress, of course the best collections of them were made by mexicanos, there are books on this, any comprehensive work on slavery will bring up the same names, as abolitionists
No, i don't do 'flames and fireworks' on movies, lol ... usually wait for them to come out on video too, so don't hold your breath on any reaction ..... but fact is, any portrayal of the loss of Tejas as black one side and white the other will be simply untrue ..... Santa Anna was a disgusting piece of work, however the slavers had multiple versions of this side of humanity, and there were plenty of liberales in México whom thinking yanquis could have befriended, as Lincoln later did with Juárez .... it would have been a far different story for the brown man, quite possibly all the way south to Tierra del Fuego, had cooperation happened, in place of robbery
It's the same now - there are a lot of people out here with goals identical to the stated aims of the Bush regime .... not many willing to accept the standard old war-party 'shut up and take our orders' routine, though .... this PNACentury business is just not going to sell, period .... cheers |
