Wait, doesn't the Glorious Revolution of 1688 count as a revolution?
America's wealthy got there through capitalism, through voluntary trade. The wealthy in Britain at large got their through violence and theft.
RetroGamer87
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,970
Location: Adelaide, Australia
More over, the Muslim migrants seem to desire to see how far they can provoke the English, before the English seek revenge by sending said Muslim migrants to Prison Camps. That is why the Muslim migrants rape young women, drive people over with truck, and all the other horrid things that they do.
More over, the Muslim migrants seem to desire to see how far they can provoke the English, before the English seek revenge by sending said Muslim migrants to Prison Camps. That is why the Muslim migrants rape young women, drive people over with truck, and all the other horrid things that they do.
They rape young girls because their religion allows it and the police ignore it. Terrorist attacks are relatively rare, I'm far more concerned about their increasing political power.
More over, the Muslim migrants seem to desire to see how far they can provoke the English, before the English seek revenge by sending said Muslim migrants to Prison Camps. That is why the Muslim migrants rape young women, drive people over with truck, and all the other horrid things that they do.
They rape young girls because their religion allows it and the police ignore it. Terrorist attacks are relatively rare, I'm far more concerned about their increasing political power.
I agree with you there!
The Glorious Revolution was so called because the people got what they wanted (the removal of James II) without bloodshed. This was achieved due to the earlier War of Three Kingdoms (English Civil War) ending in the execution of Charles I. Parliament latter invited Charles II to be king but the role was completely different, parliament kept the power (ie the treasury and therefor the army*). In 1668 The Bill of Rights was signed - no monarch is legitimate without the support of parliament, and parliament has no legitimacy without the support of the people.
Feudalism isn't perfect and it's right that we've mostly moved on from it but it's how we got here, it's the reason our modern democracies exist. Feudalism is all about the land. Keeping a tight control of the it and therefor the production of food is very important when you are densely populated. Countries with more land per head could allow a wider ownership of land earlier. With land ownership in England came voting, is this the same in the US? if so were the rules actually different or did more people vote (6%) due to more people owning land?
_________________
climate change petition, please sign
Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.