Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00008)

At 09:39 PM 6/30/96 -0400, you wrote:

>Maybe there was also a degreedy of "Go West, young man, and steal
>someone else's land."  The Europeans had been doing this for centuries
>before the US of A got into their sights!  All those Spaniards swarming
>over South America and populating the continent with a whole new breed
>of catholics.  The Vikings did it to us even earlier .....

Alan: Question: How do you "steal someone else's land" when the only people
on the land had absolutely no conception of land ownership. The rush of
immigration to the "new world" was not a bunch of greedy governments, it was
an enormous mass of people who wanted to go somewhere else than they were.
The Jews and others came to America for religious freedom, and got it, The
poor and landless came because they could become other than poor and
landless. There is absolutely no comparison between the Conquistadors, who
were the representatives of the spanish State, and the masses of poor
Europeans who populated North America. We got all those highland Scots and
Irish because england sent them here. We got huge numbers of people due to
"enclosure", we got masses of people due to the European revolutions of the
1840's and 50's, whenever there was a famine or a program the masses
swelled. We don't have class warfare in America because we don't have
classes, just financial differences. If a person has never seen films of
Ellis Island (where immigrants were processed) one has no idea of what
America really is. And they all found a home here and created the mongrel
citizenry that is so typically American. If one doesn't see that aspect of
America, one doesn't see America at all.

In regard to your comment re. the "Vikings", "The Invaders Of The British
Isles" which included Kelts, Romans, Jutes, Angles, Saxons, Danes, and
Norsemen and then their brethren the Normans, why pick on the poor
"Vikings"? In any case "Viking" is a verb not a noun.
>
>Britain did a better job on Canada of course, which it managed to keep,
>only there was some trouble with the French, which is still going on.

It's not "some trouble with the French" it is a horrendous mess. I assure
you of this, in the next 10 years or so both Canada and australia will leave
the commonwealth and become totally independent states. Australia came very
close to so doing just this year. I would also be very suprised if the five
western provinces of Canada don't end up as States in the U.S.A.
>
>As for Ireland, well there again we may have George III to thank
>(THANK??) for the inheritance of violence there.

Don't forget religion Alan. It's Protestantism that has caused the problem.
None of this would have happened if England had stayed Catholic.
Irish nationalism is a combination of nationalism and catholicism and that's
what makes it impossible to cure.

>
>In short, I suspect your analysis is incomplete.
>
>Alan :-)
>---------
>THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL:
>Ancient Wisdom for a New Age
>TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk
>http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html
>
In this case alan, I suspect your wearing "blinders".

alexis>