"Are Democrats the New Tories?"

ChronWatch ^ | 10/20/2003 | Jon Alvarez

[Redbob]

Don't sully what little "good name" remains to the Tories by identifying them with Dimocrats!

Shoot, the Tories could at least pretend to acting on principle, as I'm sure many did - there were those who just could not believe that their own King was treating them so badly.

Dimocrats OTOH long ago gave up "principles", many of them even before Bill Clinton.

[Redbob]

"Republican politicians need to... begin questioning the loyalty of the Democrats."

"Ann Coulter!
Paging Ann Coulter!"

[jonalvy44]

LMAO--thx for the good laff. That was funny.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

This article is stupid as hell, written by someone who has absolutely no idea who Tories were other than "they're not around anymore."

Honestly . . . I hope you didn't write this waste of letters.

[jonalvy44]

care to explain why it's stupid, in your opinion? Or are you just throwing out an emotional comment because you don't care to be considered a traitorous buffoon on the wrong side of history?

[TheAngryClam]

I find it funny that you refer to the Tories, who were the ones to resist a radical uprising against their rightful sovereign and their own country, "traitorous buffoons."

[jonalvy44]

the truth hurts, i guess. The Loyalists chose to side with an oppressive king/Parliament against their own neighbors, who valued freedom and representation. I don't write history, I just analyze and draw comparisons.

Might I ask where YOU stand on your views with regards to the Bush administration?

[bobjam]

Athens was a very open minded and free thinking society...the place liberal academics dream of. Then she got into a little war with Sparta- and lost. After the Peloponesian War, Athens became much less tolerant of what was to them as political correctness is to us. Will America go the same route? If the liberals succeed in making the War on Terrorism our Peloponesian War, will they follow the same fate as Socrates?

[Hemingway's Ghost]

care to explain why it's stupid, in your opinion?

Where to begin . . .

For one thing, Tories were the conservatives of their day. American Tories thought the best way to preserve their rights as Englismen was to remain allied, politically, with England. Whigs, on the other hand, were the radicals of their day. American Whigs thought the best way to preserve their rights as Englismen (yes, as Englishmen) was to petition the King and Parliament for redress of a number of grievances surrounding the Stamp Act, the Tea Act, and a whole host of lesser Acts passed by Parliament to help England recoup her losses after the Seven Years War (French and Indian War here in America). When civil redress didn't work, radical Whigs engineered a number of violent protests (riots) in Boston and in other eastern seaports like New York, Providence, and others, destroying a good deal of property in the process: virtually stopping the administration of the Intolerable Acts through fear and intimidation, blacklisting, economic boycots, solemn leagues and covenants, you name it.

So when an essay accuses today's Democrats of being modern Tories because of a perceived disloyalty to their country, that essay is by its very nature ridiculous. Why in the world do you think they called Tories "Loyalists?" For advocating the overthrow of British rule in North America?

Or are you just throwing out an emotional comment because you don't care to be considered a traitorous buffoon on the wrong side of history?

Hardly . . . I actually know the history. The author of this piece clearly doesn't have even a rudimentary grasp of it, and I daresay the author of this piece is the one "throwing out emotional comment(s)." If the author of the piece is you, well, I suggest you actually know what you're writing about before you write it.

[bert]

New Tories?

No, they are the remnents of the old Tories. All the good people went west leaving the Tory residue in the North East.

[marty60]

New Tories? Over the weekend I heard on Fox that the same arguments were made to stop Americas plan to Kick Hitlers A**. Old man Kennedy (amb to Eng.) was one of the worst offenders. Seems ole Teddy is just spouting his old mans thoughts. Dumocrats have always love death and destruction by evil dictators.

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of people trying to smooth over the true characteristics of this evil dumocrat cancer we have in this county.

That's the problem with their critics, no guts.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

All the good people went west leaving the Tory residue in the North East.

Actually, most Tories who refused to see the light went northwest into Ontario, northeast into the Canadian Maritimes, or east to England. In New England, Tory land and property were confiscated.

[hattend]

Ann Coulter coming up on Rush Limbaugh show in the second hour.

[jonalvy44]

You miss several key points, of which your oversight and attitude clearly leads one to believe you to be a Democrat and a Bush-basher, thus your attempt to argue my points:

1. The colonial legislatures petitioned the government of England for years concerning the abuses they felt were aimed at them.

2. The patriots of the day represented the majority of the populace with Loyalists representing approx 30%.

3. The English gov't was oppressive in its handling of the colonial legislatures, at times disbanding them. Thus attempting to silence the voice of the American colonists.

Thus, the patriots of the day had exhausted legal means to seek redress of their grievances.

There is another comparison we could make between the Tories (Loyalists) and Democrats today: Willingness to surrender autonomy and control to a foreign gov't (King George or the United Nations).

I do appreciate your efforts to point out discrepencies in my article, but once again, you are wrong. Democrats today are on the wrong side of the issue, just as the Tories of that day were. Your attempts to argue that provide conclusive evidence in my mind that you are both a Democrat and a Bush-hater. I know it drives most Democrats mad to think their "patriotism" is being questioned, but not only is their patriotism being questioned, so is their loyalty.

[TheAngryClam]

Not in the least. Your comparison is just plain wrong. As detailed by another poster, the people more in common with the anti-war crowd, who engage in street riots and property destruction, were the Whigs, who would turn into the revolutionaries.

And you're welcome to analyse and draw comparisons, but when such comparisons are based on a very fundamental misunderstanding of the facts surrounding the American Revolution, your analysis plainly looks stupid. Before I answer your question, let me pose one to you: did you attend public schools? That's the only thing I can think of for such a fundamentally bankrupt understanding of the history of the Revolution.

And I don't like Bush very much, because while his foreign policy is decent, his domestic policy sucks- one cannot tell it from Clinton's apart from the judges, for whom he refuses to fight. Discretionary spending in non-defense areas is up massively, there's talk once again of amnesty for illegal aliens, he praised the Supreme Court's affirmative action decisions, and on and on. Regardless, I will be voting for the man in 2004 because I enjoy how upset the left gets when it loses, even though it really wins domestically with Bush.

[TheAngryClam]

Wrong.

King George and the British Parliament was not a foreign government- it was their own government.

Unless, of course, you think the Federal Government is really a foreign government of, say, the state of Hawaii, since it is, after all, thousands of miles away over the ocean.

[jonalvy44]

You wrote "And I don't like Bush very much" sums up quite a bit.

The gist of the matter is that the Democrats are on the wrong side of history. They are siding with the enemy of their neighbors. They will go down in history as a morally corrupt group, same as the Loyalists. As for King George, they may have well been a foreign gov't. The majority of Americans involved in the Revolution were here for several generations and felt no strong bond with England as it was an ocean away. Different culture, etc.

Remember, this is American history. Not English history or World History. It's the story of America and it's struggles from birth on...

I had a strong education. We said the Pledge of Allegiance, were taught that America became a free country by fighting a corrupt and out of touch monarchy, and have grown to represent the greatest triumphs of man. What part of that education was wrong?

[jonalvy44]

Hemingway's Ghost: Wasn't Hemingway a communist?

I'm very familiar with the Loyalists. I prefer the use of the term "Tory" as the Loyalists were not loyal to their colonial neighbors, but rather an oppressive monarchy.

[jonalvy44]

we shall see. I think many Americans are growing weary of "pc". Look at immigration as one area where the politicos are still unwilling to touch it for fear of losing the minority vote. We will have to deal with it.