"Anglo structure, where the king rules and the subjects live for his convenience, that we overthrew in 1783. "
not really. The problem was that the british has a certian set of rights (basically our bill of rights) for citizens in the UK and did not apply them in the Americas. the UK monarch has not held any power for a very very long time.
Secondly what the article calls Anglo has nothing to do with race, he is just using the term to identify a set of ideas that came from the British. If you look at Singapore or HK, you see that simply emulating some of those ideas leads to prosperity regardless of the race of the people.
Minus is correct. What the British refused to do is allow us our own representation, they did not seek to control our every moment and every move. They just wanted legislative power to be located in London, and no where else.
What's intersting to point out is that when Canada started giving Britain trouble, brewing up talk about wanting its only legislature, it was gladly given. It is clear that the Brits learned their lessons from the second British civil war and decided to spread out colonial power instead of keeping it so centralized. If only the same approach was adopted in 1776 (it in fact was one very strongly pushed option by several Lords and Commonsmen), American history would have been very different.
I think that we can say that it is you, Oldbill, and not us, who has clearly been a product of American education. And I'm not even attempting to put that in insult form like you did. Its just a clear reflection of your statement.