• 🏳️‍⚧️ 新星 [she/they]@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I think so but the outcome of the Seven Years' War treaties was to allocate that land for indigenous use:

    (Note that if it had been less expensive to keep a military presence there, the British would have been as eager as the Americans to keep genociding in that region as well)

    Show

    • huf [he/him]
      ·
      2 months ago

      oh yeah, the brits just signed those treaties as a temporary measure while they did other stuff, they would've come back eventually, kicked the treaties over and taken the land.

      but the US elite couldnt wait that long. they wanted the land NOW.

      • l0tusc0bra@lemmygrad.ml
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly lol there's no way the British were going to actually honour and safekeep their land forever. They'd have just bided their time and invaded later. Guess that wasn't soon enough for the heroic founding fathers.

        • huf [he/him]
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          i've always wondered how much this english court ruling influenced the founding fathers of the US to rebel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart

          a lot, apparently. this article's been expanded since i last looked at it, lol.

          • l0tusc0bra@lemmygrad.ml
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I didn't even know about this specific case but wow, nice catch. So yeah I rest my case lol. Unless maybe it was just a weird coincidence that the vast majority of the founding fathers' wealth rested on enslaved people's labour.