This is 16th century England, not Mexico. The English reformation was kickstarted by a fat king wanting to manage his own church and not having to listen to the Pope anymore, it wasn't some grandiose fight for freedom and against foreign encroachment.

Hell, Henry VIII had been named Defender of the [Catholic] Faith by the Pope only a few years before he left the church!

I believe the whole reason why English spelling these days is "weird" is because we shifted our pronunciation from how it was originally when the words' spelling was standardised, so now we're stuck with outdated spellings suited for an entirely different manner of speaking.

> Canada speaks French and English

More like the Quebecois speak French and English, while the Anglophone Canadians only speak English and barely learn the most basic French outside of school.

> Penn Station is the busiest train station in the western hemisphere.

Fucking hell, what a massive L for the New World. Train infrastructure in Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina need to get their shit together, 'cause Penn Station ain't exactly a shining beacon on a hill lmao

Why is this such a uniquely American phenomenon? You never hear about Australians or Canadians of Irish descent being as militant as the American ones, or still identifying with a country they weren't raised or born in for that matter.

Him calling it Soccer is probably what's garnering those downvotes more than anything lmao. Nothing gets European football fans more riled up against Americans than that.

He is referring to the Pilgrims and Puritan migration to New England in the 1600s. Massachusetts and Connecticut were Puritan strongholds, and even sheltered some of the Regicides who killed King Charles I.

However, I disagree with the whole "Puritans founded America" line. New England is only one small part of the USA, tucked away in the northeastern corner of the country. The rest of the colonies had completely different origins from NE and they were not Puritan strongholds by any means. In fact, the Quakers of Pennsylvania were persecuted in New England.

*founded one part of America

New England isn't the whole USA, that'd be like saying all of Germany is Swabia. Pennsylvania was founded by Quakers, not Puritans, while Virginia and the other Southern colonies were largely Anglican and had nothing to do with Puritanism. Then of course we have Maryland, which was founded by Catholics, the arch-nemesis of Puritans.

Boston likes to claim a sort of monopoly on American Independence War history, but lets not buy into their cheeky attempts to portray the whole country as them alone.

In Scotland, quite a lot of that destroying was actually done by the Presbyterian Scots themselves, in a similar iconoclasm to that which happened in the Netherlands when they began destroying Catholic "idols".

For instance, many Anglo-Saxon (southern Scotland included the old kingdom of Northumbria) crucifixes located in church graveyards were smashed and destroyed, because they contained "pagan" elements in them. The Ruthwell Cross is a surviving example of these crosses.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthwell_Cross

Kind of winter solstice-y. In Scotland the New Year's was the main celebration, they call it Hogmanay. It's just a local Scottish traditions, not Scythian or anything lol.

Traditions associated with it likely have influences from Scandinavians too, e.g. blond people (i.e Norwegian and Danish vikings coming to fuck your day up) are not allowed to enter the house first, because that's bad luck.

> He then became king of Norway (or Sweden..?) o

You were right the first time, Harald was of Norway. The king of Sweden at this time was Stenkil IIRC

> What a fuckign stupid comparison.

Why? It's an example of Government acknowledgement of their responsibility for past actions, that's exactly what this thread is about.

>Wake me up when when they declare it as a genocide on what happened to the natives and black Americans

Sure, you claimed it will "never" happen. Never is a big word, lets wait and see. Do you happen to have a crystal ball that can see all the way into the future end of the universe?

>What US did to the Japanese was geopolitics.

Oh, and this isn't? Canada isn't going to truly "decolonize" itself anytime soon, saying sorry for past atrocities is also geopolitical PR because ultimately it won't change anything. You can't un-murder someone and you can't decolonize a country founded by colonizing. Canada, as a state, is here to stay and it won't cede its ultimate sovereignty over the landmass it controls to any Amerindian movement seeking to re-establish true independence and sovereignty over the land.

>Reparations for internment of Japanese Americans is nowhere near the same level as admitting treatment of indigenous peoples as genocide.

It's the government acknowledging a wrong doing, under a very conservative executive mind you, and taking action to try and right past wrongs. Is it perfect? Obviously not, but nothing in this world ever will be, not unless you invent a time machine.

>The latter is what the US will never admit to, is the OP's point.

"Never" is a very strong word mate. Do people think culture and values are static? The USA today is virtually unrecognizable from what it was 60 years ago.

> Also, since you think reparations are such a simple gesture that absolves the sins of previous governments... when will descendants of African American slaves see their reparations?

Paying reparations to Japanese internees is a hell of a lot easier given that:

A) They were still alive in the 1980s

B) accurate records of who was imprisoned in them and the property they lost are available

C) defining who the victims are is easy; if you were imprisoned, you were a victim.

Paying reparations to "the black community" in today's world becomes a lot messier because then you have to find a way to define who is considered "Black" and who is "not Black". What about recent Nigerian immigrants whose ancestors were not enslaved? What about Jamaican immigrants whose ancestors were slaves in British Jamaica, but not in the USA? How about places like Louisiana, where you have descendants of slave owners who were the mixed-sons of enslaved mothers and slaver fathers? Would somebody like Obama be entitled to these reparations to the Black American community, if his father was a Kenyan whose ancestors were never enslaved in America and his mother was a white American? Is a white guy whose distant ancestor was a slave entitled to reparations too?

> this shit will never happen in the US.

The USA already apologized and paid reparations to Japanese internment victims under fucking Ronald Reagan back in the 1980s. What makes you think something like this "will never happen" in the US?

You never realized a 19th century Victorian era politician was racist?

Man you'll be in for one nasty surprise once you start reading 18th-19th century philosophy from other famous figures like Kant, Hume, Hegel, Voltaire, etc.

Shit, even Left Wing parties in the early 20th century were often racist. The Social Democrats in Sweden funded eugenics research in the 1920s-30s, and the early Labour movement in Australia supported a ban on all non-European immigration.