The Other Great Game: Britain vs The United States 1814-1846 (Documentary)

In 1814, the War of 1812 came to an end, but the tensions that had brought about the conflict between the United States and British Empire had not gone away.
Over the next century, both countries would swing between friendship to active hositllity. This video aims to be a short documentary looking at the competition between Britain and America in this era, roughly from 1814-1855. Part 2 will cover the rest of the century.
Sources:
Paul Hayes, Modern British Foreign Policy, The Nineteenth Century (Heavily relied upon for this video)
George Herring, From Colony to Superpower
#UnitedStates, #History, #BritishEmpire

[@OldBritannia]

I hope you enjoy this short documentary on the Anglo-American competition in the nineteenth century. As usual, this video is a bit of an experiment, focusing on a much larger timescale rather than a specific event. It obviously means I have not gone into much detail on specific events, so feedback on how you found it would be appreciated. Thank you for watching.

[@explodingwolfgaming8024]

Very good :):)

[@bones6448]

Great video

[@jackbharucha1475]

It is interesting to see things I learned about in US history class and from my own research viewed from the other side's perspective.

[@nathanpinho9877]

Fantastic video, can’t wait for part 2!

[@More_Row]

I liked it , good video.

[@rivers169]

I love how you delve deep into 19th and early 20th century history, not just through vague and broad claims of what happened then, but actually quoting policymakers and leaders of the time and their train of thought.

[@jonahhudson2052]

Yeah he's one of the best Victorian KZbin historians. Maybe even the best. Definitely top 3.

[@Dhjaru]

@@jonahhudson2052 do you have any others in mind? Looking for some good channels.

[@leesnyder9144]

The depth of the factual claims is why i like it but the paternalistic empire apologetic is why I love it. Dhjaru the channel Jabzy covers colonialism in the Victorian era. He covers the scramble for Africa, partition of China and the diplomatic and war aims of the Great powers before world war I. Historia Civilis did 2 videos on the 1815 treaty of Vienna. I might think of more later.

[@FazeParticles]

@@leesnyder9144 paternal is best.

[@forthrightgambitia1032]

Not especially relevant, but the Republic of Texas, as a state recognised as independent by Britain, had its own embassy near St James' Palace that is now the Berry Brothers and Rudd wineshop and is marked by a plaque. There was a restaurant near Trafalgar Square called "The Texas Embassy", that naturally served "TexMex" food, about 15 years ago, but despite what they wished you to believe this was *not* on the site of the original embassy.

[@ritemolawbks8012]

Thanks for explaining that. I'm from Texas and saw that during my first visit to the UK. Maybe the tour guide explained it, but I thought it was pretty random to have restaurant named after my home state.

[@Jaunyus]

Testimony to how, given time, bitter enemies can become such close friends and allies.

[@black10872]

It was bound to happen. America just grew too powerful to be contained in anyway post civil war era.

[@Jaunyus]

@BB49 I wonder what that will say about ukrainian-russian relations in the future.

[@buddermonger2000]

To be fair, most of the tensions came from from the birth of the USA and the war of 1812. Beyond that, the cultural links and very little geostrategic disagreements post American expansion meant that it really didn't take long for it to develop. While a counter-example may exist with Spain's relationship with its former colonies or Portugal and Brazil, I think the biggest difference here is international power. Neither Lisbon and Brasilia are major powers. Lisbon hasn't been one for centuries, and Brasilia has never been one. Similarly, Spain has been out of great power politics since the peninsular war with the loss of its colonies in the Americas and Latin American "stability" is so well known that I doubt you could even have much there in the first place.

[@Jaunyus]

@BB49 exactly

[@foodman3695]

Old Britannia's vids have come so far since the start, another amazing and detailed documentary!

[@Ethan-cz8xq]

American here. I always hear this part of history get told from the American perspective, regardless of whether the telling is meant to glorify or degrade the US. Interesting to hear it from a British perspective instead.

[@petekdemircioglu]

Maybe its this: America Disrespected

[@davidz2690]

it's hardly a british perspective, rather an impartial one

[@CedarHunt]

​@@davidz2690It's a heavily skewed pro-british perspective.

[@davidz2690]

@@CedarHunt how so?

[@CedarHunt]

@@davidz2690 You merely need to look at the wording and the framing to see it. It's pretty obvious.

[@somehistorynerd]

This is the best 18th century geopolitical channel I’ve seen on KZbin! Great work, by any chance, can you cover Austria or Russia some more please? Maybe the conquest of Central Asia or the annexation of Bosnia? Either way, I love your work.

[@MrWalka]

Do you mean 19th Century? The 1800s is the 19th century

[@sharkrecorder1738]

This is such a high-quality video on a lesser-known topic! I like how you portray these events from the eyes and perspectives of the policymakers at that time, giving an impression that the possible outcomes of each political event/dispute are always uncertain and open-ended (instead of cheap post hoc assessments and judgment people often make). Hope to see more videos on this topic!

[@SteezyRider]

Excellent summation. You've captured sentiments on both sides extremely well. Can't wait for part 2.

[@johnpijano4786]

Keep it up man. This is the best video on 18-19th century geopolitics. This is the era which is the most underrated in how it affects the present. Please keep it up man.

[@guidoserafino2943]

Awesome video as always. You seem like a hardcore Victoria 2 man that wanted to study the lore perfectly (just joking).

[@mappingshaman5280]

He's preparing for Vic 3.

[@totalwar1793]

Imagine if Britain was as strong IRL as it is in Victoria 2. Can literally game ruin the US by puppeting it on day 1 :P

[@zettic]

Eating dinner, was looking for something good to watch, perfect timing lmao, your vids are great!

[@reddeercanoe]

As a Canadian I must say I wasn’t surprised by this video. One thing you can be sure of is that both the UK and the US will totally ignore Canadians when it comes to history. In all the major battles of the US invasion of Canada during the 1812 War it was Loyalists, Indians or French Canadians who repelled the Yankees. The Americans attacked Canada when Europe was busy with a little Corsican .

[@lima153330]

Top tier video as always Can’t wait for part 2

[@NiceColorss]

This channel gives by far the best analysis on any topic it covers, spectacular work!

[@PeacetimePuma]

Great video, love your choice of subject matter as its timeframes / events not usually covered on YT or the mainstream. Happy with either kind of video, broad or focused. Whatever you're passionate because it will reflect in the productions

[@gabedejongh4767]

Keep it up man, always excited when I see you’ve posted a new video

[@Harrys-History]

How are your maps so good! Great video, as always. Never knew much about this side of the world diplomatically, so very refreshing :)

[@trashedhead]

Very interesting and great video - it's fascinating how quickly the Anglo-American relationship changed during the 19th century. Looking forward to Part II!

[@timgerk3262]

Enlightening summary of what are so often disconnected side-notes to contemporary events. American history is taught with a spirit of "it was pre-destined" that obscures the personalities and compromises of the time. Thank you.

[@stevemcgroob4446]

Interesting video, looking forward to seeing part 2

[@Mixcoatl]

Dude, your videos are great, and I'm glad that you're making more of them recently. Keep it up. It's inevitable that the KZbin algorithm gods will eventually smile upon you.

[@garrettallen7427]

Amazing video! I was wondering if you would cover British-American relations in this time period, looks like you read my mind friendly!

[@paul1780]

Can't wait for part 2. Finally subscribed.

[@Very_Silly_Individual]

I think it's funny that America and Britain began their relations essentially hating eachother. And nowadays would literally "ride or die" for eachother 😂

[@EarthForces]

@Skylark I sense a Holy Britannian Empire vibes if that happened. London is just a "facade" while in the Americas, Pendragon and the Royal Family with the mixture of Yankee and English high nobility being the actual powers behind this aristocratic and semi-mercantilisic hyperpower.

[@EarthForces]

@Skylark I have some gripes with how irl history when the Americans (with Theodore Roosevelt advising Pres.McKinley) to pretend in aiding to "liberate" the country of my forefathers back then only to be backstabbed through a purchase made between the US and Spain. My forefathers have to endure hardships from this lie but our people are quite a forgiving kind and had seen both the good and the bad of America in which theu see more of the positive. This was helped also by the indoctrinaton of the Thomasites (the ship's name that brought American school teachers) and the succeeding waves of indoctrination. I really just hope more Americans can live with an honest view they are an imperial power with some minor differences in ideology with their British cousins. Back to responding to your comment, those additional traits to such an Empire actually did happen in Code Geass but at the price of ending te Royal line that had the power along with Lelouch of course. In all honesty I don't despise the concept of an empire, as long as it tries to be that "benevolent" in the best sense of the word but maybe it is best mixed with some form Enlightenment principles that made both the actual UK and US both the "democracies" with one having a Constitutional Monarchy embeded in it, the other being more inclined and improved on the English Liberalism and Republicanism brought upon from the beginning of English Civil War until the Glorious Revolution.

[@MonsieurDean]

People forget too easily how the US and Britain went from seeing one another as threats to developing the “special relationship”.

[@forthrightgambitia1032]

Ironically though it was probably more Britain - see the Venezuelan crisis where many of the cabinet members deliberately reigned in Salisbury's instinct to be more aggresive, or the Zimmerman Telegram incident - that sought to soften the relation rather than the US. This, I think reflects Britain's growing problems with the continent and an old sense that the US, whilst technically lost in 1789, remained bounded by trade and culture to a kind of informal British colony that, say, the provisions of the Jay Treaty of 1794 had envisaged and impressment had put into place. By WW1, Cecil Rhodes was openly dreaming of the US being reincorporated into the Empire as a dominion and Kipling was talking of America as the vessel for the white man's burden: these woud have been unimaginably honeyed words for any Briton 100 or even 50 years before. American moves against Spain and its creation of an inchoate empire gave sense to a kind of hope that the US could finally be integrated into a British system as it had finally starting to accept its role and responsibilities as a European-style great power rather than day-dreaming itself as an ineffective Jeffersonian republic. I don't think any imagined the reverse woud happen and the UK would become incorporated into the US system, it would have been considered the height of absurdity, even though it should be added the relative trade and economic strength of the US (and Germany) by the end of the 19th century was highly concerning for Britain. The US remained hostile to the UK for much longer. In the 1930s the US had deliberate war plans to annex Canada and turn their provinces into US states, and Canada specifically pressured Britain not to renew the Anglo-Japanese treaty in order to avoid Britain fighting on Japan's side in a war everyone saw coming. One that Canada assumed would end up with their annihilation, which given how Australia was later left wide open to the tender mercies of Japan might not have been an unfounded conclusion. In Richard Rhode's book The Making of the Atomic Bomb that the head of the Manhatten project General Groves regularly expressed anti-British views and was suspicious of the British scientists involved. (Although that included a naturalised communist spy Karl Fuchs so maybe his instincts weren't that off). And then of course the US screwed Britain in Suez.

[@frank-ko6de]

Yeah that didn't come until much later in the 1940s.😂😂😂😂😂 Which is very recent and is really spread out amongst the Anglophone world which includes Canada, New Zealand and Australia hence the "five eyes".

[@greatwolf5372]

@@forthrightgambitia1032 Plans were developed for any potential war with all major countries. What else was the war planning department going to do? But there was no, even semi-serious thought of a war with the UK. Many Americans were quite Anti-British till the 40s. This was because the UK was the world's leading power and that causes resentment in other countries. Even today many Brits(public not the government) are quite Anti-American. Not many Americans who are anti-British these days. This is because the relative power of US and UK has flipped between 1930s and the present.

[@forthrightgambitia1032]

@@greatwolf5372 Yes but few of those battle plans involved permanent annexation of the entirety of the enemy's territory as War Plan Red clearly envisaged.

[@thesecondsilvereich7828]

The Anglo saxon empire

[@glassychap1141]

As a fellow historian this was quite an informative video! It is quite fascinating to see how relations between our nations developed over time!

[@hrmpug1092]

This is the best history and geography channel I’ve seen, period

[@wesdowner5636]

These are some really great videos. Keep making them!

[@danielninio7383]

Your vídeos are amazing, I’m sure I am seeing the beginnings of a great channel. Congrats and keep it up!

[@LeftysLefty]

Nicely done. You have a new subscriber

[@lordsalisbury8507]

Really great work, keep it up!

[@ponyboy3403]

Keep the great content up dude!

[@migamaos3953]

Love your videos, I always wish there was more

[@bones6448]

Wake up babe new old Britannia video

[@fantasyfleet]

Really the best new content on KZbin.

[@bmhh123]

fantastic content.

[@alfonsomures732]

Great video man

[@StoicHistorian]

Great video, have studied this topic extensively but never drew the comparison of the Great Game, makes a lot of sense now though

[@nmayfield]

Another fantastic video

[@paulbrockschmidt6405]

Another great video!

[@Dave_Lad]

This channel is going places

[@coolclouds7055]

Wow! Just wow! great video 👍

[@stevenhumkid1850]

Good Work. 👌🏻

[@gabbar51ngh]

Well, made video. Subscribed

[@croationz]

Love your work. Could you make a video describing the history of London Town and the inns of court, or a video on the treaty of Verona, or the English revolution of 1688

[@originalname9386]

amazing!

[@andrei19238]

Amazing

[@anneonymous4884]

I love your videos! Is there any chance you can do a part 3 of WWI territorial ambitions? I'm curious what Belgium, Portugal, and Japan wanted from the war.

[@PossessedPotatoBird]

1; Belgium didn't want anything, it was invaded. But after the war it happily accepted a few territorial concessions. 2; Portugal was just an ally of the UK, by refusing to join them in the war they could be breaking the oldest alliance to ever exist. 3; Japan had no hard feelings towards Germany but they saw that Germany was losing and decided to snag Germany's islands in east asia.

[@alejo7365]

I love your videos, from argentina with luv ;)

[@ImJustAoife]

Bit of an out there comment, but if you are ever in need of help regarding your maps I can probably assist. I've been an avid cartographer for many years now (nothing professional, but a hobby I take rather seriously) and have grown quite the collection of sources, I specialise in the late 18th and early 19th century, and in addition I've been in Uni majoring history for a while now. Either way, I absolutely love your content and appreciate the effort you put into the maps, I wish for your continued of success and growth.

[@OldBritannia]

Thank you very much. That'd be great, I don't think I've got any real difficulties in the next few videos I have planned, but if further down the line I need some assistance that would be a big help. Purely out of interest, when you say sources do you mean contemporary or self-made?

[@nickmacarius3012]

Another great video! It seems that 19th Century geopolitics is a strong era for your channel. I would love to see a future video on the tri-rivalry Great Game among Britain, Russia, & France from ~1850- early 1900s when the rivals nations signed respective concordant agreements with one another as a result from the emergence of Germany as a major player on the stage. Very interesting point in history.

[@TheLocalLt]

During this same era Britain and America also had a significant dispute over the Miskito Coast, where Britain had interests and which later became a British protectorate, as well as another dispute over the nearby Bay Islands, which were a British crown colony. There were a number of naval standoffs over this, and eventuality Britain handed protectorship of the Miskito Coast over to Nicaragua, which later forcefully annexed it. The Bay Islands, meanwhile, were ceded to Honduras

[@yc2673]

As a French, I see that Britain politics was rather short sightened in those times. Let me explain : - The wrath of Britain for French and Spanish colonies in the XVIII th led to American independance. - The same wrath kept them supporting Spanish Empire dismemberment at the only profit of the US. - Their blockade after the treaty of Amiens in 1798 with Napoleonic France led France to be unable to protect Louisiana and then, forced her into selling it to the US, paving the way for their expansion westward and southward into Mexican territory. - After initial agreements over the Mexican affair of 1861, Britain finally disengaged from the French agreement to build up a centralized state there by intervention. What I mean is that Britain long term interests were always hampered by short term ones, that led to bigger problems soon after. I don't know if that is related to frequent cabinets changes inside British politics of the time...

[@mappingshaman5280]

2: it didn't only profit the US. The UK set up many investments in the newly independent Latin American countries that led to them being virtually dependent on British finance 3: how does France selling louisiana to America harm Britain? If anything it denies France resources and military bases in North America from which it could theoretically strike into Canada or the Caribbean 4: I don't really understand your point. The only somewhat valid point is 1 and even then if we didn't start taxing the Americans (which i think was still the right move simply because we were defending them from the French and natives so I don't see why they shouldn't pay for their own defence) then America would have stayed a colony.

[@yc2673]

@@mappingshaman5280 2 - Yes Britain took profit from them especially Argentina but in the end, they would receive a no go Monroe doctine directly set for them. 3- It allowed the US a direct western expansion towards Canada and Oregon, and to Mexico. The seizure of Florida and their expansion towards the Caribbean was only a matter of time then. 4- It is mostly financing the whole Prussian army that crippled Britain finances more than the war effort in North America and India btw. So the Americans felt that this heavy burden was set to expand their master domination rather than defending them. My point is that keeping Americas divided between european powers was the best moove towards keeping the US at bay from seizing British assets there. In Mexico it was this very same problem that almost led to war but Britain backed down, while it was the last chance to maintain a link between Europe and those countries. History is history we can only wonder why, but politics... I think democracy tend to lead to short term vision, as we clearly see today...

[@mappingshaman5280]

@@yc2673 2: yes but Britain approved of the Monroe doctrine because it meant continental European countries didn't have as much access to the resources of the americas. Meanwhile Britain owned all of Canada and large parts of the Caribbean whilst France had nothing of any significance and Spain had Cuba. 3: yes but the Americans never actually expanded into Canada and the British agreed to mutually divide oregon, meaning ultimately this only harmed Britain's rivals. 4: the american gripe was that they were being taxed but didn't have political representation, not that British domination was being expanded. No keeping the americas divided was not beneficial to British interests at the time, since France and Spain had an actively hostile relationship with Britain and were great powers whereas America was only a fledgling regional power with which Britain could engage with however it pleased. Furthermore, ousting the Spanish and French from the americas left the former Spanish colonies open to British financial domination, meanwhile the Americans ensured that this financial domination would not cease as Spain could not simply reconquer the colonies as that would cause a war with America which would cause them to lose the remaining colonies they had.

[@yc2673]

@@mappingshaman5280 Are we talking about the same century ? What you say seems more XVIIIth century than XIXth, by 1815, Spain had completely lost feet in the Americas while France and Britain began to cooperate on this theater more and more actively throughout 1840 and beyond. Btw, didn't the US invaded Canada in 1812 leading British to burn Washington in the same year ? In those times France had still valuable interests there to defend with its Dominican, Haitian, Antilles and Guyana possessions. In 1850 the Hispaniola Island (Haiti and Dominican rep) was the first worldwild producer of sugar cane. Finally we were ousted from there by the Monroe doctrine, a shame we did not cooperate furthermore during the Mexican affair. It was a missed opportunity. In those times we could have tamed Russia and the US in the same time from 1850 Crimean war to 1860 Mexican intervention passing by US civil war... Now we struggle to maintain a worldwilde influence with all those newcomers. Let's hope our interests wd still coop those years coming

[@jonayz8655]

@@yc2673 "by 1815 Spain had completely lost feet in the Americas". You should double check your history books. The last Spanish province to separate from the mainland in continental America was Peru in 1826. Santo Domingo, (Dominican Republic) separated in 1865 . Cuba and Puerto Rico were lost to the USA in the Spanish-American war of 1898.

[@micahistory]

great video, as Canadian this is of particular interest to me

[@ShadowDragon1848]

Maybe a dumb question, but how could the Americans call Britain Imperialist, while conquering half the continent?

[@shawnv123]

waiting for part 2

[@thoughtfox12]

Brilliant brilliant stuff as ever, though I wonder if the word “Anglophobia” is quite the correct one to use; of course, suspicion of Britain as a political rival was enormous and that’s the term usually applied to this, but it’s worth remembering just how “Anglo-Saxon” America felt itself to be in this period. If anything the yanks thought England wasn’t English enough and that they were the inheritors of its legacy away from the Norman yoke of autocratic European dynastic power

[@OldBritannia]

I agree with much of what you say, and had the same thoughts when Paul Hayes (my main source for this) used it heavily. In general I think it less describes here an irrational hatred of Britain/British culture, and more the view that Britain and America irreconcilable rivals/enemies.

[@thoughtfox12]

@@OldBritannia of course, I only think the word itself carries a sort of ethnic connotation that is definitely present in European “Anglophobia”, while American feeling lacks this

[@thoughtfox12]

In fact - a video about American Anglosaxonism and so on would be really interesting

[@OldBritannia]

@@thoughtfox12 There was also a strain of this running in Britain at the time - Churchill's mother helped found a magazine called the 'Anglo-Saxon Review' (it of course went bankrupt within months). Definitely a good idea for a video. I shall do a bit more research into it.

[@thoughtfox12]

@@OldBritannia oh for sure Victorian Britain was ripe with it - one need only read Kingsley

[@Princeofbelka]

Incredible work as always we love to see it

[@seamusduffy983]

It is amazing to me how different the American and British interpretations of this period are. For the most part, American and British macrohistorical views are very similar, but I can attest that the difference here is VERY significant

[@gamingquagga3057]

Can you please do a video on either the Balkan wars or the Polish- Saxon Crisis?

[@JonahNelson7]

Insanely good video. It's so fun to see how what seems such a given geopolitically nowadays are in fact just the result of the decisions of surprisingly few men. Not saying it was fully the single leaders of the countries, but still, such a small group of people

[@oracle372]

Please make a tutorial on how to make your maps!

[@historyinbits]

What a funny coincidence! We uploaded a video also talking about UK-US relations in the 19th century yesterday

[@vivekkaushik9508]

Background music is beautiful. I hope it was a little more audible. It adds to the texture of the timeline being discussed. Also, maybe I'm wrong but I find your narration very monotonous not in a complaining manner but rather in a boring manner. My mind dozes off to something else going on the screen or around me as your pitch never goes even a little bit higher or lower and there are no breaks in your narration. I hope I'm the only having this issue of focusing.

[@brianwolle2509]

freakin wonderful

[@MrDubyadee1]

The UK-US relationship during this period sounds very much like the offspring growing into adulthood asserting their autonomy from their parents. There is always a lot of squabbling during this period, but in most cases it settles down where the parent accepts their child is an independent adult and the child becomes more secure in knowing that and so finds it easier to communicate and get along with their parent. So the relationship generally improves over time as it has with our nations.

[@harrynewiss4630]

And a century later the child learns how to mercilessly fleece its parent

[@LindaAndrews-ly1qf]

@@harrynewiss4630 what do you mean fleece?

[@harrynewiss4630]

@@LindaAndrews-ly1qf read up about 1940 to 1941

[@MelGibsonFan]

The parent built their wealth and power fleecing others, it's poetic justice.@@harrynewiss4630

[@crocodil8983]

I do like how you summed up American history as a petulant teenager trying to get an unintrested parent figure to respect them to respect them British btw

[@barmybarmecide5390]

Would love a video on France, perhaps covering the foreign policy of the July monarchy or second empire?

[@OldBritannia]

I’ll definitely get something on the Second Empire and Napoleon III’s foreign policy out in the near future.

[@Sceptonic]

@@OldBritannia yesss thank you, Napoleon III doesn't get covered nearly enough

[@danieldpa8484]

Somehow it’s a shame the US was not able to absorb Canada and Mexico, creating a much more resourceful state. Still a new commonwealth of all these states = US/UK/Canada/Australia/New Zealand makes perfect sense today

[@StevenRoberts77]

No

[@alexandreveigapereira8727]

Well as a Canadian no it is not a shame.....Why does a certain type of American keep assuming that other people do not have as much emotional attachment to their own countries and identities as they do....

[@jeffs4483]

True. Canada and Mexico would be far more advanced today if this happened.

[@danieldpa8484]

@@jeffs4483 and this bigger United States an even more powerful and wealthy entity

[@EarthForces]

Nah, it wouldn't do anything good in the long-run but maybe it does... with the Europeans realizing they have to curbstomp the US before taking the entire hemisphere and of course, the pretense of not being an imperial power beimg removed at the outset as well. 🙃

[@thebalkanhistorian.3205]

Great video! What app do you use for your maps?

[@OldBritannia]

Just photoshop, learnt using Dr Ludwig’s tutorial on YT, and from there it was just trial and error and finding a map style I liked from online.

[@thebalkanhistorian.3205]

@@OldBritannia Ok thanks!

[@paulwaweru9271]

Truly enlightening! I especially like the perspective on slavery being an issue of national sovereignty rather than a moral issue. Plus, I now see that American Manifest Destiny was not just limited to the Slave-Free divide, but also bore a geopolitical dimension that US college textbooks appear to never engage. These are new horizons to explore. Thank you so much for this video!

[@EarthForces]

They tend to cloak their imperialism or some would say, their geopolitcal aspiration as if it is their inevitable "destiny". 🤔

[@paulwaweru9271]

@@EarthForces The thing is, while the driving forces internally adhere to the principle of self-interest being the motivating factor in their works, for the laborers, footsoldiers and lower classes, a different maxim/rhetoric must be applied and spread. So history must be approached from the dual perspective of the movers and the moved; destiny as obligation, profit as interest.

[@bleachorange]

Manifest destiny was almost entirely about the geopolitical future of the nation (as it related to westward expansion for the US and its peoples), of which the slave-free state tensions are but a part. I'm glad you picked this up here if it wasnt covered in what you learned previously.

[@paulwaweru9271]

@@bleachorange Did additional reading on the subject. The Slave-Free issue appears to have been a part - not the only issue - and only a part of the main concern. The major business was State Rights vs centralization of power in my opinion, with Slavery an unfortunate item picked up by many in the North as a weak point that could be used to pry open the South. Not to say that anti-slavery was not a genuine concern for many! My observation is that many in Congress really did not want to address the issue of slavery and really believed that it would simply wither away as industralization made it clear that machines were far cheaper than slaves. Indeed, few in the South - 1-3%? - owned slaves, if I recall correctly. Its just that, just as some in the North were using slavery to weaken political power among Southern Democrats, the powerful elite used slavery as a sociological ideal and standing point behind which many could stand behind even when they probably had no direct opinion over the matter. Hehe, the dances when they were trying to admit new states is interesting though!

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Thank you for this video! Certain aspects of this time period don't get covered nearly enough. I will say that I was a bit disappointed you didn't go over the Texas saga in more detail. For the roughly 10 years it was independent and the decision to play the suspicions and ambitions of a politically gridlocked USA and eager British against one another. Mexico was either giving offers or speaking not so subtly about the desire to get back the one territory that got away. Texas wanted long-term protection by being a part of a greater power. The British also saw a chance to possibly box the USA in, in the long term. If their outreach was successful to the Republic of Texas and had they pushed the Oregon Territory issue stronger. The paranoia of that possibility in the USA was one of the less talked about, yet greatest reasons the push on the Oregon Territory, Texas, and the final grand push for Continental westward expansion happened when it all did despite previous relative complacency, hesitation, and even opposition. Edit: although come to think of it, that would be great as a video on its own someday! Edit: spelling

[@TacitusKilgore165]

Straight line?

[@rivers169]

Straight line

[@anonnymousperson]

12:50 - I like your slight nod to the pig war when you mention 'the slight alteration of 1871'. Although that slight alteration actually happened in 1872.

[@Hypophreniac]

Finally early for once !

[@MrNTF-vi2qc]

A good video, as usual. Been thinking about subscribing up to this point but I finally decided to. I'm kind of hoping you can make a video about Napoleon III and France's recovery and rebuilding from the Franco-Prussian War up to WW1. Cause I know Germany and France almost went to war again in 1875 but Russia threatened to invade Germany so it didn't happen.

[@liveforever9888]

Are you going to make war aims of each nation in ww2 in the future?

[@jackbharucha1475]

Ah Palmerston. The villain of just about every Alternate Civil War history.

[@Mooocheropordis]

Simply fascinating, the perseptions of either side played out through flawed men on either nation. Pity the first nation tribes shunted out of the way though in the name of national interests, that was the real catastrophe

[@EpicWinFTW1]

recommend H.C. Allen's History of Anglo-American Relations (1783-1952)

[@Skipping2HellPHX]

11:55 Minor error, but the map shows the border expanding to its current southern form following the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, but Arizona & New Mexico's southern frontier only extended south to its current form (and brought my family into the United States, isn't it nice to be wanted) following the Gadsden Purchase half a decade later.

[@MBP1918]

Interesting

[@belewerd9672]

Realmente me gustaría que hubiese un canal como este pero de habla hispana

[@rush6521]

Will you also be making a video about the Great Game between Russia and Britain sometime in the future?

[@OldBritannia]

Definitely.

[@umbralveritas]

This content is good and informative but I find it hard to follow. I think it's something about your voice, you mumble and trail off at the end of your sentences. But aside from that, great content ! Thanks!

[@OldBritannia]

Ah sorry about that. Yes I agree, I don't think I'll be quitting the day job for voice acting anytime soon!

[@umbralveritas]

No worries!! Its more my own problem really, I do have attention deficit... Your content is extremely interesting, and frankly I follow along with your stuff just fine in the end, since the amount of information and depth you provide in your videos is enough to satiate my curiosity.. until the next one anyways haha Cheers

[@fshoaps]

Sidenote: The portion of MN, where Duluth lies was part of Canada until the border regarding Maine was finished. It wasn't merely "Lake Of The Woods", MN's status that was drawn up.

[@michaelhanna7720]

An interesting and thorough review that is marred by pedestrian asides and rudimentary psychology. The personalities of historical figures can and do influence events, but seldom in such simplistic ways. Jackson, for example was a complex and volcanic character, and more than just an Anglophobe… he feuded with just about everyone around him but had a deep seated and well founded hatred of the British that went back to childhood experiences during the Revolutionary War. The United States in the mid-19th Century was less “immature” than it was riven by faction that would soon explode into a Civil War. The British policies of the time were also in conflict- with social feeling against slavery counter balanced by strong commercial interests favoring the South. The Monroe doctrine was at its inception an aspirational document that by the end of the century became a cornerstone (for good or for ill) of American policy in the hemisphere and was backed by a somewhat less immature international power. The reasons behind national policies have less to do with friends and personalities, and more to do, as Palmerston noted with interests: “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”

[@HarborLockRoad]

Excellent vid! I cannot see how we had such a nasty split and tentative reconciliation. Example, i live in what we still call " new england", my town was founded in 1669, and most all of our towns and cities are named after the colonists old home towns in England. I always thought it would give an Englishman a great laugh to look at a map of our new England states and see the names of our towns and cities to this day .

[@subboid]

I can safely say (as a Brit) that America's belief that the UK wanted to limit their expansion would have been 100% correct and a matter of policy by default

[@EarthForces]

I just find it funny that they have to create a pretense of idealism when in fact it was just plain geopolitcs and imperialism on their side for it. Expect one empire to of course stop its breakaway territory to expand in becoming another empire while it tries so hard to pretend that it isn't one. 🤣

[@_________.]

@@EarthForces you are very insecure. Youre spam commenting under every comment.

[@Paul-ft9dn]

Wasn't the Monroe doctrine in 1823? How could it be suspended in 1820?

[@SamAronow]

My main takeaway from this is that, but for Jackson and his political heirs, the US and UK could have been allies going all the way back to 1829. Britain had been the only post-Napoleonic power to base its European policy on the concept of alignment, softly encouraging liberal regimes in France, Spain, Italy, the Low Countries, and the Balkans. The US could easily have been part of that if the Whigs had been more successful, and the American Civil War would likely have happened 15-20 years earlier. Granted, under such circumstances I'd probably have grown up in Illinois; California being an independent country.

[@rogeliovaldez6594]

Cali was still part of mexico 15-20 yrs earlier. The Civil War only took place 13 years after mexico. Hell, texas may still be independent or invaded, who knows

[@supersasquatch]

So, are we doing that New York to London hyperloop or what?

[@KevinJonasx11]

another banger, mr old britannia

[@WanukeX]

2:55 - It's just "Lake of the Woods" , not "The Lake of the Woods"

[@Exnem]

It is interesting how Oregon was such a sticking point for the two.

[@TsarNicholasyearsago]

The river systems there were essential for British fur trade

[@JonahNelson7]

I mean let's be honest, the shape of the US looks nicer when the 49th parallel continues to the Pacific. I'm not convinced that wasn't the driver behind Manifest Destiny lol

[@AFGuidesHD]

5:17 sounds like appeasement to me

[@danehollyoak4897]

The diplomatic relations between the British and the Americans is truly one of the most fascinating ones of all time. The liberalist much radical manifest destiny of the Americans clashes so perfectly with the collected and economical approach the British take.

[@somethingcraft3148]

canada and australia

[@danehollyoak4897]

What?

[@clauvex7829]

I want to see more of this! Specially, i want to see when the British went from seeing the Americans as a young, bashful and inexperienced power to a great world power that even they feared would eclipse it's global influence.

[@gauravvarma3645]

Confusing at some points

[@randomuser2461]

This period is when we went around asking everyone, "Can we has your stuff?", and everyone let us has their stuff.