0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5,168 Given: 4,757 |
I didn't really mean to say offense, I welcome the new member and it's interesting to have an African American here since there are hardly any
I only said it because it caught my attention when he identified with his ancestry, it's as if a Japanese or Korean user signed up
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,002 Given: 12,788 |
The reason the Scots-Irish were anti-British and pro-independence is that the Scot-Irish were the ones typically pushing forward in the frontier but the British crown in 1763 made it illegal for British colonials to cross over the Appalachian mountains so as not to antagonize the natives. In other words, they were having limitations placed on them for trapping and future land acquisition.
This is basic well known American history.
On topic, it's odd to claim that roughly 14% to a quarter of AA ancestry being NW European isn't significant. It's interesting to see people's bizarre perceptions because they're bothered by what the facts would entail. You ask any normal person if 14% to 25% is significant and they'd say yes. The average person isn't mathematically retarded.
Last edited by Colonel Frank Grimes; 08-11-2023 at 04:34 AM.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 14,044 Given: 6,628 |
That's a plausible reason but not the only reason. The Penal laws restricting rights to non-Anglicans and high rents of English landlords in Ulster that caused their mass migration may have been the ultimate reason for their anti-Britishness, considering most of their migration to America was only within a lifetime before the Revolution. That's something they have in common with Catholic Irish Americans a century later.
And needless to say you are retarded CFG. Nobody, black or white, cares or can discern whether a black American's white quarter or fifth is Irish, Scottish or English. It makes no difference.
Last edited by Creoda; 08-11-2023 at 05:14 AM.
Spoiler!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks