Wouldn't the Clone Wars count as being the first Galactic Civil War?

Discussion in 'Literature' started by Tyber_Zahn, Jan 14, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DarthUr Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 14, 2008
    star 4
    Um, yes, they did. They very much considered themselves citizens of the Empire, and therefore politically entitled to protest the Empire's form of government as illegitimate and wrong. The founders of the Rebellion kept their Senate seats while it got started, and Garm Bel Iblis, for instance, continues to think of himself as the "rightful" elected Senator of Corellia after he goes into hiding.

    The Rebels aren't Separatists in any form and go so far as to actively oppose a "treasonous" neo-Separatist movement in Allegiance. (Well, Luke, Han and Leia do, but at no point is it implied that their actions are inconsistent with the Rebellion's values.)
  2. DarthUr Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 14, 2008
    star 4
    At the time, "Englishmen" was a common shorthand term used for subjects of the Crown and affirming that you were an Englishman was common rhetoric for stating that you had all the obligations but also all the rights of a Crown subject. George Washington's men toasted King George III and declared themselves to be "loyal Englishmen" at the beginning of the war -- this is often cited as a demonstration of how rapidly politics shifted as the war went on.

    The fact that not all "Englishmen" were really "English" is not that big a deal, any more than the fact that we say "American" to mean citizens of the USA even though anyone who lives in the Americas could technically be an "American".
  3. Tyber_Zahn Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 20, 2008
    star 3
    I could call myself Chinese, it wouldn't make me Chinese though.
  4. Dawud786 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2006
    star 4
    Blah, redundant. I gotta remember to read threads before picking something out to respond to.

    Tyber, you could call yourself Chinese if you were subject to Chinese rule. The government and people of Taiwan consider themselves Chinese because they are ethnically Chinese... despite not being under the rule of the government of the mainland. In the same way, the English founders of the United States of American considered themselves Englishmen.
  5. Ghost Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2003
    star 6
    The Seven Years' War (the French-Indian War in America) was the first true "World War" stretching from America to India, but it isn't called that.

    The naming of wars, both in real life and Star Wars, don't always make sense but that's just how it is.
  6. QuentinGeorge Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 12, 2003
    star 5
    They were citizens of British America, but they weren't English.

    No they weren't, since there was no entity called "British America", merely a collection of colonies that included portions of what is now modern USA and Canada, and secondly, pre-Independence Americans weren't "citizens" of anywhere, they were subjects of George III, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland, and Elector of Hanover. The modern concept of "citizenship" didn't exist. You weren't a "citizen" of Virginia, you were a subject living in the colony of Virginia. It was only later in the war that an American identity developed, prior to that the colonial rebels were fighting for their liberties as Englishmen, as they saw proscribed by the Magna Carta, and reinforced by the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution of 1688. They were guided by the ideas of the Whig movement from Britain (who personally disliked the King because he broke up the ruling Whig oligarchy) and others sympathetic politicians in Westminster and intellectuals in London and elsewhere. (Paine, Pitt the Elder, Burke). Furthermore, people who self-identified as English were the most prevalent among the upper hierarchy of the rebels, since they were the ones who believed that, as Englishmen, they had special rights and liberties enshrined for them. Notably, the concept of Common Law, which England and Wales operated under, but Scotland didn't. Ditto the Magna Carta. So, basically what DarthUr said.
  7. Tyber_Zahn Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 20, 2008
    star 3
    I know it wouldn't have been called British America at the time but it's as good a name as any. The colonists of English descent may well have thought as themselves as English, but I don't think we would have called them or thought of them as being English, British perhaps but not English. And I think they would have had the same kind of status as anyone else living in the British Empire, they were essentially subjects of British rule, whether they were of English stock or not.
  8. Jedimarine Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2001
    star 5
    That's what the war was all about.

    The American Revolution didn't begin as a war for independence.

    It began as a struggle for equality as British citizens...to have equal standing with folks in the home isles...to not be subject to decree with no recourse for grievance.

    "No taxation without representation!"

    For most Colonials, getting a fair voice in Parliament would have been enough to quell the tension. It was that lack that led even educated men to take up the independence mantra...one that before the 1760s had only been preached by pirates, indentured servants, and social malcontents.

    --------------

    The major difference with the Rebel Alliance in this analogy is that the rebellion was founded on the notion that the Empire was evil and ought to be overthrown. The American Revolution never entertained such principles...on the contrary, most Americans "liked" British governance...the way it was in Britain.

    That said, once the shooting began, the analogy is pretty good, especially as the war took place very much in the midst of everyday life. The lines are just a little clearer then when you start talking about star systems and the void.



  9. Tyber_Zahn Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 20, 2008
    star 3
    I thought the War of Independence was about a tax on tea.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Act
  10. Jedimarine Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2001
    star 5
    amongst other things.

    Though it's a good underpinning for why this country runs on Coffee today.[face_coffee]
  11. QuentinGeorge Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 12, 2003
    star 5
    I know it wouldn't have been called British America at the time but it's as good a name as any. The colonists of English descent may well have thought as themselves as English, but I don't think we would have called them or thought of them as being English, British perhaps but not English. And I think they would have had the same kind of status as anyone else living in the British Empire, they were essentially subjects of British rule, whether they were of English stock or not.

    There was really not the concept of "Britishness" that is around today, since Scotland and England had only been combined in the act of union in the early 18th century. In fact, the only place a "British" identity really formed that early was in the Plantations of Ireland, and that was due to a marked difference between them and the native Catholic population. Again, Scotland and England were under different legal systems, and had different parliaments until 1707. "British" as an identity didn't really become firm until the 19th century.
  12. Sinrebirth SWC and EUC Forum Moderator

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 15, 2004
    star 7
    Generally, taxes, I believe. When the colonies weren't particularly taxed anyway. And England had spent vast sums of money and life protecting the colonies in the Seven Years War. But you are quite capable of correcting me.

    Darth-Ghost; Well said. [face_peace]

  13. Jedimarine Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2001
    star 5
    The Stamp Act was enacted specifically to recoup the costs incurred in North America during the French & Indian War (Seven Years). And it was, on the individual level, a meager and insignificant tax...it's political vitriol came from it's being so vast in scope and it's embedding to nearly every aspect of colonial social life.

    This lit a fire in the less educated ranks, while the elite in the colonies had been eager to find a way to advance their station in society...something as a "colonist" that was being denied them...men from the "age of reason" who were well schooled on the high marker for "democratic virtue" of the era, the Glorious Revolution, still not 2 generations removed.

    ---------------------

    If anyone is really truly interested in an all-sides POV on the American Revolution, I highly recommend works by historian Simon Schama.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.