That shows only that some countries have holidays with a similar theme. It is not the same holiday at all. They are on different dates, for a start.
Are you seriously trying to say that being called Thanksgiving, having its origins in the same irregular religious observance (called thanksgiving), and having mostly the same traditions as the American holiday, does not make the holiday Thanksgiving, because when the US and Canadian governments decided that if they were going to do this thing every year, they should set a range for it, instead of declaring it independently every time, they chose different ranges?
And that the Liberian, Norwegian, and Norfolk Islands observations are not Thanksgiving, despite the fact that they were actually imported from the US?
You have a better argument the German Festival of Thanks is not the same holiday, since they don’t use the same word (Google translates Erntedankfest as ‘Thanksgiving’, but also as Harvest Festival)…but, again, same origins and whoever wrote the German Wikipedia article on it certainly seems to think the US and Canadian Thanksgivings are connected to it - as well as each other.
Quoth Peter Morris:
We accomplished all of our primary objectives in the War of 1812. At most, you could call it a draw, since we didn’t accomplish any of our secondary objectives (like assimilating Canada), but it certainly wasn’t a loss.
Yes. They are different holidays, have different origins, different traditions, different dates. Just because they have similar names doesn’t make them the same.
The festival called “thanksgiving” in USA commemorates a specific event in US history. The festival called “thanksgiving day” in Canada doesn’t.
cite?
As I recall my history lessons, assimilating Canada WAS the primary objective. And you failed.
The secondary objective was that you wanted trade with Napoleon, while the British blockades prevented it. This became a moot point after Napoleon was defeated. There was no longer any reason to stop you trading with France. You did not achieve your objective there.
What objectives do you think you succeeded in, exactly?
sigh
I’ll break it down, one last time.
Multiple countries celebrate Thanksgiving as a regular thing, in the fall.
ALL of those Thanksgivings have their origins in a Christian religious observance (called thanksgiving) that happens whenever someone feels the desire to declare one.
Canada and the US both decided to make Thanksgiving observation an annual, secular, tradition.
Germany happens to have a regular thanksgiving festival in the fall. (Though theirs remains a religious observance.)
Several of those regular Thanksgivings are imported directly from the American.
The Canadian and American Thanksgivings, coming as they do at about the same time, and as close as the two countries have been since before Canada existed as a separate country, have influenced each other to the point that the traditions are more or less the same. (We have a little less talk about Pilgrims, since they weren’t a major part of our history, but that’s it.)
That the initial incident that caused Canada to declare a Thanksgiving in the late 1870s is not the same one that the Americans commemorate with their Thanksgiving (which didn’t become a regular thing until a couple hundred years later) doesn’t change that they both declared Thanksgiving for those events because ‘thanksgiving’ was an extant tradition.
Stopping Indian incursions. To U.S. school kids, the war of 1812 is about stopping Indian raids and enabling Westward expansion. And we were mostly successful with that - or at least successful at keeping the British from funding it.
We also got Florida. From Spain (!)…I don’t get HOW, but that was the boarder change.
Mainly it’s seen, properly or not, as taking care of unfinished business from the Revolution and finally confirming our independence.
The best part, once you get older, is finding out that Canada thinks they were not only in it but *won *it. 
Are any of them remembering the same specific event in US history that was the origin of the American festival?
Just answer yes or no. And then let’s end this hijack.
I apologize to all and sundry for the possible hijack, but since Peter Morris asked:
Madison’s war message continues on, further objecting to impressment, to harassment of trading vessels, to British blockades, to Native American attacks encouraged by British officials, and to the general British attitude of refusing to negotiate to any American protests over these “indignities.” Canada is not mentioned once, not even in passing. The clear message of Madison’s request was the Great Britain was threatening the economic safety of the fledgling U.S. and refusing to treat the U.S. as an equal nation.
Please, if you would, present your own cite that conquering Canada was “the primary objective” of the US in that war.
On the one hand, yes, the Liberian, Norwegian, and Norfolk ones are, in fact, based on the Thanksgiving that was declared in the US commemorating the Pilgrims, since they are directly imported from the US.
But, on the other hand, it’s just not true that the other Thanksgivings declared for other events unrelated, because the idea of declaring a thanksgiving observance to mark a good event was not invented by the Pilgrims - it was an existing tradition that they, and others, indulged in, long before any Europeans set foot in what is now the US. (And even if it were invented by the Pilgrims, the fact that other countries picked it up would mean that it was still related.)
And, even if it was, that does NOT mean that other countries that celebrate Thanksgiving don’t celebrate Thanksgiving…because, guess what, we have holidays and observances called Thanksgiving.
See that bit, right there?
‘It’s called Thanksgiving’?
Yeah. That means we celebrate Thanksgiving. No matter how much or how little American influence is on our holiday, we have Thanksgiving. No amount of claiming that it’s not related to the American holiday (which it would be, even if the two didn’t influence each other, as I’ve shown, repeatedly) can change the fact that, yes, indeed, other countries celebrate Thanksgiving.
Here’s a staff report by Gfactor discussing the aims and the outcome of the war.
"So, was acquiring Canadian territory a reason for going to war? Probably, but it wasn’t an official one. And the desire for Canadian turf alone did not cause the war "*
So, perhaps I overstated slightly calling it “THE primary objective” but certainly it was one of the major ones.
And that point does not change the fact that America lost.
Let’s end this hijack If you want to discuss it any further, start a new thread in the staff reports forum.
They’re the same damned thing, just on different days. Or are you also going to claim that Christmas is two unrelated holidays when celebrated according to the Orthodox and Western traditions?
- RickJay, a Canadian
What did it lose?
Will Ferguson said it best: in the war of 1812, America won, Canada won, the British tied and the Indians lost big time.
That’s a bit like saying that UK’s 5th November is the same as the USA’s 4th July, because they both involve fireworks.
I’m done wi8th this hijack. If you want to continue, start a thread in some appropriate place.
A war.
What, because they didn’t have to cede any land, or pay reparations to England, and the president wasn’t arrested and sent into exile, you think they won?
And that’s another hijack. Again, if you want to continue, start a new thread.
So the British don’t get high school diplomas? I didn’t know that. As an American I admit that thought would never occur to me. Are O levels considered evidence of a basic education? And A levels evidence of more advanced achievement?
What we get is certificates in each of the subjects we study and pass.
So, I understand the Americans get a single certificate for their whole basic education, is that right?
If you mean that A levels represent a higher score on the exams than O levels, then no. It’s a separate test.
Kids take O levels at age 16, about 9 subjects. After that, they choose 3 subjects to study for the next 2 years. They take A levels in those 3 subjects at age 18. Then pick 1 subject for University.
I’m thinking that A-levels are more or less equivalent to an American Junior College, if I’ve understood the term correctly.
I think the most accurate way to put it is that there is no equivalence whatsoever for the American and British levels of achievement given to people in their teen years. Passing a lot of O levels at 16 might be the same as the courses that an American has to pass by the time that they graduate from high school at 18. But a lot of Brits don’t do well at the O levels and drop out at 16, while a larger percentage of Americans graduate from high school having acquired that knowledge. A fair number of Brits learn enough about a small number of subjects for their A levels which nearly all Americans don’t learn until the first or second year of college, but more Americans learn that amount of knowledge when they do get to college.
In general, Brits tend to get pushed harder in their teen years to learn more about the subjects that they will specialize in, while Americans tend not to be so pushed. Americans then tend to get more chances to catch up in later years. In particular, American tend to get more chances to enter college later than usual. I didn’t see any particular tendency in my observations in the U.S. and the U.K. for citizens of either country to come across as being more educated than those in the other.
<nevermind>
Except no-ones studied O levels since 1988, when they were scrapped in favour of GCSEs (General Certificate of Secondary Education).
You study for your GCSEs between the ages of 14-16. Generally anything between 8-12 subjects will be studied, with English, Maths, a science and a modern language being compulsory subjects, and the others chosen according to your personal strengths and interests. Grades are decided usually on the basis of coursework completed over the 2 years, and exams sat at the end of the 2 years. Most employers have a minimum entry requirement for jobs of 5 GCSEs, grades A-C, to include English and Maths.
While all children must remain in full-time education till the age of 16, it is possible, if you are particularly academically disinterested, to leave school with no basic qualifications at all. However you can, should you wish to, take work-based qualifications instead, such as NVQs (National Vocational Qualifications, though I believe they are also being replaced by something else). You study for these in the workplace, and they are based more on an assessment of your practical, rather than academic skills.
If you want to go on to university, however, you will need to stay in education and study for A levels. These take up to 2 years, and you’d sit approx. 3-5 of them (5 is unusual but getting more common due to increased competition for places at top universities; some unis will take you with only 1-2 A levels, but they tend not to be well-regarded ones).
You need to have some idea of what you want to study at uni when picking your A levels, as they will dictate the courses you can get on. There is no point, for example, in taking A levels in English Lit, History and Spanish and then trying to get on to a Biology degree course, you’d be expected to have at least one science a level, probably more. So at the age of 16 we’re asking kids to make some fairly major decisions about their future!
Like GCSEs, A levels are usually graded on a combination of coursework and final exams, although some will only have one or the other. You’d normally go into your final exams with at least one conditional offer from a university, so you’d know what minimum grades you need to achieve to take up your place. If you don’t get the grades, there’s a chance your first choice uni might take you anyway, or you might have the grades to get your second choice place. If all else fails, you can go through Clearing (a process where students without places are matched with unis with spare places, but of course you may not get a uni, or even a course you would have chosen), or you can resit.
I should add though, it’s been a number of years since I’ve worked in this field, so my information may be somewhat out of date!
The thing is; in the UK and many other Commonwealth countries; you begin your professional degree in university at 18; so your future Doctors and lawyers are studying to be that from day 1 in Uni; while in America; it seems that the first two year are party time.