Which perfectly explains why they bring it up but doesn’t explain why all Canadians (in positions of influence) seem to think this.
Oh, that. That’s just politicians trying to get elected. No biggie.
Since some Canadians fought on the side of American colonists in the Revolutionary War, modern-day Canadians could claim that “we and the French defeated the British at Yorktown”. :dubious:
This.
Canada’s evolution from colony to nation was a slow process and it’s hard to pin down exactly when many Canadians ceased to think of themselves as part of the Empire and identifying with the British.
To put it slightly differently, what does it mean if an American says “We kicked out the British in the Revolution”? What if that American lives outside the 13 original states, and their family immigrated to the US in the last 50 years? How can that person say “we”?
The answer is that you can identify with long-ago founding events from your country’s history without having any personal or family claim to having participated.
As for why the meme, I think it’s partly because the War of 1812 is so odd, and Americans and Canadians both claim that they won it.
Back when the claim was being made that the Vietnam War was the first war the US lost, the Canadian reaction was often that the US lost the War of 1812, because they failed in one of their major war goals, to capture Canada. gfactor did a Staff Report on it about 12 years ago.
Just a little example for our American Dopers about the inter-twined nature of British and Canadian history.
I’m in Ottawa today for a meeting. The meeting is at a hotel on Wellington Street. That’s the main government / ceremonial street: Parliament and the Supreme Court of Canada and te Bank of Canada are all on Wellington Street.
Why is the main government Street in Ottawa named Wellington, rather than “Boulevard des Canadiens” or Constitution Street or Canada Street, or something like that?
Because Wellington saved the British Empire, of course, by defeating Napoleon.
So of course we commemorate him. The street was named way back in the early 19th century, but there’s no reason to change it.
I don’t think Americans “get” this aspect of Canadian political history.
Canada fought off the US and the US fought of the UK. Everyone but the UK won, and that’s OK, because in the real war they cared about, they stopped France under Napoleon.
No, the UK also won because they didn’t lose Canada. That’s a win in imperial terms.
The war was largely over free trade and impressment of US sailors into the UK Navy. There were plenty of other factors, but in the end the US got the UK to respect our sovereignty. The UK opened an extra front they did not need in their much bigger war. The UK can’t really claim they won, but the Canadians can.
Not that it would have made much of an impact, but the UK may have been able to pull the US to their side against the French, instead they fanned the flames and caused an additional war that was major to the US & Canada though admittedly fairly minor to the UK.
The difference being the US fought the War of 1812 and Canada didn’t. Britain did. Contrary to what another post said, Americans are not actually likely to consider Britain’s victories in the Seven Years War in North American (aka ‘French and Indian War’) as American victories though British forces recruited in the future US were involved. Which is a similar case to the War of 1812 as it applies to the future country Canada in general, though not the capture of Washington DC in that war, since the key units in that campaign were all regular British units brought in from Europe, not militia raised in British North America.
Making believe a country Canada fought the War of 1812 against the US is a Canadian quirk. It’s not the most outrageous distortion of history among national myths worldwide by any means, but it still is.
Blame Canada!
Don’t know which Americans claim it as a win. I remember being taught in school that it was basically a draw. This was mostly because the treaty at the end said everyone goes back to the way things were before the war. Except with less impressing of American sailors. Well, OK, the treaty doesn’t say anything about that last part, but they knew that with the Napoleanic War over, there wouldn’t be any more need for it.
Canadians existed before the current country of Canada.
Upper and Lower Canada both existed and were the targets of the US aggression. Canadians (of French, British and First Nations stock) fought to resist the aggression, as part of the British forces, composed of British regulars, Canadian militias, and First Nations allies.
Some historians argue that the American aggression in the 1812 War was one of the defining moments of Canada’s identity; that if the Americans hadn’t invaded, perhaps Upper Canada would have gradually been absorbed by the US, just as Oregon was forty years later. Instead, the American hostile invasion cemented Upper Canada’s identity as British and Canadian.
Yes but I think it’s great how the Americans and Canadians put aside their past differences and defeats to work together and win the Battle of Stalingrad.
That argument for the British government triggering the war overlooks that the British government repealed the Orders in Council that were the alleged causus belli, before the US declaration of war. Due to the slowness of trans-Atlantic communications, the declaration and the repeal were not immediately known to each other. But if the US war goal was solely to end the trade restrictions, as soon as the US government got word of the repeal of the OC, there was no longer any need for war, if that was the sole reason the US declared war.
Instead, the US launched invasions of Canada with the goal of conquering Canadian territory, knowing that Britain had repealed the trade restrictions. How is that the British opening a war front? And what is the justification for a war of annexation if the trade issue has been resolved?
I never used the word sole or soley as I bolded above. You quoted what I said and then implied I said something else. 
Are you arguing with someone else?
One of the major causes of the war was the British arming Native Americans and allowing them to attack American settlers in the Northeast preventing their expansion. The United States invaded Canada primarily to destroy these tribes with conquering Canada as a secondary consideration. The Wikipedia article on the War of 1812 goes into great detail on this.
Also according to Wiki Word of the repeal of the Orders did not reach President James Madison until 12 August 1812, some fifty days later. Even then he refused to halt hostilities because he did not know how Britain had reacted to the declaration of war.
Likewise the Seven Years War (French and Indian War) had a significant effect on forming American identity and starting the unrest which led to the Revolution, British tax changes were in part a result of the war. However, the US did not fight in the French and Indian War, did not capture Quebec City, did not defeat the French. Because, the US did not exist as a country. Great Britain fought that war against the French using some manpower from the (future US) colonies.
Likewise Canada did not fight the US to a draw in the War of 1812. Great Britain fought the US to a draw in the War of 1812. Great Britain used some manpower from its remaining North American colonies (now the country Canada). Although, there was no important use of manpower from the colonies in the capture of Washington DC, that was units of the regular British Army raised in Britain.
The later historical ramifications of either war doesn’t change the fact that it’s an odd Canadian quirk to speak of the War of 1812 as Canada against the US just as it would be an odd American quirk (perhaps it has happened but is far less common AFAIK) to speak of the Seven Years War in North America as having pitted the US against France.
The Oregon Territory was split between the US and Britain by treaty. The southern portion became part of the US, but the northern portion is now part of Canada. There was an argument in Congress that the territory was being filled much more rapidly with Americans than Britons, and in due time Britain would have been no more able to push its claims to any of it than Mexico was in Texas, but Polk’s Manifest Destiny zealotry was more immediate. There was also a sentiment that the whole thing could easily be taken militarily (“54-40 or fight!”) but there wasn’t enough willingness to start another war with Britain, with so many potential negative consequences.
There’s also a claim that the American Civil War instigated the formation of the Dominion, as a defense against Yankee militarism turning its focus northward.
Nobody said it’s rational, as tribalism and nationalism are not rational, but the sentiment is real.
Not the Indians.