At least they didn't send Prince Andrew.
I assume that we are giving the South Carolina because it was originally colonized by Barbados.
Barbados was an independent constitutional monarchy whose head of state, Queen Elizabeth II of Barbados, happened to also be the queen of the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, Zimbabwe, Canada, etc.
Whoops, not Zimbabwe. Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Grenada, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia... on and on. This is why I rarely comment.
2: ah, I figured there was a historical detail I was missing.
I wonder if they considered remaining a monarchy and just replacing Queen Elizabeth II with Rihanna.
yes, they've shifted from being an independent state that's a Commonwealth member and has the queen as head of state, like Canada, to one that doesn't, like South Africa, India, or the Republic of Ireland.
I would assume the queen had no formal control over the decision. It looks like the amendment to the constitution was just done by (unanimous) vote of Parliament, in classic Westminster fashion.
7. The Republic of Ireland is not a member of the Commonwealth. But there are any number of republics that are. There are even monarchies in the Commonwealth whose monarch is not Liz 2.
Unless South Carolina regularly produces world class cricketers, Barbados would politely tell you where you can stick it (between the coasts of North Carolina and Georgia). They wouldn't want to be outnumbered by white racists, they've been there and didn't like it.
yeah, it's been a nonissue since the decision that India could be in the Commonwealth after passing its constitution in 1950.
Is South Carolina the state with most for us to gain if it were given away? Or were you just being politely deferential about Texas?
In the end, you have to say that ridding the nation of Texas is really the right move here, given its outsized influence on the rest of the US. But for historical repugnance over the life of the country, weighted by population, it's hard to beat South Carolina for its combination of pure evil, ignorance and belligerence. I think I'd put them a whisker ahead of Mississippi.
2 is correct re: the Barbados/SC connection, although sadly 9.2 is also correct that Barbados would never go for it. I think 12 is also basically correct on SC's role in American history and society. They sparked multiple constitutional crises, one of which led to an actual civil war.
And the Barbadian connection there is not coincidental; antebellum SC was exceptionally dominated by the wealthy planter class even compared to the other southern states, in a way that resembles the Caribbean sugar islands in the era of slavery more than any other system in North America. The state legislature chose the presidential electors rather than having them selected by popular vote until after the Civil War, the last state to still use that method by a huge margin.
Louisiana has some similar minuses to TX/MS/SC, but compensates by having some big pluses as well.
Compared to MS, has SC had cultural contributions on the level of the Delta blues or Elvis?
6. Rihanna was honoured at the ceremony and made aHero of Barbados, which I would guess is a bit like being made an Honorary Colonel of Militia of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, though probably a slightly bigger deal in a country of less than 300 thousand people.
The Presidency is purely ceremonial and is elected by Parliament, so maybe she'll run when she stops touring. It would be a nice retirement gig.
John C. Calhoun's political philosophy was so bad it made (and still makes) Andrew Jackson look good. Not just substantively atrocious on e.g. slavery, but strongly antidemocratic and actively corrosive to the very idea of a functional national government. It remains very influential on the American right.
If the US did want to get rid of Texas, would they kick it out to be an independent country like it was when it joined, or would they lean on Mexico to have it back?
Texas gets combined with Chihuahua, the rest of Mexico goes to Barbados.
I just watched a presentation on the evils of the filibuster, which among various other things we know, noted Calhoun explicitly stated he believed the Constitution as existing to be too majoritarian.
15: That's an excellent point. South Carolina has nice beaches. I'll give it that.
Plus, I like the SC flag, which has a really cool Islamic vibe to it.
Fort Sumter is a dud, though. Having visited that one and Fort McHenry, among others, I can tell you that you want to go with the forts that weren't flattened by war.
There's something old world romantic about living in Texas, post-Texas-being-shunted-off-to-Mexico. I would rather have us amalgamated into Mexico than be our own country, at least. That seems less romantic and more dystopic sci-fi.
Let me be the first to recommend Hilton Head, especially with kids or assholes who golf.
Pre-pandemic my kids wanted to visit Edisto Beach, SC because there's some sandbar full of seashells.
"SC" stands for "Seashells and Calhoun".
26: went to Edisto for vacation a couple of times when my kids were teens and had a great time. We did indeed go to a sandbar with lots of shells but I had no idea it was a destination sandbar.
Charles Pierce, modern master of the Homeric epithet, calls South Carolina "the home office of American sedition."
John C Calhoun, famous founder of DC's All Souls Unitarian Church
SC didn't even vote on 1860. They'd already seceded. They'd a tourist destination because of quaint relics of the Old South -- courtly manners, magnolias etc.
Texas is effectively horrible but could turn. Not SC.
SC didn't even vote on 1860. They'd already seceded. They'd a tourist destination because of quaint relics of the Old South -- courtly manners, magnolias etc.
Texas is effectively horrible but could turn. Not SC.