Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While I do appreciate the impacts of Boston, I find you to be completely dismissive of any and all impacts not from Boston. Boston (and Philadelphia) are two cities tied to American history as much or more than any other.
Quaker and Puritan beliefs have both had instrumental impacts on basic freedoms not just in the US but worldwide and much can be tied back to these two cities. In some ways the two ideals worked well in tandem and likely played a role in the country and freedoms we have today
I get the sense that history classes up there may place greater focus on Boston in the historical context than many other places which is good in that it likely perpetuates identity and a proudness.
In a historical context these two are like trying to determine what is worth more; a dollar bill or 4 quarters
thats what i said earlier, my words where a "virtual tie", Phillies thinks Philly is much more important, which i disagree with.
thats what i said earlier, my words where a "virtual tie", Phillies thinks Philly is much more important, which i disagree with.
really when did I ever say that? I have never claimed that Philly is much more important. However you did say this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
and the constitution was based off the Mass Bay Charter.
History Boston has a slight edge.
and this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
Boston is more important Historicly
the start of the American Revolution
Shays Rebbellion was stopped here
(cause of the consitutional convention)
the Indusdustal revolution started there*
First primary school*
First Public school
First University*
First Hospital*
*in America
meanwhile I've said this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillies2011
Listen Boston has a RICH history and is extremely important in the creation of this country. But at best you should hope to match Philadelphia in historical importance. If you try and claim that Boston is more important "historicly" though I'll be glad to continue to thoroughly show you that this is untrue.
My main issue is not even that you keep saying Boston is more important, but that you keep saying things that are false, like:
-The first hospital was in boston
-Shays Rebellion is the reason why the constitution was written
-the first University was in boston
-thomas paine was a virginian
-boston was the cultural center of america
-boston was the primary funder of the revolution
-etc!
these are all things that you have claimed and they are all untrue. You can't just go around making things up. The sheer amount of false information you've provided in this thread is embarrassing and you haven't even acknowledged ANY of these errors, you just keep on producing more. The worst them all was this:
-Philadelphia was just a central place to meet.
Philadelphia was the cultural, economic, and population center of America at the time of the American revolution.
You vastly underestimate the historical importance of Philadelphia. Even so, continue to think Boston was more important historically if you wish, but PLEASE at least make that argument without making things up!
Boston was the forefront of social change for most, if not all of American history
-Starting with the first self rule in america
-the start of the American revolution
-the start of the Industral revolution* -the start (and center) of the Abolitionist movement
-the start of gay rights (gay marrage ect.)
-the begining of universal heathcare*
*in America
i've already displayed how saying the american revolution started in Boston is at best debatable and at worst false. The first battles of the revolution were fought there... that is not the same as the revolution itself starting there. The revolution technically starts with the creation of this country in philadelphia. Without that happening Lexington and concord is simply a battle between the militia of boston and the british army.
You've now added yet ANOTHER falsehood to your lists though. While Boston was undoubtedly more against slavery than most cities it was not the start nor center of the movement. Pennsylvania was the first state to abolish slavery. Philadelphia was the city that had the highest population of free african americans for nearly 100 years from the 1750s - 1840s. It was in philadelphia where african americans were first able to rise to affluence, allowed to attend schools, purchase land, own a business, start organizations (such as the first abolitionist society started by African Americans - The Free African Society) etc.
Boston was against slavery due to ethical religious reasons. Most did not however even consider African Americans to be "human" and they were not allowed to own land, businesses etc in boston until far after they had obtained the same rights in Pennsylvania. Historical populations of African Americans tells you all you need to know about how friendly Boston was to the group. Philadelphia was the center of the abolitionist movement. This isn't even a debate.
honestly the amount of false claims in this thread that you've made is beginning to border on the absurd. Do you actually believe the things you say or do you just pull them out of your ass?
i've already displayed how saying the american revolution started in Boston is at best debatable and at worst false. The first battles of the revolution were fought there... that is not the same as the revolution itself starting there. The revolution technically starts with the creation of this country in philadelphia. Without that happening Lexington and concord is simply a battle between the militia of boston and the british army.
You've now added yet ANOTHER falsehood to your lists though. While Boston was undoubtedly more against slavery than most cities it was not the start nor center of the movement. Pennsylvania was the first state to abolish slavery. Philadelphia was the city that had the highest population of free african americans for nearly 100 years from the 1750s - 1840s. It was in philadelphia where african americans were first able to rise to affluence, allowed to attend schools, purchase land, own a business, start organizations (such as the first abolitionist society started by African Americans - The Free African Society) etc.
Boston was against slavery due to ethical religious reasons. Most did not however even consider African Americans to be "human" and they were not allowed to own land, businesses etc in boston until far after they had obtained the same rights in Pennsylvania. Historical populations of African Americans tells you all you need to know about how friendly Boston was to the group. Philadelphia was the center of the abolitionist movement. This isn't even a debate.
honestly the amount of false claims in this thread that you've made is beginning to border on the absurd. Do you actually believe the things you say or do you just pull them out of your ass?
No, the first state/sovereign body to abolish slavery was Vermont.
You try to submerge the importance of what happened at Lexington and Concord, just to try to shift historical weight to Philly, and then to deny the abolitionist movement in MA.... that's just "homerism" run amok. Period.
You took a thread that was dying peacefully, and injected a little personal invective....more nonsense from the "PBS"...
No, the first state/sovereign body to abolish slavery was Vermont.
You try to submerge the importance of what happened at Lexington and Concord, just to try to shift historical weight to Philly, and then to deny the abolitionist movement in MA.... that's just "homerism" run amok. Period.
You took a thread that was dying peacefully, and injected a little personal invective....more nonsense from the "PBS"...
Pennsylvania was the first state to abolish slavery in 1780. Vermont had already abolished slavery in 1777, one problem though, IT WASN'T YET A STATE! Vermont doesn't become a state until 1791. Thus the claim that Penn. is the first state to abolish slavery is CORRECT!
I do not submerge the importance of Lexington and Concord, they were the first battles of the Revolutionary War! Without the fighting that begins in Mass. there is little chance that Continental Congress in Philadelphia declares independence and war. At same time though if that Independence is not declared in Philadelphia than those battles would not have nearly the significance that they have today. Each depends on the other to truly start the Revolutionary War, thus to say that the war "started" in Boston is disingenuous. I never claimed the war started in Philadelphia, I just said that it didn't start in Boston as btownboss claimed. To say that it starts in either location does not tell the full truth.
Also I do not deny the abolitionist movement in Mass. the puritans had long been against slavery. But you can't deny that while they were against slavery, they also wanted all the African Americans to be sent back to Africa! They did not treat them as equals... and hardly any black people moved there... why? Because they were treated awful. Now the treatment of African Americans in any state back in the 18th, 19th and even the 20th century is not exactly something to be proud of even in the most progressive states, but you cannot deny that Philadelphia was much more important to the abolitionist movement than Boston. Philly actually had black people there fighting for and starting anti-slavery organizations, universities, schools, Businesses, churches, etc. NONE of that was happening in Boston in the 18th or even most of the 19th century.
I know more than anyone that there are loads of Philly homers here, and honestly I'll be the first to admit that I probably think better of Philly than most and see it with rose colored glasses, but this is not an example of homerism. This is historical fact! I continue to be shocked by the lack of historical understanding that is displayed here.
No, the first state/sovereign body to abolish slavery was Vermont.
You try to submerge the importance of what happened at Lexington and Concord, just to try to shift historical weight to Philly, and then to deny the abolitionist movement in MA.... that's just "homerism" run amok. Period.
You took a thread that was dying peacefully, and injected a little personal invective....more nonsense from the "PBS"...
And yet you also display a one-sided tact in calling out boosterism where in fact in most ways it was just as rampant among the BB (Beantown Booster) crew that continued to post false statements
Also just to clarify are you suggesting that Concord and/or Lexington were more important than things that took place in other locations such as Philly or is it the submergence of Phillys importance?
Pennsylvania was the first state to abolish slavery in 1780. Vermont had already abolished slavery in 1777, one problem though, IT WASN'T YET A STATE! Vermont doesn't become a state until 1791. Thus the claim that Penn. is the first state to abolish slavery is CORRECT!
I do not submerge the importance of Lexington and Concord, they were the first battles of the Revolutionary War! Without the fighting that begins in Mass. there is little chance that Continental Congress in Philadelphia declares independence and war. At same time though if that Independence is not declared in Philadelphia than those battles would not have nearly the significance that they have today. Each depends on the other to truly start the Revolutionary War, thus to say that the war "started" in Boston is disingenuous. I never claimed the war started in Philadelphia, I just said that it didn't start in Boston as btownboss claimed. To say that it starts in either location does not tell the full truth.
Also I do not deny the abolitionist movement in Mass. the puritans had long been against slavery. But you can't deny that while they were against slavery, they also wanted all the African Americans to be sent back to Africa! They did not treat them as equals... and hardly any black people moved there... why? Because they were treated awful. Now the treatment of African Americans in any state back in the 18th, 19th and even the 20th century is not exactly something to be proud of even in the most progressive states, but you cannot deny that Philadelphia was much more important to the abolitionist movement than Boston. Philly actually had black people there fighting for and starting anti-slavery organizations, universities, schools, Businesses, churches, etc. NONE of that was happening in Boston in the 18th or even most of the 19th century.
I know more than anyone that there are loads of Philly homers here, and honestly I'll be the first to admit that I probably think better of Philly than most and see it with rose colored glasses, but this is not an example of homerism. This is historical fact! I continue to be shocked by the lack of historical understanding that is displayed here.
Just one little thing, sport--there was no such thing as a state until 1787. Vermont's abolishing of slavery in 1777 as a "sovereign body" stands as the first of any kind in the western world.
When you're in the news as little as VT is, you have to claim those distinctions that are rightfully yours.
Philadelphia is close to New York. Yes. To act as though this has prevented Philly from developing it's own identity though is ABSURD. If Philadelphia becomes a part of NYC's CSA that still wouldn't make Philadelphia a suburb. How about you learn about what these terms mean before you start throwing them out there.
Honestly though if you think Philadelphia doesn't have it's own identity than perhaps you should just excuse yourself from this conversation because your clearly don't have much of a clue about what's going on here.
I'M FROM THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Twice I've written this week, NEW ENGLAND BORN AND BRED.
Just one little thing, sport--there was no such thing as a state until 1787. Vermont's abolishing of slavery in 1777 as a "sovereign body" stands as the first of any kind in the western world.
When you're in the news as little as VT is, you have to claim those distinctions that are rightfully yours.
1787??? I think the date you're actually searching for is 1789, that's when the constitution actually goes into affect. It's signing in 1787 changes nothing and for awhile there was a lot of uncertainty over whether the document would ever govern this country.
Besides if you really want to get down to it, Pennsylvania is a commonwealth, so I guess it STILL isn't a slave free "state".
Those who operate in reality though of course know that even before the constitution, Pennsylvania is one of the 13 original states... you know the ones that the name of this country refers to. Haha i mean if there were no states until 1789, naming this country the United States of America in 1776 was very oddly prescient.
So although legally states did not reach their current form until the adoption of the constitution, Pennsylvania was very much a "state" in 1780 when it abolished slavery and upon doing so it was the first state in the country to do so. Besides even then Vermont doesn't become a state until 1791 so even if you were going by your bizzaro american history, Pennsylvania still beats Vermont in becoming a slave free state.
Vermont is the first sovereign body to outlaw slavery and that is the title that it should hold with pride. I do not wish to strip them of this accomplishment. But I did not say that Pennsylvania was the first "sovereign body" to abolish slavery, I said it was the first state and this statement is correct.
Also I notice you focused solely on this issue in your response and have apparently dropped your claims that Boston was the center of the Abolitionist movement. Perhaps even you realized how ridiculous that claim is now.
Last edited by phillies2011; 10-11-2011 at 07:09 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
