I was speaking of the spreading of Democracy in America ie universal suffrage. I think some of what you say has merit, certainly you're free to choose who you like best, I still disagree with your assessment on the influence the American Revolution had - even with their differences the principles are the same, and this is certainly something that was on French and English minds at the time; what example did this set? Far as I know it the various states had various ideas about government and the federal government wasn't very significant until the Jackson and the Civil War, your idea that it ought to have been more democratic for it to be more free is still not correct. When America Revolted it kicked an arrogant and imbecilic occupying force out and establish sensible government which was way ahead of its time. Andrew Jackson wasn't long in coming and he spread to vote to the rest of White males, but as I said, it isn't clear that was a good thing, its not too much of a stretch to suggest that it was Jackson's presidency that gave rise to the Civil War.
Well, to be clear, virtually no one followed
the American example in terms of political organization. Although many countries have aspired (often successfully) to become as wealthy as America.
Some articles for comparison:
* Throughout the 19th Century, liberals, democrats and nationalists inspired themselves from France and its Revolution
, hence why so many new countries picked tricolors for their new flags, in self-conscious imitation (Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, German liberals, many others).
* In the 20th Century, many, many countries have first-past-the-post Parliamentary regimes and Common Law inspired from Great Britain
, a legacy of their membership of the British Empire and the continued appeal of its organization among postcolonial elites. Good examples of this are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, Jamaica, South Africa and many others.
* As you may or may not have noticed, very few democratic countries have presidential
systems, although a few Latin American countries did inspire their constitutions from the American example. Virtually no new countries and regimes have used the nightmarish mess of shared jurisdictions and political sclerosis that stems from the American bicameral-presidential-state legislature-judicial regime. I say this in particular for some of the more absurd institutions of arbitrary representation, notably the electoral college and, above all, the Senate.
* If one wants to be pedantic, one can even make the case that the Soviet Union's example in its heyday inspired more self-conscious imitation than the American one. Here one can cite the numerous "Communist" regimes established especially in the Third World, notable for their red flags and Marxist-Leninist trappings.
Your assessment of British colonial rule in North America is rather childish. As to being "advanced," it was on some legal rights, but on the whole the average person in North America was not much more "free" than that in England, except insofar as the abundance of land itself (a geographic fact, not a making of the Constitution) was a liberation.
A stubborn porcupine: heredity & nationhood. Meditate, brother!
« Artists are the antennae of the race. »