Nevv VVorld Covvboys

Spanish Legacy

For their role in Columbia’s development I think the new-world is in debt to Spain. Spain proved to be one of the more lasting influences upon it. Actually, if I had to pick one culprit throughout the world’s colonial history it would probably have-to be the Dutch regimes. They almost seem to have made everyone-else look even worse. All over the world Dutch colonial traditions have led to political disasters. And the Dutch didn’t even have much of a presence in the new-world (in spite of New York’s Dutch roots). But, some of their rivalries made their way here via France, Britain and Spain. Warring between those three for supremacy on the continent resulted in most of Columbia’s historical-conflict.
Spain was in some ways Columbia’s steward. At the time of Spanish conquest, European policy was ruthless toward other cultures. All of Europe’s major powers scrambled to occupy distant lands in the name of discovery. Spain stormed onto the continents of the new-world and seized power over most of Columbia. Their immediate impact was brutal. But they may have proven to be less abusive in the long-term than Columbia’s other two foreign-occupants (the Russians and Dutch having never really been ‘occupants’), France and Britain. The missions that colonial Spain left in the new-world still provide a sense of community to their surrounding areas. And the missions are important for reminding us of Columbia’s history before our arrival.
Spain is ultimately responsible for its role in occupying the new-world. Any of the other colonial empires were just as capable of that kind of exploitation if they had gotten to Columbia first instead. In some ways, Spain just had the misfortune of beaten them to it. After the Spanish empire settled-in they treated Columbia like a new home (which is what distinguishes Spain’s impact from France or Britain’s). And I think Spain remains burdened with Columbia until it is free from foreign interests.



British Influence

We subscribe to a predominantly ‘anglo’ culture in the states. It’s no wonder there is a significant British presence on the continent. From the nation’s founders to the commonwealth to the north, Britain has contributed to our way of life. ‘British’ makes a better culture than it does rule. I think our patriots felt the same way. The British are a fairly academic race. Some of (probably both) the motives behind the Revolutionary War are based on British principles. There was some distinctively non-British dissent, too. Everyone knows the story, British taxation was too high and we declared sovereignty (in a not altogether un-British way). Britain decided not to give-up it’s colonies without a fight and colonial Labrador went to war. When it was over the United States had been forged.
We tried (like many immigrants do) to adopt a new identity. And frontier-Labrador demanded we do, to some extent. We traded some culture with native tribes and some with French hunters. Spain was too far away from colonial Labrador to influence our customs much from Mexico. Later waves of immigrants brought customs of their own but British customs remained the standard even as they merged with the rest. Even after the war, Britain remained an influence on our customs with the Hudson’s Bay Company and their trades with locals. The company’s success at Fort Vancouver encouraged settlement of the Northwest. British culture had spanned a new continent.
Britain isn’t quite what I’d call ‘opportunistic’ but it has remained a close enough ally to come to our aid when it benefits Britain. I guess its presence can still be felt in its North American commonwealth. But, I think it has been a while since Britain really involved itself in continental policy. It’s Britain’s distance that makes it an absentee landlord. Its interest in Columbia has always been limited to Columbia’s resources and not Columbia’s development. That is a trademark of an island nation. Island nations and their empires (like Britain and Japan) are usually resource-poor. And an undeveloped continent like North America makes a good target for their ambitions. Our patriots decided to reject its rule but British customs are friendlier to Columbia’s residents. It has a minimal effect on the landscape but in subtle ways still influences how Columbia looks.



Exploration

After the revolution, our nation only had a share of the continent. There was still plenty of unexplored territory though. Baja wasn’t undiscovered. The Spanish already had settlements on the Pacific at southern Baja. The British had overland routes to the pacific but hadn’t exploited the Northwest’s harbors south of British Columbia. It was not until Astoria was established that British ships really docked off of Oregon’s shores. Jefferson knew he had an exposed-flank between Mexico and British Columbia. There was also a growing trade-market on the Pacific. Settling the territory would serve a defensive and economic purpose. Lewis and Clark were chosen to lead the ‘corps of Discovery’ overland to Oregon and survey the frontier.
The corps of Discovery was joined by native-guides and skirted the badlands to the head-waters of the Columbia river. The northwest’s native tribes were both peaceful and industrious. The corps of Discovery made the easy trip down-river without much trouble. The expedition wintered in Clatsop county and returned with their observations. The president decided it was time to expand and opened the west to settlers. The resources of the West led to most of its development. SFO and LAX’s growth justified railroads and upon their completion Jefferson’s vision was realized. The world’s two great oceans were now linked.
The founders of the United States are tough competition. But sometimes they distinguish themselves. Jefferson’s pursuit of a transcontinental nation distinguishes him from even Franklin, sometimes. The nation has been able to serve as an intermediary between the continents of the Pacific and Atlantic because of it. It demonstrates the West Coast’s importance as a maritime-hub, in-spite of its rocky coastlines. And accounts for the fondness held for it by locals.



‘Where have all da Cowboys Gone?’

Baja has always been ‘romanticized’. It seems to be untamable. Its residents are expected to live by the West’s rules. It even turns its visitors into ‘cowboys’. So what does the future hold for its cowboys? Its deep-water ports will need them for trade across the Pacific. And with significant trade its railroads could again serve the continents interiors. Vacation-destinations might still lie south of LAX and north of the Cascades, between there Baja is almost more likely to put any vacationers to work. But on the weekends the mountains and coast are open-for-business. I guess even cowboys ‘work for the weekend’.
That might be Baja’s real legacy. In return for its scenic wilderness, Baja expects its cowboys to keep-it up. The West is likely to drive away urbanites like a cowboy that don’t-belong in the city. Those who are upto it have got some work ahead of them. A lot of that work resides in environmental-legislation and that policy’s implementation. That might mean jobs for mechanics if emissions becomes a priority in legislation. And of course, the agriculture that drives the West’s economy.
I’m a ‘romantic’. I like to think that the West ain’t been broken for a reason. All of Columbia has a way of being wild. But the West alone could give the rest of Columbia a good bar-fight. I guess that’s become a cliché, but I’ve got a weakness for good bar-fights.