One hears incessantly about the War of 1812 and the time we "beat the Americans". The way it's discussed, you'd be forgiven for presuming the war happened 50 years ago and not over 200.
Reading online, the two most common themes defensive cakers use against Americans are healthcare and the war of 1812.
"Sorry, what's that? I can't hear you over my free healthcare!" is a typical caker comment when responding to any American criticisms. (If only I had a dollar for each time I'd read or heard this comment made!)
The second one goes something like this (and is equally popular): "yeah, well we kicked your ass in the war of 1812 and burned down your White House!"
Because Canada is such a dull, stale place with such little achievement for its age, size and resources - these are the only two items of pride that cakers can come up with when put on the spot.
According to a national poll that was commissioned:
" ...the fact that Canada beat the US in the War of 1812 placed second (25%) in a list of items that defined Canadian identity, behind only free health care (53%) but ahead of beating the US at hockey (6%)."
In 2012 the government declared a three-year commemoration of the war and spent over $28 million on it.
The War of 1812
When Napoleon Bonaparte became emperor and began engaging in the expansive 'Napoleonic Wars', Britain declared war itself in 1793; which led to a series of Navigation Acts meant to cut off American trade with French territories. The Americans responded in kind, leading to conflict with Britain.
During this time America was expanding, forcibly moving some Indigenous populations to new areas and obtaining land they ceded in treaties. Some Aboriginal leaders were suspicious of the Americans and their motivations and wanted a pan-Aboriginal society to combat them (which never occurred, since its advocates later died). After the Americans attacked a large Aboriginal settlement, the natives reached out to Britain for support, which they obtained, leading to American suspicion that the British were meddling in their affairs.
The British began harassing any American shipping on its way to France, leading to the agitation of US congressmen. After five years they declared war on Britain; an act that was without real risk since Britain was already engaged in war with France and couldn't focus on a secondary conflict.
Since the US couldn't attack Britain directly, they had to conduct a sort of proxy-war by attacking its colony in Canada. Due to superior communication and efforts, Britain was able to help foil the first American efforts in the endeavor, which failed.
The Aboriginals who had reached out to Britain then joined the fray and fought against the Americans in a series of battles. During a major defeat to the Americans, supportive leaders of the Aboriginal movement were killed which whittled their continued support down to a minor role.
In 1813 the Americans captured, looted and burned York - the colony's capital. This was followed by a series of conflicts along the border. After an American defeat they withdrew, followed by some failed skirmishes.
"By 1813 American attacks on the Canadas ended. Abandoning their position around Fort George, the Americans decided to torch the town of Newark (now Niagara-on-the-Lake) and did so with the enthusiastic support of pro-American Canadians led by a member of the legislative assembly of Upper Canada, John Willcocks."
"The Americans were withdrawing from the Niagara Peninsula in the second week of December 1813. Their Canadian allies, led by John Willcocks, were exasperated at this turn of events and demanded that Newark pay a price for Upper Canada’s resistance. Willcocks and his volunteer regiment, overseen by the American troops, razed the town by fire."
In retribution, an assault was made on Lewiston, New York (stopped by Aboriginals). These events also later led the British to burn the American capital. The war carried on for nearly another two years between the British and the Americans within US lands.
Identity Politics
"The elites of British North America were distinguished by a number of qualities, one of which was their Toryism. Loyalists from 1783 and their heirs were reinforced by a mythological legacy of 1812-1815 when, it was claimed, brave Canadian militiamen repelled American armies ...
It was also a foil to brandish against those more republican-minded British North Americans who were outspoken in their admiration of American political institutions. To be a republican — rather than a Tory — was to climb into bed with the enemy to the south, not to mention the enemy in France. Toryism and privilege were safe for the time being.
No one was completely fooled by the more exaggerated claims of Tory myth-makers; there was no chance that a British North American militia could hold off an American assault without British support. British North Americans would continue, therefore, to thread their Western Hemispheric identity with one that involved Britain. Certainly the economy would continue to point in that direction as the colonies strove to survive and advance in the depression years after the Napoleonic Wars."
"The War of 1812 became a myth-building moment in the development of an anglo-Canadian identity."
(Further reading/quotes source: Open Textbook)
Caker Revisionism
Cakers began to immediately pat themselves on the back and use the "win" as a myth-building exercise in propaganda. Somehow a myth started that Canadian civilian militia had won the war instead of British troops. (Also forgotten were the American-Aboriginals who had helped the British.)
Over time it became known as the "American invasion" or in other words - the idea that the Americans had invaded Canada in order to annex it, because they wished to do so.
In fact, America was conducting war against British interests via a nearby colony, due to actions Britain had taken against it through the navy.
(There was a small militia of Americans who wanted to annex British land in Canada, but they were never taken seriously and were denounced by Washington; they received no support whatsoever.)
In 1817 a British admiral admitted that if the Americans wanted to take Canada that Britain couldn't stop them.
(Unfortunately for Canada, that never happened.)
Futher reading / quotes source:
White House
As for that business regarding the White House? To hear cakers tell it, you'd think the 'Canadian civilian militia' bravely went marching down to Washington, beating off Americans and then set their White House ablaze.
What in fact happened was that it was burned (along with other buildings) by British officer Robert Ross, who was in charge of the British Army force meant to attack the city.
Historians' opinions
Well, I suppose it all depends on who you talk to. When reading up on the subject, it is frequently said that "historians are divided" or "historians disagree" on who 'won' the war. One thing is not in dispute: territories of British-Canada and the USA did not change in any way, although the border was strengthened.
Many say that it was a neutral outcome for Britain, Canada and the US - and that the Aboriginals were the real losers since they lost their lands, their lives, and the British failed to keep their word (they had promised a portion of land as an "Indian sanctuary" to the Aboriginals).
Blow a caker's mind!
The next time you hear some loud-mouthed caker spouting off on how 'we kicked American ass in 1812!' - remind him that it was the British army who did virtually all the work; that fellow Canadians helped to support the Americans and even raze a Canadian town; that the British burned the White House and that the US didn't want Canada, it was provoked into war.
Watch the idiot's mouth hit the floor!
Sorry Canada, it's time to get over it. If you want to be proud of something ... do something worth being proud over. I don't know that being a colony that was defended by the British is "winning a war".
