The War of 1812: Opinions

It's a little out of the norm for me to give opinions as I regularly deliver only purely factual information (historical stuff doesn't give me all that many opinions anyways). However, 1812 brings up a number of questions that I would like to answer. So, if you're in for moderately informed opinions from someone on the internet, you're in for a treat.

So, who actually won the war?

"They have killed our drummer! All is lost! Sound the
retreat!"

I think this one is fairly simple; the British/Canadians won. I know it sounds very kindergarten-y to say "yeah, well, they started it" but the core of it is true here. The Americans did start the war. They engaged with the intention of expelling the British from North America, taking the land as their own, and ending impressment. They went 0/3 on those goals. Canada, at the onset of the war, was hoping simply to keep their stuff. Yes, those goals may have changed throughout the campaign when the British started to push back, but I feel that's mostly irrelevant; the goals of the war were completed for the British and not at all for the Americans. Had the British only done well enough to just barely stymie the American assault, it would have never been a question. However, with their success in pushing into American territory, those goals changed and suddenly it wasn't as clear cut. But, we have to remember how it started out - the British defended their territory, completing what they sought to do in the war.

The Americans didn't lose too much either, but more so maintained a status quo. Impressment started to pass by the wayside, but that was due to circumstances oversees rather than anything they did personally. They may have defended valiantly at the end but their purpose in entering the war was to take territory, not prevent losses.

The only one who really lost in this case were the native tribes in the area surrounding the fighting (Ohio and so forth). The native state was not established, they lost what they held previously, and many were sent to reserves or continued being kicked off the land they previously held.

Why do Americans think they won it?
Americans believe they won the war because of a number of decisive battles close to the end that all went the way of the stars and stripes. However, these battles were used as leverage when peace talks were already occurring. The British hoped to continue pushing into American territory to have a greater say in how the treaty went, planning to score a few extra points by saying "hey, we can still blow up your crap if we want to". Losing in New Orleans (and losing in a rout, at that), a defeat in a major naval battle, and failing to take Baltimore culminated in a strong end for the Americans - but the final score still weighed in favour of the British North Americans.

Can we say Canada won?
This is a tricky one.

The argument for no:

One could easily say it was all the Brits. The generals, military leaders, and backbone of the army (the British regulars, the highly trained military) were all British. It was, without question, British territory. Canada wasn't even a country at that point, and wouldn't be for another half century - and even then, it would still be under British command for some time. Even now we love hearing about the Royal Family for reasons beyond my understanding (I'm a touch confused why the British care either). Everything about it screams Britain since the spoils of war went to them, the command came from across the ocean, the best soldiers were British born, and ultimately it was America vs. Britain. If it's Britain, it's not officially Canadian, no matter how linked it may be.

Brock, thinking the battle a lock, found shock in the shot
from the glock that pierced his smock. He took his knock
on his walk to squawk at the War Hawk, alongside the Mohawk,
wielders of the tomahawk.  

The argument for yes:

No, Canada wasn't a country - but it's called Upper and Lower Canada. It's the same territory and while many of the British regulars would have gone on home, many of those that fought were those settling into that territory. Their children (well, grandchildren mostly) would be those that would grow up there and later become, unequivocally, Canadian.  And while the British regulars and generals may have been leading the fights, a massive number of soldiers were militiamen of Canada - meaning those that had settled into the lands around there and signed up to defend. These were Canadian militiamen who were British subjects.

In my mind, this absolutely was Canada, just the same as it was Britain. It was a shared victory through and through. Through the occupation of towns by the States (and, in truth, harbouring an anti-Americanism that still shines through at times today) we began to develop our own cultural identity. 1812 was one of the first steps to move from being British living overseas to true Canadians, and because of that, we can find a part in it. It was those fighting on behalf of Upper and Lower Canada who won the war, and many of whom were the basis for the country as it stands. Without them the face of Canada would be littered with American flags instead of the maple leaf.

Were the British the "good guys"?

"Oh man oh man oh man we've got to get that piece back
before the President noticed or we are so dead."

This isn't Star Wars. There's no Dark Side, pure good or evil, or Jar Jar Binks (there's only Manley Power). Everything here is rather muddled. Both sides, in a sense, are underdogs. America is the young upstart, but with the British across the ocean, they outnumbered them - making them the heavyweight in this fight if not the world. America may have declared war, but it was the British who goaded them into it with impressment and disrupting their trade. Neither side really wanted to enter the war, but felt they had to. So, all in all, the answer is clear.

Maybe?

Lasting Legacy:
With a lack of territory change, would things really have been that different if the War of 1812 didn't happen? Well, that's all conjecture. But... It showed that Canada wasn't a pushover. We may have been fewer in number, but that doesn't mean we would allow outsiders to come into our territory and set up camp. Through shirking American influence we chose to be uniquely ourselves, rather than another State, or America's hat. (Yes, still a British colony, but sort of unique.) In fact, both sides seemed to find some new identity through it - the Americans describe it as their Second War of Independance (finding independence through attacking another, but still) and it pushed us one step closer to Confederation years down the line.