Hegel said:
Americans in justifying the Revolution usually bring up a wide range of "injuries" done by the British as just cause. But was it justified? They claim that the British soldiers were quartering in American homes. This can be countered by the fact that they were just finished fighting a WAR with the French and Indians to the west, and the border situation was quite hostile at that time. They also claim that the British were overtaxing the colonists. Again, acording to the British, the tax increase was to pay for protection from the French and Indians. One of the final major reasons that the Americans claim that the revolution was justified is that the British refused them representation in Parliement. While this was quite reprehensible, lets think about why the colonists came to the U.S. anyway. For religious reasons, (i.e. breaking the LAW of England against non-Anglicans, not exactly law-maker materials.) for judicial reasons (e.g. being sent as an indentured servant from the debtor prisons) or being poor or the youngest son of a noble. These were all reasons not to let them into Parliement which was reserved for the Lords in the House of Lords, and for the burger class of the towns in the House of Commons. Almost none of the people that came to the U.S. were inheriting nobles or powerful enough to be in the House of Commons, after all if they had been they would have stayed in England.
So do you have any other info that would be relevent to the debate? And do you think the American Revolution was justified?
I've actually done some work on this issue myself.
The conclusion that I have come to is yes and no.
Technically by the laws of the day, no, they were not justified. But, by the fact that they didn't like the laws of the day, sure, I guess that any revolution can be justified in that manner.
Here are all the claims:
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and
necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate
and pressing importance, unless suspended in their
operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so
suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of
large districts of people, unless those people would
relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature,
a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places
unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of
their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing
them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for
opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of
the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to
cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers,
incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at
large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean
time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without,
and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these
States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for
Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to
encourage their migrations hither, and raising the
conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by
refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary
powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the
tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of
their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither
swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their
substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies
without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and
superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction
foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our
laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended
Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for
any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of
these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by
Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended
offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a
neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary
government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it
at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the
same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable
Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our
Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring
themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all
cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of
his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our
towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign
Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and
tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty &
perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and
totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the
high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the
executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall
themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has
endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers,
the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare,
is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and
conditions.
Here is what I figured out. Yes, most of these claims are true, there were a few that I was not able to establish as true, but that does not mean that they were not true. However, as you point out some of them were justified, and many have two sides to the story. The ones that are the most suspect are the ones towards the end.
Here is what is true though:
The British Crown was losing money in their fights all around the world and it was very costly for them to maintain a force in the American colonies to defend them from the French and Indians. The main people being attacked were the people on the western frontier.
Because of this they imposed a tax, but that tax mainly affected the wealthy on the east coast. They didn't like this because they felt that they were paying for the protection of the frontiersmen, which they didn't want to do.
In the House of Commons they really could not understand the opposition to taxation because from their point of view the Crown had spent huge sums of money and resources helping to establish the colonies, and here, after all that and the continued cost of running the colonies these people didn't want to pay anything to help with the cost.
There are other issues too though.
#1 The British outlawed slavery in Europe in 1772.
There was significant dialog between the British and the colonists on this matter and the British were making it clear that they planned to outlaw slavery in the colonies as well. The Americans who wanted the revolution greatly opposed this. They claimed that it was an infringement on their freedom to not allow them to enslave people.
At the time of the revolution there was slavery in all 13 colonies, and in fact one of the highest concentrations of slaves was in New York.
With the onset of the Revolutionary War the British declared that they would free all blacks that rose up against their masters and fought for the Crown.
George Washington refused to allow blacks to fight in his army and pushed to keep the blacks under tight control.
Eventually, as the war was being lost, the colonies agreed to allow blacks to fight in their army as well and offered them freedom if they fought for their side. This, along with reinforcements from the French helped to turn the tide of the war. Unfortunately for the blacks things got even worse for them after the war was over.
#2 At the time of the war it was deemed the Tobacco Wars. The British had sever restrictions on Tobacco because the king felt it was unhealthy. He opposed Tobacco, and but the Americans were smuggling it into Britain against the law. In fact this was the single largest source of income for the Americans. Many of the American tobacco farmers had massive debts to the British which they refused to pay, even though they were making money.
The King was continuing to crack down on the tobacco smugglers and to take action against the colonists who were not paying their debts.
#3 Only about 1/3 of the colonists supported the revolution. over 60% of the colonists didn't support it. The people who did support it were largely wealthy slave owners. It was revolution instigated by the wealthy in opposition to taxation and the request for repayment of debt and opposition to slavery that the British were mounting.
So it was really a revolution to save wealth that had been acquired by illegal and unethical means, but which they did not want to have taken away.
This is what makes it different from most other revolutions, which are usually of the poor.
...please send us one :torrentofbile: smiley.
