Why the War for Independence was Justified Rebellion?
The American Revolution or the War for Independence was a justified rebellion because people should be allowed to freely make their own choices within the boundaries of any governmental institution. The British government at the time had according to Thomas Jefferson become destructive of one’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. How unfairly it was for Great Britain to impose a tax on the American colonies? There was also no representation in parliament. This was unfair to the colonists, and it needed to be abolished. The politics of taxing the colonists would only benefit the British. Armed rebellion would be the only justifiable opposition against the British for the Americans to gain independence. The French also stood in support of the Americans as they help to provide additional military and financial support in America’s fight for freedom from the British.
Why was the Boston Tea Party a Justified Act of Defiance?
The Boston Tea Party was a justified act of defiance in 1773 because it helped to set off the Revolution that would provide freedom for many Americans at that time. This citizen uprising resulted in the several men dressing like Mohawks. They boarded tea ships and dumped cargo overboard into the harbor. The plan was very organized. This non-violent act was executed well against the British rule. Although it left the Boston Harbor in shambles, the British needed to understand that their actions were not in the best interest of the colonists. Those that were responsible for the crime had to remain silent as they could receive severe consequences that would not have helped the Americans voice their concerns. Sadly, the British imposed restrictions on the Americans as a result of the Boston Tea Party with the Intolerable Acts. The Boston Harbor was closed down. This made it difficult for Boston to self-govern. It also made it possible for British soldiers to search homes without a warrant. Even if the colonists were wrong in destroying the tea, a change was needed.
The East India Company was not required to pay taxes to Britains for any tea that was shipped to the American colonies. It was also able to gain control of all of the tea business in America. It simply was not fair that the colonists had to pay a tax to the East India Company without any representation. As a result, there was a significant need for such aggressive political protests. If everyone sided against the Boston Tea Party, then it is possible British could still be in control. It is clear why the colonists revolted due to Britain’s overtaxing.
Why was the Boston Massacre a Massacre?
In early 1770, colonists and the armed British soldiers were still at arms with one another. This made it difficult for the British soldiers that were stationed in Boston and the colonists. A dispute disrupted between one soldier and one of the colonists which caused other violent colonists to challenge a group of British soldiers. The unruly group of colonists refused to obey the orders that were put in place by the soldiers. They even chose to throw objects at the soldiers. The soldiers, however, did not refuse to ignore the attacks brought on them by the colonists. They instead chose to retaliate with a violent force. The soldiers fired into the crowd killing five of the colonists. One of the colonists was Crispus Attucks. Crispus Attucks was one of the first fatalities within the American Revolutionary War. He was of African American decent. Paul Revere referred to this incident as the Bloody Massacre in his historic engraving, which he titled the “Bloody Massacre. The images on the portrait showed how the soldiers fired into a peaceful gathering. Although the opposing side would say that colonists provoked the soldiers by not following their orders. However, the soldiers did not use equal force in their efforts to stop the colonists. They instead chose to use deadly force that would take the lives of innocent individuals. This makes this event a massacre because people were brutally slaughtered.
Why was the Stamp Act too much to Ask?
The British government chose to impose the Stamp Act of 1765 on the American colonists. This act was placed on such items as paper documents within the colonies. During this time, the British felt it was necessary because they were in financial debt. The American colonies served as their only form of revenue. The American colonists disagreed completely because they were convinced that in order for them to be taxed, it had to first go through their representatives. The colonists saw the act as unconstitutional and refused to abide by it. Stamp collectors were harassed by colonists forcing some of them to re-sign. The Stamp Act was put in place to help the British pay their debt after the French and Indian War. But a violent revolution took place instead. The Stamp Act was instead repealed in 1766.
The British Parliament, instead, declared and issued a Declaratory Act to show their authority over the colonies. But regardless, the issues of taxation without representation help to further distance relations with the colonies and the British. The resistance portrayed by the colonists show that what the British expected was too much to ask for. The colonists only accepted such orders from their own representatives. It was clear that the British only put the tax in place to continue to enslave the colonists and deny them their freedoms.
Why was Bacon’s Rebellion a Personal Power Grab?
Almost one hundred years after the American Revolution took place, another rebellion surfaced. Within this rebellion, there was a power struggle between two leaders that were head-strong and difficult to work with. The two leaders’ determination to defeat one another made it difficult to focus on the cause of the rebellion. Governor Sir William Berkeley, who was seventy years old at the time and a well-respected Governor of Virginia, made it difficult for his enemy to side with him on certain issues. Nathaniel Bacon, Jr., who was Berkeley’s cousin through marriage, hated Berkeley. He also had a reputation of being a troublemaker. But he was intelligent. This relationship encouraged Berkeley to not only treat his cousin with respect but also be quite generous to him. But Bacon’s actions created more of a dissent within the Virginia colony. The Virginia colony suffered with several economic issues. The colonists had to find someone to blame which ended up being the local Indians.
In 1675, the Doeg Indians who resided on the plantation of Thomas Mathews started a raid which resulted in several of them being killed. The Doeg Indians were furious with Thomas Mathews after he had not paid them for some of the items that he had received from the Indians. But the situation worsened after the colonists retaliated and ended up attacking the wrong group of tribes. Indian raids continued, but to help put a relief to the attacks, Governor Berkeley planned meetings that resulted in the deaths of tribal chiefs. The meetings were disastrous. The colonists were encouraged to hold off from any further attacks, however Bacon resisted the orders of his cousin. He instead captured a group of Indians and accused them of stealing such items as corn. Berkeley was forced to take action and issue consequences to Bacon for his irrational behavior.
Berkeley attempted to compromise with the Indians, but it led to more Indian wars. Berkeley formed what he called a “Long Assembly” which penalized the Indians that were not in support of improving the situation. The Long Assembly was considered to be corrupt. Regular trading was not the same for Indians. They could not receive any ammunition or arms. Bacon accused Berkeley of favoring traders to whom he was friends with at the time. Bacon decided to side with the Indians and rebel against Berkeley. However, Berkeley continue to give Bacon opportunity after opportunity to make peace and suffer the consequences for trying to take the law into his own hands. It was clear that Bacon’s rebellion was for his own personal gain as he fought hard against Berkeley to become general of forces against the Indians. Berkeley, however, had no other choice but to give in to Bacon. Bacon’s leadership ended up being a failure as he continued to dispute against Berkeley, which forced him to resign. It wasn’t until later when Bacon died suddenly and Berkeley was able to take power again. Throughout this entire endeavor, it was clear that the issue was between Berkeley and Bacon’s quest for power despite America’s fight for Independence.
Why was the Trial of Hutchinson a Heretical Teacher?
The trial of Anne Hutchinson was a heretical teacher as it helped many to understand what heresy was and how it led to her being banished from the Massachusetts Colony. Ironically, she was a religious woman who in future time would have never been charged with atheism or any other such sins of the world. The Christian leaders during the time were strong believers in the teachings of the Covenant. They saw her beliefs as those that did not align with the teachings of the Christian doctrine. Puritan clergy felt the need to protect others from her teachings. In a dominant male society, Anne Hutchinson, had no chance of persuading the colony that she was not trying to destroy the Puritan’s religious community. She became a teacher of heretic as she remained strongly against established beliefs and customs that were in place. In 1637, Anne Hutchinson was put on trial for her beliefs and convicted. She was also excommunicated from the church a year later. The years the followed brought on more conflict for Hutchison and her family, as her husband was killed. Eventually, Hutchinson and her family was killed.
References
Morrison, Julie. (2016). Life, Liberty and The Pursuit Of Happiness At Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/julee-morrison/life-liberty-and-the-purs_11_b_10815052.html
