- Dec 13, 2015
- 5,228
- 4,189
- 37
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
1. The American Revolution was not about the tea tax.
2. Why shouldn't the people who felt oppressed in the 1770s just sit tight in the knowledge (?) that in 150 years-after all of them were long since dead-things would be better? LOL
I shouldn't have said that because it never had anything to do with the subject at hand. I'll probably delete it. But I can address it. Isn't that why the colonists wanted their freedom from King George III? So that they could be free from his apparently ridiculous tax on tea? That's why the Boston tea party started. I mean granted it wasn't JUST a tax on tea he apparently raised many taxes but the tax on tea is what drove the colonists to war. At least, that's what I was taught in school when we were talking about the American revolution. They also mentioned that some colonists wanted to stay loyal to the king because God pretty much commanded it (they didn't mention that part but that was probably why) and they were called Tories while the colonists that wanted freedom were called Patriots. I said that if they waited 150 years they would have gotten their freedom from the royal monarchy because most countries over the years that are ruled by the monarchy have mostly gotten their freedom from the monarchy.
Yes, England still technically "owns" them. But the royal monarchy doesn't really make all the laws and ordinances and governs the countries they own. They have prime ministers for that. Only in England did the monarchy have all of the power. And even in England the royal monarchy has lost some of it's power because the prime ministers make the laws now while Queen Elizabeth II gives the final approval. No longer does the King/Queen say "Kill this person." and is obeyed. They don't have the same power that they used to. It's a good thing in today's day in age when humanity has changed and see's that kind of power as wrong. But people who lived back then never questioned it. They obeyed the royal family without question because God told them to.
Why should they have waited? I don't know. They had no way of knowing that the Royal Monarchy would lose it's power that's one argument that's probably right. But still at the time and pretty much from the beginning of time people were supposed to be loyal to their king and to authority. So I see it as kind of wrong that they wanted to secede from the English king who really wasn't much of a tyrant in the first place. True, he was not well liked by even the English people and some of them tried to assassinate him because they wanted Catholicsm to be a main religion of the church again but the majority of England still remained loyal to their king so what would make a colonist any different? Virtually every country that Britain "Owns" has remained loyal to the British monarchy so what made the colonists any different? What made them special that they were able to go against what God and what their King wanted like that?
I could be uneducated and wrong though in any of these things. I'm open to being wrong. Especially by people more educated than I am. But to me, it just doesn't seem right.
*edit*
Oh yeah and another thing that confuses me about the Patriots. After the war was over and they got their independence from England they wanted to make George Washington their king! It's like... you just cost thousands of lives on both sides trying to break free from kings and queens yet you want to make Washington your king and start all over again? If Washington never saw the problem with this America would be another country with a royal family. Like... it boggles my mind that people who wanted to break free from a Monarchy and Authority would want to later make somebody else their king.
Last edited:
Upvote
0