5 ms·

That's a poor question. The Revolutionaries were really just opportunists. They could have received the representation they wanted in parliament, however they

by dkuntz2 13y ago

That's a poor question. The Revolutionaries were really just opportunists. They could have received the representation they wanted in parliament, however they saw the chance to start their own government, a new one, built by them, however they wanted. I'm not saying it was a bad thing that they decided to focus their efforts on starting a new government instead of working with their current one, but they didn't have to. The Declaration of Independence was written to discredit parliament and the king (who, at this time, didn't have power anymore, it was already with the House of Commons), and to drum up support with other powers who didn't really like England (specifically France). They could have worked out a deal with the House of Commons giving them a representative spot, but their declaration explicitly decided against it. Take a history class. You might get some context to the events you cite.

bjhoops1 13y ago
But what could we base 21st century policy on, if not the divinely inspired actions of 18th century European colonists?
- dkuntz2 13y ago
  19th century proletariats?
chris_mahan 13y ago
Royalist! Traitor! You defy the very premise of the United States of America's existence: The God-given right to live free from the oppression of a Draconian Regime! (I kid, I kid, I like to hear people's opinions) But it's got to strike you as interesting that I have taken many history classes, along with reading many historical books, and still evidently lack the profound knowledge of the 1770s that you have. I wonder whether my classes and books were somehow deficient, perhaps as they were written and taught by the victors, the same sort of people who benefited from these Colonial Opportunists, and may thus be unwilling to besmirch their hallowed reputations...
- dkuntz2 13y ago
  It's partially that I spend a great deal of time with history buffs, and partially that I took a Modern British History class (1485 onwards, starting with Henry VII). I also had the same teachers, teaching from the American view, but my college (Carthage College) has a Western Heritage requirement, where second semester freshmen year some of our readings were Locke, Marx and Engles, and two drafts and the final version of the Declaration of Independence. Plus, political systems intrigue me.

by dkuntz2 13y ago

bjhoops1 13y ago

But what could we base 21st century policy on, if not the divinely inspired actions of 18th century European colonists?

dkuntz2 13y ago
19th century proletariats?

chris_mahan 13y ago

Royalist! Traitor! You defy the very premise of the United States of America's existence: The God-given right to live free from the oppression of a Draconian Regime! (I kid, I kid, I like to hear people's opinions) But it's got to strike you as interesting that I have taken many history classes, along with reading many historical books, and still evidently lack the profound knowledge of the 1770s that you have. I wonder whether my classes and books were somehow deficient, perhaps as they were written and taught by the victors, the same sort of people who benefited from these Colonial Opportunists, and may thus be unwilling to besmirch their hallowed reputations...

dkuntz2 13y ago
It's partially that I spend a great deal of time with history buffs, and partially that I took a Modern British History class (1485 onwards, starting with Henry VII). I also had the same teachers, teaching from the American view, but my college (Carthage College) has a Western Heritage requirement, where second semester freshmen year some of our readings were Locke, Marx and Engles, and two drafts and the final version of the Declaration of Independence. Plus, political systems intrigue me.