savvageorge - We've never had the American dream in full, but it's the ideal that true Americans have always supported and fought for in many various battles along the road of our American history.
The British soldiers were nearly entirely cut off, their ships were small (compared to today), they were living closely with the Americans and often in their homes (leading to the 3A), and they shared the same culture for the most part. How did they not find themselves growing empathetic or at least more aligned to the Americans than the King?
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Wow I love how you frame this. Avoiding all and any point that paints the colonists in a negative light. Take the Boston massacre for example. The soldiers were there for the same reason the police are there when there is an international conference or why the police are at airports etc (to keep the peace). But while the colonists were taunting the soldiers they started to throw snowballs at them, but one person decided to throw a stone hitting a soldier and causing him to drop his musket which caused it to discharge. The loud noise of a musket firing combined with the shouts from the croud caused the regulars (who were already scared for their safety) to think that they may have been given the order to fire. Remember there was a lot of people shout at the redcoats to shoot. I also noticed you failed to mention anything from the resulting trial in which the officer responsible for dropping his musket was put on trial (by the British) and found guilty and punished.
The British Empire’s soldiers had been used to defend the colonists before the peace set in so, even if your ancestors did not like them, the colonists did receive some benefit from the British soldiers. Although the British Empire increased taxes on its North American colonies, the British Empire taxed the people living in its North American Colonies less than the people living in England so the tax rise was not unfair for the time, especially as it did fund protection for the colonists. You do have a point about British soldiers murdering colonists but that was an issue with induvial soldiers being put in tense situations where they experienced aggression from some colonists. You admitted that colonists had been breaking the law and that one of the colonists had told the soldiers to shoot them so it is unreasonable to blame the British Empire as a whole for what happened because the induvial soldiers and colonists were at fault; the soldiers were at fault for shooting colonists and the colonists were at fault for breaking laws (requiring the British Empire to send soldiers to police them) and for antagonising the British soldiers. Given that the British Empire had protected the colonists from France, the colonists were being taxed less than people in England, the colonists’ own law breaking led to soldiers being used to police them and the mascaraed that you mentioned started because of colonists antagonising soldiers, the colonists’ declaration of independence was unjustified by the motives that you outlined in this video so there were clearly other motives that you are (deliberately or ignorantly) overlooking.
@@chris0000924 The British Empire taxed people living in North America less than people living in England despite having recently spent a lot of money defending the people in North America from the French. The British Empire’s North American Colonies could have been treated better by the British Empire but they received more benefit overall so having to pay some tax to fund the empire that supported them was fair, especially as they were taxed less than the people in England who received less benefit from the British Empire.
@@realestateunplugged6129 If you are asking if I support the Republican (US) pollical party or the Democrat (US) pollical party then the answer is no; I do not support ant US pollical party and think that they are even worse than the parties we have in the UK. The only pollical party that I actually support is the Brexit Party but I expect them to go the way of UKIP at the next election. The Conservative and Unionist Party (aka the Tories, or the Conservatives) has a history of underfunding public services and making budget cuts in very inefficient ways such that a lot of money is still wasted while the level and quality of public service is reduced. As such I would rather not vote for them. The Labour party is full of champaign socialists (i.e. people who say that they represent the poor and understand normal people but have not done a single hard days work in their life nor do they ever speak to people who are not rich or asking them a question for TV), has had issues with anti-Semitism and has been fighting Brexit despite most people (including the majority of their base) supporting Brexit. The Liberal Democrats (aka the LibDems) were an anti-Brexit party (despite the democratic mandate for Brexit) and have proven themselves to be very untrustworthy (even compared to other politicians). I agree with the core polices of the Green Party but not their stance on Brexit (although that should not be as bigger issue in the future).
The idea of fair taxation of the colonies depends on if you agree with the idea of virtual representation in Parliament. No matter what protections Britain may have been offering, to continue to tax the colonies, without having a minister or ministers to represent their interests, was believed to be unjust at best and tyrannical at worst by the colonists.
Using soldiers to enforce treaties signed by one's government, especially in the face of blatant violations of those treaties, is a valid use case. Governments, the countries those governments run, and the citizens of those governments, are subject to the rule of law, including international law, of which a treaty would be an example. The Americans at the time were violating the rights of the native peoples who trusted the British government to uphold their end of the treaty. A country that can't adhere to an agreement will find it hard to maintain relationships with other nations. Everything else mentioned in the video in reference to the British government's, and by extension the British army's, treatment of colonists was gross and inappropriate and completely warranted the response it received.
French guns , french training, french , Dutch, soldiers . Against Britain at a time when Britain was at war with france and the mysore empire in India, among others. But yanks never mention that.....
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
Reminds me of what is happening now in America with the ill will towards the government and police.
savvageorge - We've never had the American dream in full, but it's the ideal that true Americans have always supported and fought for in many various battles along the road of our American history.
The British soldiers were nearly entirely cut off, their ships were small (compared to today), they were living closely with the Americans and often in their homes (leading to the 3A), and they shared the same culture for the most part. How did they not find themselves growing empathetic or at least more aligned to the Americans than the King?
They were British colonists not American.
Because they were subjugated.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Welcome to the revolution, comrade.
Wow I love how you frame this. Avoiding all and any point that paints the colonists in a negative light. Take the Boston massacre for example. The soldiers were there for the same reason the police are there when there is an international conference or why the police are at airports etc (to keep the peace). But while the colonists were taunting the soldiers they started to throw snowballs at them, but one person decided to throw a stone hitting a soldier and causing him to drop his musket which caused it to discharge. The loud noise of a musket firing combined with the shouts from the croud caused the regulars (who were already scared for their safety) to think that they may have been given the order to fire. Remember there was a lot of people shout at the redcoats to shoot. I also noticed you failed to mention anything from the resulting trial in which the officer responsible for dropping his musket was put on trial (by the British) and found guilty and punished.
Jeez, they all had such skinny legs!
The British Empire’s soldiers had been used to defend the colonists before the peace set in so, even if your ancestors did not like them, the colonists did receive some benefit from the British soldiers.
Although the British Empire increased taxes on its North American colonies, the British Empire taxed the people living in its North American Colonies less than the people living in England so the tax rise was not unfair for the time, especially as it did fund protection for the colonists.
You do have a point about British soldiers murdering colonists but that was an issue with induvial soldiers being put in tense situations where they experienced aggression from some colonists.
You admitted that colonists had been breaking the law and that one of the colonists had told the soldiers to shoot them so it is unreasonable to blame the British Empire as a whole for what happened because the induvial soldiers and colonists were at fault; the soldiers were at fault for shooting colonists and the colonists were at fault for breaking laws (requiring the British Empire to send soldiers to police them) and for antagonising the British soldiers.
Given that the British Empire had protected the colonists from France, the colonists were being taxed less than people in England, the colonists’ own law breaking led to soldiers being used to police them and the mascaraed that you mentioned started because of colonists antagonising soldiers, the colonists’ declaration of independence was unjustified by the motives that you outlined in this video so there were clearly other motives that you are (deliberately or ignorantly) overlooking.
Tax was more than unfair the tea tax exempted the British east company so it had a monopoly
@@chris0000924 The British Empire taxed people living in North America less than people living in England despite having recently spent a lot of money defending the people in North America from the French.
The British Empire’s North American Colonies could have been treated better by the British Empire but they received more benefit overall so having to pay some tax to fund the empire that supported them was fair, especially as they were taxed less than the people in England who received less benefit from the British Empire.
Lol. You're a modern day redcoat my friend. If I may ask, are you a republican/democrat?
@@realestateunplugged6129 If you are asking if I support the Republican (US) pollical party or the Democrat (US) pollical party then the answer is no; I do not support ant US pollical party and think that they are even worse than the parties we have in the UK.
The only pollical party that I actually support is the Brexit Party but I expect them to go the way of UKIP at the next election.
The Conservative and Unionist Party (aka the Tories, or the Conservatives) has a history of underfunding public services and making budget cuts in very inefficient ways such that a lot of money is still wasted while the level and quality of public service is reduced. As such I would rather not vote for them.
The Labour party is full of champaign socialists (i.e. people who say that they represent the poor and understand normal people but have not done a single hard days work in their life nor do they ever speak to people who are not rich or asking them a question for TV), has had issues with anti-Semitism and has been fighting Brexit despite most people (including the majority of their base) supporting Brexit.
The Liberal Democrats (aka the LibDems) were an anti-Brexit party (despite the democratic mandate for Brexit) and have proven themselves to be very untrustworthy (even compared to other politicians).
I agree with the core polices of the Green Party but not their stance on Brexit (although that should not be as bigger issue in the future).
The idea of fair taxation of the colonies depends on if you agree with the idea of virtual representation in Parliament. No matter what protections Britain may have been offering, to continue to tax the colonies, without having a minister or ministers to represent their interests, was believed to be unjust at best and tyrannical at worst by the colonists.
Using soldiers to enforce treaties signed by one's government, especially in the face of blatant violations of those treaties, is a valid use case. Governments, the countries those governments run, and the citizens of those governments, are subject to the rule of law, including international law, of which a treaty would be an example. The Americans at the time were violating the rights of the native peoples who trusted the British government to uphold their end of the treaty. A country that can't adhere to an agreement will find it hard to maintain relationships with other nations.
Everything else mentioned in the video in reference to the British government's, and by extension the British army's, treatment of colonists was gross and inappropriate and completely warranted the response it received.
French guns , french training, french , Dutch, soldiers .
Against Britain at a time when Britain was at war with france and the mysore empire in India, among others.
But yanks never mention that.....
Seems familiar almost like it's happening again now lol #billitary #jimminycrypto
This is really good