65 thoughts on “Blog #106 – How Revolutionary was the Revolution?”

1. Dorian C December 9, 2017 at 11:23 am

   I truly believe the American Revolution was a radical Revolution for many reasons. One reason is taxation without representation. The colonists had no say in whether or not they would get taxes to pay off the debt of the Seven Years War. I believe that if they had had a say in this tax, then they may have not revolted the way they did. In addition, we see the many people that organized the Revolution create many documents, such as Common Sense by the original T Paine. In this document, we see the reasons for which he wanted independence from Great Britain. Also, in another extremely important document, the Declaration of Independence, we see all the grievances the colonists held from the king. An example of one of these is how the King continuously vetoed laws they had tried to put in place. With this list of grievances, we see that the colonists had many different reasons why they wanted their independence. On top of that, the Continental Congress attempted to make peace with the king with the Olive Branch Petition which basically said, “Your majesty, let’s let bygones be bygones”. With this petition, we see the colonists made a last attempt to try and resolve all the issues they encountered with the king and/or Great Britain. As we know, the King rejected this and declared the colonies to be rebelling. Also, the fact that a revolution so important is not something you can decide after one incident. The British were continuously angering the colonists. Again, the acts imposed on them kept crashing down on them and it seemed the British were purposely imposing these to anger the colonists. The colonists were struggling to earn their liberty which is a strong force that managed to bring all of these people together against one of the strongest countries of that era. If less people thought they were being treated fairly, then there would not have been this radical revolution. The British were mistreating their own people and even white males felt they were being treated as slaves. Thus, we can conclude that the American Revolution should have been expected by Great Britain, and it was justified.
2. Nia Kepes December 9, 2017 at 1:19 pm

   Nia Kepes
   The American Revolution was special to the US in that it could have been considered both a conservatively motivated and a radically motivated movement. The revolution could be classified as a conservative movement because the elite whites in the United States were trying to keep their already established powers/rights that they already have been exercising for years. On the other hand for common people, poor people, slaves, and women it would be considered a truly radical revolution or people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one.
   The elite whites in the US were fighting a conservative fight to keep their right to run themselves democratically. The elite colonists had already been doing this in opposition to the British government or during the time of salutary neglect for a while before the revolution took hold. The common people and poor people were fighting a more radical and internal revolution to change the social structure in order to have more of a say and be able to live more comfortably and in less contrast from the wealthy. The farmers, workers, and craftsmen wanted more economic and general equality. The slaves, on the other hand, were fighting to free America from the British so that they could then fight to free themselves. The role that slaves played in the revolution was conservative on the outside but had radical intentions internally. Finally, the women were fighting a slow but ultimately successful fight to have more rights. For example, Abigail Adams was an important figure in the women’s movement who helped the boycott of British goods which was part of the conservative external fight. After helping the United States gain independence she then set out on her radical internal agenda to get more rights for women. Some examples of those rights include, voting, right to sell land, and more divorce rights.
   In conclusion the American Revolution can be classified as both radical and conservative. The conservative fight being more at the forefront and external, while the radical fight being behind more the scenes and internal.
3. Jake Stollman December 9, 2017 at 5:49 pm

   Jake Stollman
   Due Dec. 11, 2017
   3rd Hour
   Mr. Wickersham
   Blog #106
   Growing up, I thought that Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and Washington were mythic figures, almost godlike. But after the recent unit concerning the revolution, I am deciding rescind that opinion. I would argue that, in the decision of whether the revolution was radical or conservative, the revolution was both. Why can’t it be? Sure, there were a few principally important people, such as the ones listed above, but it was between two (with influences from more) nations, each with multiple millions of people, with differing views of their own. To some, the purpose of the revolution was to dispel the tyrannical british tax levying and to restore the colonies to their glory before the aforementioned taxing; however, to others, it was a chance to create a nation with unprecedented political and social power, a “city upon a hill,” to quote John Winthrop. The differing views of the colonists lead to both answers being true in some regard.
   The main issue is how one views the desire of the revolution and the colonists’ lives before the taxing. Were the colonists searching to retain economic and political rights taken away by the British, a conservative option, or were they seeking to break away from the British altogether and establish a new nation, a more radical stance? I would say both were going on simultaneously, with considerable overlap. There were the rich, white higher-ups, like the founding fathers, who sought to break away from Great Britain and create a new nation which would restore the colonists their economic and political rights; but there were also the less well-to-do colonists who sought a social change for equality. I would argue that the radicalism worked in tandem with the conservatism in a way, such that the colonists were restored their political and economic rights, but to have them expanded upon, as well as the increase in social rights.
   Firstly, the conservative side of the revolution was rooted in the desire to regain rights taken away from us by the British. At least, that’s what it was at first. The colonies had already possessed a colonial legislature. They also experienced an era of british salutary neglect, in which the navigation acts were not enforced and trade with other countries besides Britain was permitted. However, after the Seven Years War, Britain sought to reclaim the its losses and thus attempted to milk the colonial cash-cow. This was much to the colonists’ lament, and (according to the “conflicting views” article) despite being previously taxed at just 1/26th the rate of the British, the colonists were angry. Thus began the revolution’s conservative side.
   However, a radical side to the revolution was evident, too. There were many gripes regarding economic, political, and social issues voiced by those inside the colonies. The general focus of this revolution was the dispelling of white male supremacy. To quote Gary Nash in The Radical Revolution from the Bottom Up, “This radicalism directed itself at destabilizing a society where the white male elite prized stability because it upheld their close grip on political, economic, religious, sexual, and social power.” All sorts of people, like women, protestants, Native Americans, African-Americans, Jews, and the poor (these are not mutually exclusive) all vied for a more equalized society during the revolution. For example, as stated in the blog, frequent attacks on the rich by poor groups such as the Paxton Boys and Regulators illustrate one example of revolutionary actions in this time period.
   In summary, the revolution was a gargantuan change in western society. It brought about massive political, economic, and social changes that were unprecedented. It generated a new nation that would be unlike any other. After a primary period of low taxes and free trade, the British’s tyrannical taxes, and without colonial representation no less, angered the colonists. Thus, a revolution was on the horizon. The rumbling of the coming war shook up the social structure of the colonies, resulting in a radical revolution inside the colonies themselves. The revolution left in its wake a new country, which would go on to become one of the greatest countries the world has ever known. If the revolution was not both radical and conservative in nature, the world would be a much different place, and chief among those differences, would be that the United States would not exist.
4. Dominic Gullo December 9, 2017 at 6:59 pm

   From what I know about the American Revolution, and from what I’ve been reading, it seems that it was mostly conservative. I think the real purpose of the Revolution (at least for most colonists) was to preserve the way of living that most people had before the French and Indian War. Before the British’s massive debt, they mostly ignored the colonies and didn’t enforce the Navigation Acts. Most colonists were taken by surprise when all of a sudden the British started creating taxes and enforcing trade regulations that already existed. I think most of them wanted to keep things the way they were before. I don’t think that Bancroft’s theory about liberty vs. tyranny is very accurate for multiple reasons. For one thing, ideas of liberty came near the end of the Revolution (near the end of the war). For the most part, many colonists viewed themselves as British citizens. Not until near the end of the war did radical ideas start being accepted, and colonists wanted to be separate from England. Although I do think that there were conflicts between social classes, I don’t think that these conflicts were the basis of the Revolution. Conflicts between social classes were most prominent after the war (Shay’s Rebellion). But the Revolution did little to change the economic and social structure. We basically went from a bunch of rich white guys in charge to a bunch of rich white guys in charge. I mostly side with the argument of imperial and consensus school historians who say that the American Revolution was primarily about political ideas. I say that it was mostly conservative because near the end it turned into something more radical. The early Revolution focused on ideas of preserving the colonial way of life (at that point Americans still considered themselves British), but it then shifted its focus to ideas of liberty, independence, and self government. For the majority of the Revolution however, total separation from England seemed like too much of a radical idea. In fact, many saw thought that acts of rebellion would cause chaos, and didn’t support a revolution. Even though the revolution is often looked upon as a radical movement, it did not start out that way.
5. Ugo Uchendu December 10, 2017 at 9:02 am

   I believe that the American Revolution was both a radical revolution and a conservative revolution.The Revolution was conservative in the sense that the colonists wanted to keep all the powers and rights that they had been exercising, though at the same time the Revolution was a bit radical because the colonists wanted to completely let go of the mother country, Britain, and start fresh without the rule of a king. I think that when the British started disrupting the tranquility and order the colonists had going on and changing the way the colonists were living, the colonists began to think about whether they needed or wanted Britain controlling them when they had been taking care of themselves just fine. Another example of why I think the revolution was radical, is the fact that the American colonists were rebelling over events that weren’t that big of a deal. For example, I think the Americans paying 1 shilling of taxes while the British citizens paid 26 shillings of taxes was a very small issue which didn’t need to be escalated. The colonists getting upset by that and sparking a revolution over that, in my eyes, was kind of silly. To support my claim that the Revolution was radical, I pulled the following quote out of The Radical Revolution from the “Bottom Up”. ‘The true radicalism of the American Revolution… was indispensable to the origins, conduct, character, and outcome of the world-shaking event. By “radicalism” I mean advocating wholesale change and sharp transformation rooted in a kind of dream life of a better future imagined by those who felt most dissatisfied with the conditions they experienced…they looked toward a redistribution of political, social, and religious power; the discarding of old institutions and the creation of new ones…’ Basically in that quote Nash is saying that the colonists radicalism was to “put power in the people”, which goes with the point I made previously. As I write this blog I can see that the Revolution was more radical than conservative, though there were still conservative and radical elements to the revolution so I stand by my claim. The Revolution was both radical and conservative.
6. AJ Zako December 10, 2017 at 11:43 am

   In my opinion, the Revolution was both conservatively motivated and radically motivated for many reasons. It could be considered conservative because of how the elite white’s in the America were trying to keep their already established powers and or rights that they already had been operating with for years. On the other hand for common people, people that were poor, slaves, and women it could be considered a truly radical movement or people striking out on their own by trying to overthrow an already existing political or social order and trying to create their own. The white elites in America were fighting a conservative fight trying to keep their right to run themselves democratically. The elite colonists had already been doing this in opposition to the British government or during the same time of salutary neglect for a while before the revolution had taken hold. The common people and poor people were definitely fighting a more radical and internal revolution to try and change the social structure in order to have more of a say and be able to live more in more comfort and in less disagreement from the wealthy. The farmers,workers, and craftsman wanted more economic and more general equality. The Slaves on the other hand, were fighting for freedom for America from Britain. The role that the slaves played in the revolution could be considered conservative on the outside but it internally had radical intentions at the core. Lastly, the women in the revolution were fighting an initially slow but ultimately successful fight for more rights. An example of this that we learned about would be Abigail Adams. She was a very important figure in the women’s movement that helped with the boycott of British goods which was part of the conservative exterior fight as I mentioned before. After helping America gain independence she then set out with with her own radical plan in hopes of achieving more rights for women. Some examples of the rights she achieved for women would be voting rights, rights to sell land, and more divorce rights for women in struggling marriages. So, when all said and done, The American Revolution can be classified as both radical and conservative. The conservative fight being more in the external of the overall fight while the radical side of the fight was at the internal and heart of the fight.
7. Henry Berthel December 10, 2017 at 11:49 am

   It’s possible to make a compelling argument going either way, but I believe that the Revolution was primarily radical. Although I completely agree with the colonists feeling unfairly represented because of the taxes that the British forced them to pay, the way the colonists responded was completely unnecessary, unless they wanted to remove British rule from the colonies. The Stamp Act was one of the huge problems at the time in the eyes of most colonists. However, the tax didn’t actually cost that much. The colonists were upset about this tax because of how unfairly they felt they were being treated, when they really weren’t being super badly taxed. British being taxed twenty-six shillings for every one shilling the colonists were being taxed seemed unfair towards the British side, not unfair towards the colonists side. However, the colonists thought that this one shilling compared to the twenty-six that the British had to pay was still unfair towards them, and they felt badly represented. The tax on paper and other taxes at the time were imposed on the colonists by Britain because they needed money to afford to get out of the debt they were in after the French-Indian war. Before the war, their was a period of salutary neglect. Since the British were helping the colonists defend themselves during the war, they needed to end this period of salutary neglect by getting money from the colonies. The British didn’t completely tax them unfairly, as they had been helping them in the war and then they only asked for a fraction of what they needed. The British used their own blood and money to benefit the colonists, so the colonists should have felt okay with getting taxed slightly by the British in return for what they received. If the revolution had been conservative, then we would have not seen such a backlash towards such a small tax. The tax was not the issue, the issue was that they didn’t want to be controlled like this by Britain any longer. They wanted to stuff their own way, which they would do by creating a new political order. For this reason, the Revolution was radical.
8. sofia di stefano December 10, 2017 at 1:10 pm

   BLOG
   After reading different sources about the Revolution i’ve come to the decision that it was for sure a Radical Revolution. In the sources I’ve read it says often that taxation was without representation which proves that it was radical. The colonists couldn’t say anything regarding whether or not they would get taxes to pay off the debt of the Seven Years War. Their voices were not heard most of the times and this was one. I believe that if they had had a say in this tax then maybe they wouldn’t have acted as they did or they would’ve maybe not rebelled. As well as taxes we see that the people that organized the Revolution wrote and created a number of documents. In some documents we see the reasons for which they wanted independence from Great Britain.In one of the most important documents, the Declaration of Independence, we see all the different things the colonists held from the king, for example of one of these is how the King continuously rejected and did not accept laws they had tried to create and they were rarely passed if the colonists were the ones trying to create them. With this petition we see the colonists made a last attempt to try and resolve all the issues they encountered with the king and/or Great Britain. As we know, the King rejected this and declared the colonies to be rebelling. The British were continuously angering the colonists. The colonists were struggling to earn their liberty which is a main reason why all of these people came together against one of the strongest countries of that time . If less people thought they weren’t being treated fairly and their voices were hear d the revolution wouldn’t have been so radical. The British were treating their people wrong and even people you would expect to be treated normally such as white males were being treated as slaves. In “Bottom up” Nash wants to put power in the people but the For all of these reasons Great Britain should’ve expected a rebellion because the people had reasons and were justified.
9. Jocelyn Warnica December 10, 2017 at 1:24 pm

   The American Revolutionary War was a Conservative Revolution. I believe this because the colonists only wanted to break away from Britain because they changed the rules and how England was governing the colonies. Salutary Neglect left the colonists to form their own colonial governments because the British had left the colonies alone for 150 years. Therefore, when the British rule returned to govern the colonies from their 150 years of neglecting the colonies, and discovered that they had developed as a nation so much. They did not like this at all and tried to change it back to how it was in the past. They did this by enforcing the Administration of Justice Act, which disbanded the Massachusetts Colonial Government. The English put this act in place on Massachusetts because in Boston, MA, the rebellion of British rule was the worst. This was mostly caused by the The Progressive school thought that the revolution was caused by the economic competition between England and the colonies. The school also believed that there was not just one, but two Revolutions. The first revolution being the fight for independence from England and the second fight in America being the internal revolution of social class. These progressive schools also thought that the colonial merchants played an important role in kickstarting the internal social class revolution in the colonies because they were scared that their jobs would be taken by the lower class colony citizens if the lower class were to win the social class revolution. Since the beginning of modern civilizations all over the world, social status has been a prevalent and big issue. In the colonies, while we were fighting Britain for our independence, to the lower class, this was an opportunity to gain social status in the colonies. This being the reason why merchants feared for their jobs. The American colonists just wanted to keep what they had when they were a self-governing set of colonies. They just wanted to keep doing what they had been doing before. Therefore, they took the British practices that they liked, and kept the practices in their new government.
10. Nick Johns December 10, 2017 at 1:26 pm

    I believe that one could claim that the American Revolution was both a conservative and radical revolution. It all depends on what group of individuals that were affected by the Revolution you look at.
    If you focus on the poor, lower class colonists, you could easily state that the American Revolution was a radical revolution. The people considered poor or middle class fought for a revolution so they could escape the unjust rulings of the British Empire. They were fed up with the taxes that their mother country was putting on them, and were mainly the ones that argued that the taxes were unjust because they were not represented in British Parliament, so they did not have a say. These colonists seemed to be the main driving force to the revolution, because they were the ones that were truly pushing for a change in their government. Another group considered to be in this classification of people were African Slaves. They believed that if the Revolution was to free the people from their tyrant, Great Britain, than they would probably be free from their oppressors, the white slave owners. Therefor, slaves in the colonies were probably some of the people included in the radical side of the Revolution. All of the people included in the radical Revolution wanted equality to who they deemed superior to themselves.
    The conservative side of the revolution was carried out be the aristocratic, wealthy white people living in the colonies. They had less goals in the Revolution than the radicals, because they already had a lot of liberties in their lives. These people already had a lot more rights than their radical counterparts, because of how high up they were in their social class. They more just wanted to secede from Great Britain just so they could centralize their government. It would make it a lot easier for the wealthy people in the colonies to have power, and get what they want, if they did not have to answer to their superiors across an entire ocean.
    Therefor, one could safely claim the American Revolution was either conservative, or radical, because in reality, it was both.
11. Sathvik December 10, 2017 at 1:27 pm

    I believe that the American Revolution was mostly radical, but had one part that showed conservatism. The revolution can be classified as radical because the colonists were advocating for some political reform. The colonists were rejecting the British monarchy and it was also an attempt by the colonists trying to create democracies/self-government on a much larger scale, which had never been done in Europe. Another reason for why it is radical is because the colonists are promoting change. There are two documents that prove this of this. The first document is the Declaration of Independence, The Declaration of Independence can be viewed as the colonists need for a change in leadership which falls under the definition of radicalism. Also, in the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers expressed their grievances about the king and about the status quo in general. The second document that proves that the American Revolution was radical, is Thomas Paine’s Common Sense. In common sense, Paine explains why we need to gain Independence from Great Britain. The final reason for why the American Revolution is radical is that our founding fathers and or the leaders of the Revolution were wanting radical change by wanting to remove anything reminding them of English rule and English tradition in America.

    The American Revolution can be viewed as conservative for mainly one reason. The reason is, they were trying to conserve the rights they previously had as colonials. The British had been indulgent to the American colonies until after the French and Indian War, when they tried to regain their expenses by implementing excessive taxes on the colonists, then punishing them when they resisted. So because of that, the American revolution is classified as conservative. This also meets the definition of conservatism because they were holding on to traditional values.

    In conclusion, the American Revolution was mostly radical but had one conservative part. The reasons on why it was radical are, the rejection British authority/monarchy, the documents Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence, and the founding fathers and or leaders of the revolution wanting to remove anything reminding them of English rule and English tradition in America. The conservative part is the colonists trying to preserve the rights they previously had as colonials before the French and Indian War. Overall, it depends on your point of view, whether or not the revolution was radical or conservative.
12. Kate Karaskewicz December 10, 2017 at 1:48 pm

    I believe the revolution was a blend of of conservative and radical. The revolution, as proven by the articles we read, had many sides to it that are often forgot. For the well of white guy, I feel it was more of a conservative revolution. They could most likely pay their taxes, I feel they were mad that those taxes were increasing, even it was just slightly, and they could not see the benefits of those taxes. In Addition, many of those men were either involved in or enjoyed the spoils of lots smuggling that took place before the French and Indian war during the period of salutary neglect and they had a rude awakening when the anti-smuggling laws started being enforced. The rich men liked the way things were, their discontent led to the ideas that inspired and fueled the more radical side of the revolution. The poorer people in the colonies were the main ones fighting and protesting out the squares. The new taxes and laws hit them harder. They wanted to move across the proclamation line the most because they wanted land to boast their status in the world, cause at that point you were next to nothing if you did own land. And who wants a bunch of soldiers in your house, eating your food,and drinking your beer? The poor had pretty much nothing to lose so, why not throw a bunch of tea into the harbor? The wealthy land owners sought to combat the new taxes in their own educated way, like for instance ideas taken from the enlightenment. The radical part of the revolution was left to the poor, the Natives, and the Slaves. The Natives and the Slaves had their own little revolution going on the side by the serval who ended up joining the british, they also had nothing to lose, they were at the very bottom of society. The British who had tried to protect some indian land with the proclamation line of 1763 and who were also promising freedom to slaves who joined their ranks. The radicals wanted complete change and saw breaking away from the mother country the best way to bring that about. The conservatives just wanted a return to the way thing were pre French and Indian war and if that meant having to become an independent nation then fine. What is, in my mind, the most revolutionary thing is how they all managed to defeat the best military in the world at the time with what they had, there was no model to go off of, they had to just figure it out kinda like a first time parent.  
13. Katie Lucken December 10, 2017 at 1:53 pm

    I think our American Revolution was a radical one in nature, although there is good reason to believe that it was also a conservative revolution as well. I think it was primarily radical because any revolution against the strongest empire in the world would need strong leaders with new ideas about leading a country. While the elite whites continued to try to exercise their power in the colonies, a conservative idea, all the colonists as a whole were trying to overthrow the King and form of government in Britain, and establish a democratic government in America. The “common people” in America were fighting for a radical revolution because they were trying to change the social structure and political structure that existed, and wanted to achieve more of a say in government. However, all of the colonists in America were fighting for representation and their rights, and similar to the consensus movement of the 1950s, I believe the ideas of liberty, voting, representative government, trial by jury, and habeas corpus were the ideas that bound Americans together in the Revolution. I also believe these ideas were a factor in what kept the Revolution from falling apart, because they reduced the economic and social conflicts that could have driven the colonists apart. Like Gary Nash elaborates on in “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, all kinds of groups of people in America wanted a change. They would hear talk of oppressive policies and taxation without representation, and wanted to completely change the system to give them the rights they believed were inalienable and their natural rights. Nash explains that the beginning of the Revolution was due to both economic conflict and social change. I agree with this, the best examples of social change being the Paxton Boys and the Regulators. In conclusion, the American Revolution was radical in nature due to the economic changes pushing the colonists towards a different kind of society than their mother country, Britain, and the social changes and conflicts causing the colonists to look for a different form of government that would represent all of the people in America.
14. Ethan Biederman December 10, 2017 at 2:15 pm

    I think that the American Revolution was both a conservative revolution and a radical revolution. As historians have discovered since the Revolution, there is significant evidence to support both claims. I’ll first identify my reasoning for deciding it was a conservative revolution, and then why I believe it was also a radical revolution.
    A conservative revolution is a revolution in which people try to keep their powers or rights that they already have had. The American Revolution certainly fits this description. Through salutary neglect, American colonists were forced to create their own forms of governance across the Atlantic Ocean. They found themselves unable to rely on London to provide aid for them as far as creating a government. Different regions on the Atlantic seaboard create different forms of government. In New England, town meeting style governments are formed, where anyone and everyone can participate in the governance of the land. In Virginia, the House of Burgesses is created, in which Virginians vote for representatives to govern the land for them. These governments came under fire after the French and Indian War, when salutary neglect ended and Parliament turned to the colonies to help pay off their war debt. Additionally, Americans wanted to keep their right to tax themselves. While I believe that the taxes imposed by the British Parliament onto the colonies were reasonable, the colonists were against them because they had no say in whether or not the taxes were passed. It is likely that many of the colonists would have been more open to the taxes if there were members of Parliament representing the thirteen colonies.
    The American Revolution, however, was also a radical revolution. The American people fought to overthrow the existing political order, a king and his Parliament, and created a new one, first with the Articles of Confederation and then with the Constitution. Americans didn’t want to be governed by the English system. They didn’t like being controlled by a King, whose power was only controlled by Parliament, a body that had no representatives from the colonies and didn’t feel bound to do as the colonists wanted. Many of them then decided to overthrow that undesirable system in favor of a new one.
15. Nikki Barnas December 10, 2017 at 3:05 pm

    After accumulating different viewpoints, including the work of Gary Nash’s “Radical Revolution from the Bottom Up”, “Conflicting Views”, and the blogpost, I’ve summarized that, despite the connotation implied by the term ‘revolution’, the American Revolution was more closely related to conservative endeavors that subsisted on maintaining the liberties preexisting in the colonies. The evidence that can most accurately encapsulate and portray the conservatism that lead to the Revolution relates to the 150 years of Salutary Neglect. As any society would agree on, the colonies were not going to settle upon the proposition of becoming a lethargic nation and just sitting around until Britain acknowledges them again. Evidently, they utilized their independent years by building their economies, politics, and societies on potent liberties that they had formulated themselves. Therefore, when Britain decided to terminate the years of neglect due to the aftermath of the French and Indian War and reshape its imperial control over the colonies, it’s probable that the colonists felt offended that Britain found it necessary to strengthen and restate its sovereignty over North America. To indulged into this concept, perspectives from “Conflicting Views” illustrate the real reason why the colonies disregarded British control. “The colonists revolted against British rule to keep things the way they were, not to initiate a new era”, the article emphasizes. The colonists had crafted a ‘status quo’ amongst their cities, one pridefully made by their native-born founders of America, and they had grown accustomed to this society. It wasn’t the physical laws and policies British placed on the colonies, it was the passive message that threatened to take away already existing liberties. Furthermore, the Imperial School mentioned in the blogpost that the Navigations Act reinforced by Britain did not directly violate all social liberties the colonies had made, as in some aspects the colonies benefited off of it. This proves that the colonist’s main objective was not to prove a young nation can defeat a global superpower through a radical war in pursuit of a totally abstract civilization. To summarize this point, a historian from “Conflicting Views” highlights this idea that Americans did not blatantly paint Britain as a malevolent tyrannical enemy. “Conservative historians emphasize the non revolutionary nature of the Revolution on the imperial level. Prior to the Revolution, they point out, the colonists enjoyed many traditional rights and liberties under the British constitution. When Parliament introduced changes in governing the empire after the French and Indian War, Americans resisted these innovations on the grounds that they were contrary to their constitution… American patriots proved to be ‘reluctant rebels,’ according to conservative scholars.” For me, to call something a ‘radical revolution’ means that your entire society sparks a random phenomenon that overthrows a common enemy in pursuit of change. Because of this, it seems like modern historians are doing the colonists an injustice by assuming that their revolution was radical just because it was an abstract idea to overthrow the mother country in the eighteenth century. As indicated before, the colonists felt their home of freedom was being robbed by the British, and they would fight them to take back the liberties they threatened to steal if the colonists let them get away with it. Another way I reached these conclusions was through Gary Nash’s “Radical Revolution from the Bottom Up” article, which in some passages I found hard to agree with. He seemed to paint any Native American Rebellions as radical and astonishing- but, similar to the conservatism sewn into the American Revolution, natives were just desperate to maintain what they already had. America would never belong to white Europeans, as it had been flourishing under the culture of native tribes for thousands of years. Therefore, it shouldn’t have come as a shock to white settlers that they were willing to maintain their “status quo” and society, as patriotic Americans were doing the same thing. I bring up this point to stress the parallels between the American revolution and Native American rebellions, as their objectives both fell under the category of preserving a trait their society already possessed. So, since native rebellions were clearly not ‘radical’, then neither were British- Americans. The same formula can applied to other groups mentioned in Nash’s article, including slaves. African Americans had relished in freedom before their homes and lives were exploited by slave traders. For the ones who had freedom stolen from them, of course they would uphold a rebellion to get it back. It’s possible that in the eyes of a white plantation owner, its intellectually wrong to ‘change society’ by granting slaves the liberties they had. But white society and enslavement wasn’t the ‘status quo’ African Americans had grown up in. Of course, the American revolution will always be illustrated as the quintessential of patriotism; the shakespearean-like story of how the underdog Americans delivered an upset bigger than any witnessed in sport’s history. But through the development of ideas and thoroughly evaluating the politics of the rebellion, it can be concluded that at the heart of the American Revolution, all Washington desired was to keep the term being blackmailed by British imperialism and would be used to define Americans for centuries to come; freedom.
16. Philip Bradbury December 10, 2017 at 3:35 pm

    I believe that the American Revolution was conservative, but mostly a radical movement. The revolution could be conservative because some rich, white colonists were trying to keep their colonial governments and ways of life. On the contrary, the revolution was also radical because low class citizens were fighting to overthrow the oppressive hand of Parliament in the colonies.
    The white elite in the colonies pushed to keep their power in colonial governments and to run them democratically. These elites had been fighting for their conservative ways since the time of salutary neglect which shows how the revolution was a conservative movement even before it was a revolutionary one. The low class colonists, that were mentioned before, were fighting against the policies and acts of British Parliament in hopes for change, a radical aspect of the revolution. The main issue that the colonists had with Parliament was with the Stamp Act. The Stamp Act and many others are what made the low class colonists revolt and fight back because the taxes that came along with these acts made it virtually impossible for these colonists to escape the lower classes. It was a vicious cycle of taxing, protests, and then the resolving of the taxes that were eventually replaced with even more outrageous acts that Parliament put in place in attempts to display power. Instead of fighting to keep the old ways of the colonies like the white elites, these colonists were fighting so that they could escape the vicious cycle and reform the systems of the colonies as a whole to better the lives of the poor and helpless. Also, women were fighting a radical fight in an attempt to acquire more rights. Neither Britain or America had equal rights among genders which is an obvious problem throughout history as a whole. Abigail Adams was one of the the most impactful people of the American revolution because she had fought to get rights such as the right to vote, sell land (which was achieved in Virginia almost immediately after the US won independence from Britain), and extents of divorce rights for women after the victory of the Revolutionary War. The revolution was radical even more so because of the attempts to abolish slavery. The revolution also consisted of slaves who fought for the independence from Britain because they wanted to free themselves in the process of doing so. This cause was one of full radical intentions in which would have required a full reform of society for America (because it was such a big part of the culture back then).
    So in conclusion, the American Revolution was both conservative and radical, but moreso a radical movement. From the conservative battles to keep the colonial governments and the power of elite white men in the colonies to the radical battle of freedom from slavery, equal rights for women, and the battle against Parliament’s absurd acts that prevented people of low classes to rise up in the social system, the American Revolution was a little bit of everything and led to more movements with the same topics later on in American history.
17. Jake Flaherty December 10, 2017 at 3:52 pm

    Oh, probably radical, actually. Americans were on their own for 150 years, like, imagine that was when they had broken away from the British, it’s like the British weren’t even there! And when they were alone, they did not have a bonded, U.S. democracy going on. During the revolution, that’s when people were united against a common enemy, and they’re like, “Okay, let’s actually work together and make a better government than the Brits could even dream of!” And well, let’s think about what happened in the revolution. Britain didn’t give the colonists representation. And America felt that that was wrong and decided to make a system in which every colony/state would be included… Like, we sort of generated ideas… The revolution helped us make a government that we use to this day! It wasn’t really a conservative revolution, because we changed so much during and after the revolution! It’s not like we had a good governmental system before the revolution, and it’s not like we were fighting to really maintain it. We started fighting for like, liberty and stuff, and THAT’s where the radical thoughts come in! We start being all free and American when we suddenly have to explain why the Parliament and King are evil and how we’re freedom fighters! And out of the revolution, there’s so many radical ideals… Women are starting to be recognized, they can even own property! Slaves are treated as people for once (temporarily) but they were still recognized at a point, which is a huge step up. You have poor people and rich people coming together, and they’re supporting eachother and stuff! And you also have the idea that a small dinky little group can take out a huge power, and it’s like, speaking out against them… This ties in with Enlightenment and stuff, you’re making your own judgements, and speaking out against the traditional and corrupt ways! The people are getting more powerful, it’s like, rich are always in charge, you have these dinky peasants going up to the king and saying, “Hey! Stupid! You suck! And what are ya gunna do ’bout it, we’re all the way over here?” They were willing to tamper and fight with the most powerful country in the world! They didn’t just let the Britains steamroll and take advantage of them. (However, the British people weren’t necessarily an evil dictatorship over the “poor, innocent” Americans) But you have this pattern of speaking out, which it completely radical and new, and that’s kind of what America’s become about.
18. Graham December 10, 2017 at 3:57 pm

    How Revolutionary was the Revolution?
    Graham Hupp
    The American Revolution was more conservative than radical when into depth of the Revolution. Defined by Merriam-Webster, radical is “growing from the base of a stem, from a rootlike stem, or from a stem that does not rise above the ground” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/radical) compared to the definition of conservative “of or constituting a political party professing the principles of conservatism” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservative) For the colonists at the time, they were tired of the English monarchy telling them what to do after being prosperous for around 100 years and then the effect of salutary neglect where the British attempted to keep the Colonists loyal to the crown. The Historian Gary Nash when describing gives examples such as the gap of social classes and lack of social mobility before the American revolution and this instance occurring more on the countryside with groups in Pennsylvania such as the Paxton boys which is an example of the anger of colonist laborers felt from being left out of the economic change happening in the world, where there were acts such as the coercive or called by the colonists as “intolerable acts” where they were being punished by the Monarchy for the rebellious acts such as the Boston Tea Party after being angry that the British made the colonists only able to trade with the English regarding Tea. With these acts such as the intolerable, the colonists wanted to make even larger attempts to veto from the British parliament in order to become their own entity, their own country, further pushing the conservative movement to exercise what they had believed in. The website American Heritage describes the American Revolution as “historians have generally held that we didn’t kill enough people, engender enough proto-Bolsheviks, or produce a sufficient social upheaval to achieve true revolutionary significance—a failure lamented in some quarters and celebrated in others.” (https://www.americanheritage.com/content/radical-revolution) stating that the American Revolution was more conservative than radical because it has been compared to it’s counterpart revolution the French Revoltion which took place six years after where the French was an absolute bloodbath where the American was more political with propogandas such as the Boston Massacre and groups such as the Sons of Liberty that would usually have political actions like the Boston Tea Party showing the Parliament that they did not want to be under rule any longer.
19. Jana Dinkeloo December 10, 2017 at 4:18 pm

    Considering the articles we’ve went over in class, the views of multiple historians and my knowledge of the American Revolution, I believe that the Revolution was mostly a radical revolution, though I can definitely see why some people believe that the revolution was mostly conservative and that the colonists were overreacting. Radical revolutions were defined on the blog as “people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one.” If you look at the Revolution, it seems that that was what it was. The people of the colonies struck out at those who were higher in the social and political class (the British), and fought against them so that they could be back in charge, like they had previously been. The Progressive School says that the Revolution was split into two conflicts of social order, which was the fight to overthrow Britain, and then the internal conflict between the colonies on who in America would end up ruling once Britain was gone. The internal American Conflict was shown in things like the Paxton Boys, where they had full intentions to attack the government if they weren’t protected. It shows that there was some discontent in the poor towards even the American Government. There were also conservative merchants on the other hand that wondered about how the social order in the colonies would change if the poorer people came out victorious in the internal colonial conflict, which shows that there was trouble on both sides of the existing social order. I am able to see the side of those who feel it was more of a conservative revolution, but I don’t think that the revolution was as simple as people just wanting to be able to govern themselves, or go back to the period of Salutary Neglect, when the British just ignored them. I think that they wanted and needed Britain to be off their backs, because if they didn’t completely overthrow Britain, there could’ve been more conflict in the future due to Britain having at least a little bit of power over them. The overthrowing of Britain is a rearrangement of the social and political order in early America, which shows that the American Revolution could correctly be seen as a radical revolution.
20. Hadin Sayed December 10, 2017 at 4:28 pm

    I think that the American Revolution was a radical revolution. If the British had continued their practices of salutary neglect I would probably call it a conservative revolution because then they wouldn’t be changing their whole political system but rather just changing who would be in charge of the system the colonies have had for years. I think the American Revolution was radical because the Revolution did overthrow the existing political order. Because of the British abandoning their practice of salutary neglect, they enforced the political system of their King and their whole idea of virtual representation. There were many issues with the new American Government and the new Articles and Confederation as the relationship between Social Classes were very weak (seen by Shays Rebellion). Even with the shaky relationships with the new Government, the Articles of Confederation did embrace the new political change of giving lots of power to the individually each state. That huge change in the Government system is what makes it a radical revolution in my opinion. The Conflicting Views paper explains how the Revolution was more than just a War with Britain. It explains it was a complete economic, social, and intellectual change. The economic change is clear as it went from the angry taxed colonists, to the Articles of Confederation not even being able to force the states to tax. This was for the reason of how angry the Americans were from being taxed by the British. Although initially I don’t think there was a big social change eventually the Revolution leaders realized they needed to something about the social order, which is something I don’t think British leaders would’ve done if they were in control. Intellectually, I feel as if the whole nation became more aware. A great example of this is for people who were on the edge on if they wanted complete independence, Common Sense provided an ideology, that explained why we should separate from Britain. It is this ideology, that the Americans brought to their new nation, of not giving so much power to someone and being aware of who is in control.
21. Megan Zacharias December 10, 2017 at 4:32 pm

    I believe that it is difficult to pinpoint the exact type of revolution that the American Revolution can be classified. Different groups of people had different views. I think that it can been seen as both a conservative and radical revolution. For the revolution to be considered conservative, historians claim that Americans were fighting to keep things the same. “…The colonists revolted against British rule in order to keep things the way they were, not to initiate a new era” (Carl N. Degler). Generally, people who believed these ideas were wealthy elites. More specifically, they were conservative merchants. This group of colonists were concerned that they would lose their jobs and high positions if those considered lower classes’ had won the internal revolution. This internal revolution was a conflict between social classes and which class would ultimately have the power after the American Revolution. This clash is an example of how the American Revolution can be seen as both conservative and radical because of the different ideas expressed by the people. To describe the radical viewpoints of the revolution, some people wanted complete independence from Britain to start over and make major social changes involving women’s rights and slavery. In “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom up’” by Gary Nash, he describes it as “advocating wholesale change and sharp transformation rooted in a kind of dream life of a better future…” So, many Americans believed that they needed to completely separate themselves from Britain in order to have a successful future. These people tended to be among the lower class citizens. They wanted to change the social ideas to help certain groups of people. Their whole idea was to change how American’s lived and as well as separate themselves from Britain’s government. As you can see, there was continuing social class conflicts between their ideas. Those that were wealthy believed that the revolution was conservative, and the poor tended to believe that it was radical. Because of these disagreements, the American Revolution can be seen as both conservative and radical. It all depends on the person, lifestyle and one’s perspective.
22. Nicholas Haddad December 10, 2017 at 5:45 pm

    It is very hard to classify the American Revolution as either conservative or radical, as there are many different groups in America at this time, each fighting for different objectives; from the common folk, aristocratic plantation managers, and representatives in colonial legislatures, to enslaved Africans, natives facing encroachment on their lands, and women in colonial society. This idea is exemplified by Gary Nash in his article “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, and he also mentions another important observation about the Revolution: besides the strife between the colonists and the British, there was also an internal struggle between liberty and slavery, two opposite ideas that divided many of the above groups.
    For the lower class, common people living near or in cities such as Boston, New York, and Philadelphia, this revolution proved to be radical. From the Stamp Act Crisis onwards, these people took it upon themselves to fight for their ability to be represented in government, and is what their primary goal for the Revolution was. They took to the streets of cities to protest unfair treatment by the British, which would eventually turn into the demand for liberty and not just lessened taxes. These people were tired of being cast down without a voice in society, and the Revolution gave them a purpose to fight for. There was already a huge difference between them and the upper class, and they wanted to eradicate that as well.
    Many aristocratic plantation owners and representatives in colonial legislators in the South were happy with their way of life, as well as their source of labor, and believed in conserving their lifestyle. They felt that if the British were to lose, their way of life would be damaged, as well as their positions in society and government. Some fled to England to preserve their lives, while others fought it out, despite the harsh treatment towards them by protesters and Patriots.
    Slaves fought for a radical change in their ways of life. They were sick and tired of being treated as inferior, and demanded their freedom. There was a fear among white southern men that their slaves would revolt against them as a result of the fervor. Beginning with Pontiac’s Rebellion in 1763, there was a large fear that this would happen. Among some of the well known slave revolts during this time were of George Mason’s slaves (planned, not executed), as well as in Loundoun and Fairfax countied in Virginia. Many people believed that by enslaving blacks, they were providing better care than they would receive if they were free, and preventing the mixing of society. Once the Revolution had begun, the British offered slaves to fight for them in exchange for their freedom. Many took this opportunity to earn a better life and status for themselves, but there were also many that stayed behind.
    Many Native Americans were uncertain about the Revolution, but definitely wanted to conserve their way of life. Many decided to side with the British, as they knew that if the colonists took control, they would immediately settle on their land. Unfortunately for them, radicalism took the upper hand, and the natives’ roles in society were lowered tremendously.
    Women were playing a large role in both the non importation movements and homespun movements in the colonies, and hoped that a radical change was coming for them. Abigail Adams urged her husband to include women’s rights in the new code of laws. She even says that women will rebel if things don’t go their way. Before the 1760s, women were stuck on their roles, and didn’t want to be anything other than a housewife. However, as new ideas began to spread, many thought that they could affect change for themselves as well.
    Overall, I would classify the Revolution as one of radicalism – many groups fought for a new order, a new system of government, and a new sense of purpose in society.
23. Wyatt Heaton December 10, 2017 at 6:04 pm

    I believe the American Revolution was viewed as a more conservative revolution by some and a more radical revolution by others. On the one hand, the American colonies already enjoyed independence to some extent until just after the Seven Year’s War, and were able to make their own taxes and raise their own militias. The higher class people from this society, mainly white landowners and merchants, who had lived long enough without constant British supervision probably saw the British taxation acts and other laws passed by Parliament to be an encroachment on the rights that they already had before 1763, and an exercise in despotism by the British government. They were already well to do in the society that they were born and raised in, and probably believed that changing that society would endanger their success, and that the British restrictions on trade to and from the colonies would damage the businesses they worked to create. It was these people who viewed the Revolution as a conservative revolution that protected an old way of life.
    On the other hand, those younger people who weren’t alive long under the salutary neglect, and those who never really were very well off, or never were treated as equals in the first place, probably saw the Revolution as a way to create a new society in which they were able to finally get what they believed they rightfully deserved. People like the slaves of the time probably saw the more wealthy people beginning to stand up to the government and thought that maybe they could use a new government to break free of their bondage or find new ways to earn a living. British restrictions like the Proclamation Line of 1763 also prevented these poorer people from moving West to restart their lives, so they wanted to remove those things. It was also these people who were more damaged by increased taxes, since they had less to pay in the first place. This would make these poorer people want to remove or heavily lessen taxes in any new society they managed to form. These poorer people were the ones who saw the revolution as a radical revolution.
24. Brody H December 10, 2017 at 6:09 pm

    The question you raise is whether the American Revolution was a matter of conservative or radical movement. I am of the opinion that the Americans were in a point of the unknown. There were many questions raised by the American people relating to the external and internal consequences of such a Revolution. Externally, many of the Americans had great pride of what they have established in America, they no longer believed that they needed the direction of their mother country, Britain. They simply saw the British as trying to diminish all that they established and created in the new America. Their is no doubt in my mind that there was a sense of British animosity towards what the Americans had the courage to accomplish. It is in my belief for this reason the British continued their attempts to maintain puppetry of the colonies; or in the big picture, destroy all that they had achieved. The Americans were clearly on their way to establishing a government of democracy which allowed all the freedom that they could not enjoy in Britain. So there is no denying, the work the Americans had yet to resolve all they had accomplished. In the big picture, the ultimate goal was to maintain the freedom that they all were searching for when they came to America. The Revolution was the first patriotic moment in American history. Despite this movement against the British, there were several internal issues that needed to be resolved by the American people. This ultimately was a sign of the freedom that the Americans sought by leaving their homeland. In Britain, there were defined classes of society, that all lived by. In this new America, you had social classes that developed that were not defined nor governed. One of the most fascinating points of American history is the development of democracy. One of the major obstacles that lied ahead, was that the wealthy had developed their own sense of the rights and powers. They believed they were above and beyond the average or middle class citizen. It is my belief that all the Americans sought to abolish the British hierarchy through the Revolution. Internally however, problems lied ahead as many of the former faults of the hierarchy reemerged thus ultimately leading to Civil War. For this reason, I find it hard to categorize the Revolution simply as a conservative or radical movement. It is impossible to define the people of the Revolution in those political beliefs.
25. Andrew Scivoletti December 10, 2017 at 6:13 pm

    I believe that the American Revolution was a conservative movement on the colonist’s part. Though the revolution could be conservative because some rich, white colonists were trying to keep their colonial governments and ways of life, which could be considered as pretty much all conservatives at that time. But on the contrary, the revolution could also be considered radical in nature because of how the poor/middle class citizens were fighting to overthrow their oppressive parent country that was Great Britain.

    The white elite, or essentially the representatives of the colonials at the time, in the colonies pushed to keep their power in colonial governments and to run them democratically because of the threats that British representatives would come in to take over the colonial government. These elites had been fighting for their conservative ways and positions in government since the time of salutary neglect by the British which shows how the revolution was a conservative based movement even before revolution was hypothesized by the great future leaders of our nation. Though the low-class colonists were fighting against the policies and acts of British Parliament in hopes for change, like the conservative upper class, they fought for it in different ways with the lower class going in more of a public demonstration route and the upper class going in a more political route. The main issue that the colonists had with Parliament was with the Stamp Act which was an act of the Parliament of Great Britain that imposed a direct tax on the colonies of British America and required that many printed materials in the colonies be produced on stamped paper produced in London, carrying an embossed revenue stamp and to combat this, what the colonist called, oppressive act the colonist would essentially torture tax collectors to prove a point to the British parliament. While on the other side of the spectrum the elite upper class would combat the British through more political offensives, like I said before, with things like the Quartering act which was a name given to a minimum of two Acts of British Parliament in the local governments of the American colonies to provide the British soldiers with any needed accommodations or housing. It also required colonists to provide food for any British soldiers in the area. Though this act affected all classes of the colonies the upper class was most offended because having the nicer homes British troops would always elect to stay in their homes forcing the home owners to pay for them. So, the upper class decided to combat this through a political battlefield which ended in repealing of these acts and many like them. So again, the Stamp Act and many others are what made the low-class colonists revolt and fight back through public displays. It was a seemingly endless loop of taxing, public displays, hard fought political battles, and then the resolving of those taxes. Also, another notable effort to the revolution was women, they were fighting a radical and conservative fight along with the rest of the colonies to acquire more rights. Neither Britain or America had equal rights among genders which is an obvious problem throughout history. The revolution also consisted of a massive slave population, slaves who fought for the independence from Britain because they wanted to free themselves in the process, this point in history would later be used in the defense of African Americans by people such as the great Martin Luther King Jr and Malcom X to help promote the rights of African Americans. The cause of separation from our father nation of Great Britain was one of both radical and conservative intentions which combined would form the future of America and its revolutionary governing style still used in part today, besides you know all the racist and sexist ideals at the time.

    So, in conclusion, the American Revolution was both conservative and radical in nature. From the conservative battles to keep the colonial governments and the power of elite white men in the colonies to the radical battle of freedom from slavery, equal rights for women, and the battle against Parliament’s absurd, in the eyes of the colonist, acts that prevented people of low classes to rise in the social system and preserved the job security of the colonial government. The American Revolution was a little bit of everything and led to more movements with the same topics later on in American history such as the great women’s rights movement s of the 1850’s and even the revolutionary movements set in motion to finally achieve racial equality.
26. Will D December 10, 2017 at 6:54 pm

    Will Drake
    12/10/17
    Blog #106
    I believe that the American Revolution has both conservative and radical aspects to it. It is necessary that you look at the different class groups to determine which aspects were radical and which aspects were conservative. Looking at the poor classes in America, it could be argued that the American Revolution was a radical one. The poor people in America fought in the revolution to escape what they believed to be the unjust rulings of the British empire. Many of these lower-class citizens were upset with the taxes that the British were imposing on them and were also angered because they had no say in being taxed (taxation without representation). The colonists who rebelled due to unfair taxes and rule by the British were the main driving force of the American revolution, and were the ones who truly wanted a change in government. Also, slaves were among those who wanted change in the government as well. It was believed that if the revolution was successful in freeing the white colonists from Britain, it would probably free them from the slave owners. All of those included in the radical side of the revolution, lower-class citizens and slaves both wanted freedom from the (as they believed) tyrannical British rule.
    But looking at both sides, it is easy to see how the revolution had its conservative parts as well. Many wealthy, aristocratic white people living in the colonies had their own reasons for fighting for freedom from British rule. They had less goals in the revolution than the radical side did because of their wealth and where they stood in the social class which meant that they already had a lot of liberties. Two of the main reasons for leaving British rule was to centralize the government and maintaining the liberties that they already had. In centralizing the government in America, it would be much easier for the wealthy people to have more power and get what they wanted easier than if they had to answer to the British government who was across an ocean. In conclusion, someone could argue that the American Revolution was neither fully radical or conservative, yet it had elements of both.
27. Hanna Lupovitch December 10, 2017 at 7:21 pm

    There are many conflicting views as to whether the American Revolution was radical or conservative, and both cases make very fair points.  In my eyes, however, the American Revolution was a conservative revolution.  To start, democracy had already existed many years before George Washington and Alexander Hamilton lived.  Therefore, this revolution could not have been a way for America to come up with a new kind of government, destined by God, as some may put it.  In addition, conservatism is trying to keep things the way they are (or in some cases, change happening dramatically slowly).  On the worksheet entitled “Conflicting Views” it is written by Carl N. Degler, “The colonials revolted against rule to keep things the way they were, not to initiate a new era.”  This demonstrates two things.  Firstly, there were no problems before the British started acting up.  Thus, the American colonies were just trying to keep their ways of society (and of life) the same.  Secondly, even though it ended up starting a new era, the American revolution was not meant to have America use a new form of government.  Since the colonies were functioning fine before the revolution, that was all they were fighting for.  It was not until they realized how much they did not want to be like Great Britain (a king that does not even read the Olive Branch Petition?  Unbearable!) that the colonies knew they needed to change their ways.  In addition to this, some historians who argue that the American Revolution was radical are convinced that this was also an inner-conflictive revolution between the social classes in America.  They have used the Paxton Boys, rebels who fought the courts who would have taken their farms because they did not pay taxes, as an example.  What these historians do not realize, is that it is Great Britain’s fault that they could not pay their taxes because of the Currency Act, which stated that paper money could no longer be used, and that gold and silver were what were to be used. So, of course this was stressful for the lower-class slaves or farmers, because they did not have any gold or silver!  It is for these reasons that I believe the American Revolution was conservative, not radical.
28. David Mueller December 10, 2017 at 7:25 pm

    The American Revolution was not truly radical. The Revolution was more conservative. The Revolution contained radical elements, however much of the democracy the Patriots were fighting for was already being practiced. Most of this starts at salutary neglect. Before the Seven Years War Britain had almost completely turned their back on the colonies. So when the Colonies were developing they developed systems of self government and democracy. After the Seven Years War the British began to enforce and impose new acts which went against American Democracy. The British began actually enforcing the navigation acts which limited American trade. Colonists had operating trading ventures with more than just Britain. The enforcement of those acts was seen as tyrannical encroachment upon Colonial freedoms. The Stamp Act was then introduced. The Stamp Act had major backlash from the Colonists as it was the first direct tax on Colonies imposed by great Britain. Britain had no representatives for the colonies and that infuriated the Colonists because they had no say in the tax. This went against what the Colonists and Englishmen in England practiced. The Stamp Act Resolves passed by the Virginia House of Burgesses bring this to light. The resolves declared that Virginians should be taxed only by their representatives, and any tax appointed by parliament should not be paid. Much of the Coercive Acts harmed colonial practices. The Coercive Acts completely undermined Massachusetts democracy by putting the Massachusetts government in the crown’s hands. The Coercive Acts also removed British subjects from facing colonial justice. These acts deteriorated the practiced colonial democracy and power. The Consensus Movement argues that the elements of self government were what drove the Revolution, and since those elements of self government were already in place, the American Revolution was largely conservative. The Revolution to maintain those rights and democratic ways was not radical. The American Revolution also had social changes behind it. These were the radical aspects of the revolution. There was push towards a more level social system that also fueled the revolution. Much of this push was seen in poor farmers rising against wealthy aristocrats, and slaves rising against their masters. These social changes and the particular fight to go with it was radical. However the economic and political side of the revolution was conservative, causing the revolution to not be truly radical.
29. Rochelle D December 10, 2017 at 7:31 pm

    When reading the textbook and listening in class about how the colonists were angry about the taxes imposed on them, I began to wonder why they were so upset. Since the taxes were low and meant for a good cause it made me angry that they opposed so quickly. It’s events like this that led me to believe that the revolution was truly a radical revolution. The British were providing safety and protecting the colonists in the French and Indian war. After years of salutary neglect, I do understand why the colonists were concerned. For example; the colonists were like kids who were unsupervised for a long time, and then without warning the parents came and interrupted the fun. The rules were still there for the kids but weren’t enforced as well since they were missing a supervisor. During the time of salutary neglect, the colonies made self governments and went along with life thinking of themselves as basically an independent country. The sudden change is the way things were ran caught the colonists by surprise and caused them to over exaggerate the situation. The fight for independence was to be free from the “evil” British empire so things could run the way before the British returned from the many years of neglect. This caused groups like the sons of liberty and daughters of liberty to rebel for what they wanted, independence. I think since these rebels against parliament sparked an idea of justice and equality in the lower ranks of society. Farmers who lived farther away from the East coast weren’t treated as equal to those who lived closer. The Progressive school explains how there was also an internal conflict between the upper and lower classes and who would control the country once the British were kicked out. The lower classes feared what would happen to their positions if the wealthier took over. This and also the fact that the colonists had a good sense of politics and were pretty well educated (which was discovered by historian Bernard Bailyn though readings in old pamphlets ). The colonists knew what they were doing and wanted to overthrow both the old society rules, the less powerful wanted more power, and the American government wanted to be more powerful than the British parliament; therefore making it a radical revolution.
30. Kevin Gruich December 10, 2017 at 7:36 pm

    I think the American Revolution was a social and political revolution. An economic revolution was attempted but was too late and failed. We did reestablish our society and political structure after the war for independence. This made us one of the few democratic countries in the world. Though this is was not modern democracy as it didn’t aid the poor or represent them. The time was not as prosperous for the everyman as Jameson wishes to believe. This is because only property owners could truly vote. Although not to say the lower class didn’t try. This attempt is seen in Shay’s rebellion after the war and after they received no boon for their struggle. I do think the revolution was rushed to prevent these sentiments from mudding up the higher classes and redistributing the wealth. The revolution was desired by the elites and twisted into a social revolution. The merchants had much to gain from free trade. The revolution was rushed by catalysts like Samuel Adams, who pushed the conflict to the brink before poor ideals and representation could become involved.
    “The stream of revolution, once started, could not be confined within narrow banks, but spread abroad upon the land. Many economic desires, many social aspirations were set free by the political struggle, many aspects of colonial society profoundly altered by the forces thus let loose.”-J. Franklin Jameson, the American Revolution Considered as a Social Movement (Princeton 1926). Jameson was correct in that many were searching to push their own struggles and desires through the avenue that was the American Revolution. Though he was wrong in thinking that these aspirations were all met. Some shifts were made like the redistribution of loyalist land, a communist like move. This may have helped the poor in the short term but in the end they received no upheaval or revolution. Society was altered no longer ruled by a distant king over shadowing the country with taxes. The political structure was also altered, but still only the wealthy, educated, landowners had any chance at government. Some of this was fixed later with the creation of the Union. But under the Articles of Confederation, the country and in turn its revolution was imperfect.
31. Devin Woodruff (3rd Hour) December 10, 2017 at 8:32 pm

    I think that the American Revolution was truly radical of one nature. The definition of radical is someone of some type of change of policy of a government or a country and or reforming the way that people do their daily operations. I believe that is was radical because it was one of the first wars that won against the western colonies trying to take over. Which leads me to my next point that the American Revolution had the government to give its will to the people instead of the government deciding their faith. The revolution tried to erase the form of government and make the voices of the people to be the decisions maker instead of the government making the decisions. An example of the voting rights which is radical thinking id that before the revolution most of the people that voted were the people that owned land and or property and they paid taxes. But after almost all white men could vote. Which shows just how it changed over time since you had to own land to almost any white male could vote. Furthermore, another example would be how people in the government and that before the revolution a lot of the colonies had kings and queen and or a royal governor. But these positions were mainly determine by the wealth of family and the family history but after the people elected who they wanted to represent them Furthermore, another example of how the American revelation was very radical is there trade deals before they were very hard on a trade like tea and imports coming in which they wanted very little of. But after the revolution, the trade reactions were lifted and almost all imports and exports were begin allowed back to England which in terms helped to boost their economy. My last example is how the Constitution changed over time because of the revolution. Before people had to follow the rules that were set by the government and or British. But, after the revolution, new rules were made for each of the colony’s to follow by the people. These rules gave people a little more freedom and not feel like they had to follow the rules by the governments. Some of the ideas provided by Gary Nash about how the progressive of the schools and how it changed because of the American Revolution and its radical thinking and how with the economic boost it helped to improve the school’s thanks to radical thinking. To end off, it seems to me that the American Revolution was very radical and had a lot of impact on different decisions to be made.
32. Kiran Krishnan December 10, 2017 at 8:49 pm

    There are both radical and conservative aspects of the American Revolution, however the radical ideas and aspects of the revolution were not completely realized and therefore it is ultimately a conservative revolution. The colonists had been living under Salutary Neglect for over 150 years and had benefited from it. The colonies had set up their own legislature which was working for them. Then, Britain began paying more attention to the colonists -imposing new taxes and exerting control over them after and during the French and Indian War, because they were in debt and saw how well the colonists were doing. This did not make the colonists happy, especially the white elite, to whom salutary neglect had been especially beneficial. They wanted to continue to run things the way they always had, and protect the rights and power over themselves that they had been allowed for the past 150 years. However, there are some elements of a radical revolution in the American Revolution, like the new arguments that the Americans used to defend their rights. They argued the higher-law principles of consent of the governed and natural rights as outlined by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, based off of John Locke’s ides. But this wasn’t truly radical, because of Americans’ failure to extend these rights to everyone who naturally deserved them, such as slaves and women. The ideals of the American Revolution and declaration were radical; however, the realties were not. Although some states outlawed slavery during and after the Revolution, the system of slavery was still left in many other places and denied the most basic natural rights to slaves. Also, although women did begin to advocate for rights during by using the same ideas and reasoning that revolutionaries were using, men ignored them. For example, despite Abigail Adams’ pleas to her husband, Sam Adams, to remember women and their rights as he and other leaders of the revolution when hammering out the new government, he believed that men should have the power, property, and should be the ones to make decisions. The American revolution would’ve been truly radical if slaves had been freed, and if African Americans and women had been given the same rights as white men.
33. Luke L December 10, 2017 at 8:54 pm

    In my opinion, our revolution was more of a conservative one than a radical one. This is because the colonies already had a democratic society before the revolution. The revolution’s purpose was to strengthen those beliefs and keep them. In the case of taxation without representation, it showed that Britain was starting to abuse their power and made the colonies realize that if they let this happen then they would eventually be taken advantage over. If the revolution was a radical one then the colonies would have realized this sooner and done something about it. However, since Britain wasn’t able to pay much attention to them they were able to govern themselves without many restrictions. It was only after the French and Indian War when Britain realized how much slack they gave to the colonies. In doing so they tried to restrict the colonies, trying to transform them under their rule. If the British had not suddenly taxed the colonies then I don’t feel that the colonies wouldn’t have done anything against them so long as they kept the colonies at a distance. But this was inevitable as Britain needed some way to fund their war debts and they couldn’t have just left the colonies alone without them paying in some way. In Britain’s defense they didn’t even tax the colonies that much. In comparison to how much Britain was being taxed, what the colonists had to pay was almost nothing. However, as said before, if the colonists let it pass then it would give Britain the incentive to go further with the taxation. Another reason as to why the revolution was a means to keep the democratic society the colonies had was the way they treated Britain. As an excerpt from the test said, the colonies were initially welcome to Britain and its culture. They accepted the British culture and supported the country. It was only until Britain tried interfering with the colonies freedom did they start to do something about it. Not all colonists were comfortable going against what was once considered a friend, thus creating loyalists and making decisions harder than they had to be.
34. Maddy Penoza December 10, 2017 at 8:56 pm

    I would say the American Revolution was a Radical one. The colonists at the time were following what we currently refer to as “Conservative Ideals.” Namely, fewer taxes. By today’s standards, the American colonists were pretty far to the right, In everything from Taxes to family values. However, the people were, for the late 1700’s doing an incredibly radical thing. While I agree with the Imperial school, and the point that It was British Blood spilled in the 7 years war. And I do believe the colonists were not being treated unfairly, and the revolution was not entirely justified, and many things the colonists did was an overreaction, I do not think those points hold any place in the debate about the revolutions Conservative Vs. Radical Intent. At the end of the day, the colonists were doing something almost completely unheard of. They were setting up a government with all of the power coming from the (White-Landowning) people. The American colonists were rejecting Great Britain, and in doing so, they were rejecting the British Ideals about social standing. I would have to disagree with the Consensus School, (Although I guarantee you every historian there has spent a lot more time studying the American Revolution than me). There was a class-factor driving the American Revolution that can be seen in riots such as the Paxton Boys but going back through the colonies history to social conflicts such a Bacon’s Rebellion. The rights of those participating in that rebellion were never really addressed. We just bought a bunch of slaves. Class conflicts cannot be ignored, or denied when studying the American Revolution. You could argue that through salutary neglect, people had certain rights, and were fighting to keep them, but when the revolution began, salutary neglect was no longer the policy, and the rights Americans had under that policy cannot be shown as proof of rights the American Colonists were “keeping.”

    It would be nice to see the American Revolution as our heroic patriots fighting evil tyrants, but that was simply not the case. While historians believed this until the progressive era, it is a flawed view, and the revolution was a lot more complicated. Modern day historians have many different viewpoints on the events of the American Revolution, but they have all managed to agree that is is not black and white. Just like with all history, there is really no right answer or way to look at the events of the past.
35. Jackson Gugni December 10, 2017 at 8:58 pm

    The American Revolution cannot be seen in black and white. To decide it’s motives you must take in what hundreds of years of facts and opinions have to say on the subject and then make your claim. After looking through all that we have learned I believe that though part of the revolution was Conservative, I believe that the fuller reason for the Revolutionary war was Radical. There were, in my opinion, three main parties fighting to be freed from the British. The first is what I would consider to be the most conservative of the three, it being the elite whites. The elite whites were fighting for pretty much one reason, self-government. While the British had been neglecting the colonies, the elite whites were able to self-govern themselves, but the thought of the British coming back and becoming the primary people in power was the elites reason to fight to keep what they have had. They also wanted to keep their elite status that they have held for multiple generations. The next group would be the slaves. Slaves were in a sense setting themselves up for total freedom. By fighting with the colonists, they knew that they would have a better chance at gaining their freedom, as the leaders of the colonists were expressing awareness to “all men are created equal”. By helping the colonists fight the British and ultimately change the way they were treated, they were fighting for their own rights. Women were another group that were fighting a radical battle. Women for years have been regarded as the lesser sex, and were very determined to be equals. So much like the slaves, women were fighting for overall equality. Overall, the revolutionary war was radical because of the way the British were treating the colonists. By putting acts like the stamp and sugar act on the colonists, the Brits were showing that they thought they had enough power to unjustly tax the Americans. For those reasons show why the colonist would want an overall change to the way things were runner. For these reasons I believe the American Revolution was a radical movement.
36. Brenden Kashat December 10, 2017 at 8:58 pm

    I believe the revolution was a blend of of conservative and radical. The revolution, as proven by the articles we read, had many sides to it that are often forgot. For the well of white guy, I feel it was more of a conservative revolution. They could most likely pay their taxes, I feel they were mad that those taxes were increasing, even it was just slightly, and they could not see the benefits of those taxes. In Addition, many of those men were either involved in or enjoyed the spoils of lots smuggling that took place before the French and Indian war during the period of salutary neglect and they had a rude awakening when the anti-smuggling laws started being enforced. The rich men liked the way things were, their discontent led to the ideas that inspired and fueled the more radical side of the revolution. The poorer people in the colonies were the main ones fighting and protesting out the squares. The new taxes and laws hit them harder. They wanted to move across the proclamation line the most because they wanted land to boast their status in the world, cause at that point you were next to nothing if you did own land. And who wants a bunch of soldiers in your house, eating your food,and drinking your beer? The poor had pretty much nothing to lose so, why not throw a bunch of tea into the harbor? The wealthy land owners sought to combat the new taxes in their own educated way, like for instance ideas taken from the enlightenment. The radical part of the revolution was left to the poor, the Natives, and the Slaves. The Natives and the Slaves had their own little revolution going on the side by the serval who ended up joining the british, they also had nothing to lose, they were at the very bottom of society. The British who had tried to protect some indian land with the proclamation line of 1763 and who were also promising freedom to slaves who joined their ranks. The radicals wanted complete change and saw breaking away from the mother country the best way to bring that about. The conservatives just wanted a return to the way thing were pre French and Indian war and if that meant having to become an independent nation then fine. What is, in my mind, the most revolutionary thing is how they all managed to defeat the best military in the world at the time with what they had, there was no model to go off of, they had to just figure it out kinda like a first time parent.
37. Isabelle December 10, 2017 at 9:00 pm

    Isabelle Borr
    Mr. Wickersham
    AP US History
    9 December 2017
    Blog #6
    The American Revolution was a radical revolution. If you asked me a few weeks ago my opinion, it’d be that the colonists were standing up for their rights, and the British needed to back off. After studying the events that took place during the era, I have a new outlook on the situation. The British were nowhere near perfect. They had a faulty administration system to oversee the colonies, and went overboard when they started taxing like crazy. The imperial school opinion, that the British were justified in taxing the colonist because it was the British protecting them and making sacrifices, is a very accurate opinion that I agree with. There were too many expenses to be taken care of by British taxpayers alone. According to the article, we looked at in class, then the colonists paid a 1 to 26 ratio compared to the British. That is just flat out unfair. In this situation, if the British had from the beginning instead of salutary neglect more strictly followed a more balanced tax code, none of this would have had happened. The Americans created their own version of liberty that did not fit the mercantilist view of the British. The issue was that the British allowed this to happen. Through 150 years of neglect, habits and the normal form in the colonies. After the end of salutary neglect, when the colonists began to rebel, they committed acts of terrorism. That was a radical act by the “patriots”. Even though nobody was hurt, an enormous amount of product was damaged. Their purpose was to intimate the tax collectors and parliament. The tax collectors were harassed, assaulted, and publicly humiliated because they were doing their jobs. This is something a mob would do, not an organized rebellion. The revolution was nothing like a conservative revolution, where their human rights were clearly violated. These stuck up colonists did not like how they had to pay a sliver of their fair share. Nobody in this situation was completely right, but the British had their reasons. They were justified.
38. Neve Robisnon December 10, 2017 at 9:06 pm

    I have learnt a lot from this class so far and I believe it has definitely changed my view of American history. It has taught me to challenge what textbooks have told me for years. Which is that America was very mistreated by the British for years and america eventually tried and gained their freedom and created one of the greatest countries in the world! But now I am starting to see the different sides to the revolution. The revolution, I believe was mostly a conservative revolution but somewhat a radical revolution. I think I can see both sides of the argument. But I think that mostly the colonists who wanted to break away from the british government for their own self good, especially the most notable founding fathers. Most of our founding fathers came to America wanting something that Europe could not provide for them, they were the “losers of Europe”. They were hoping to find money and power here and become like the “winners of Europe” (The king, other royalty, members of parliament and the upper class). But even though most of these people became wealthy and found new opportunities, the power of the colonies still stood in the hands of the “winners of europe”. I think these made colonists craved power which was one of the reasons they wanted to overthrow the british, so they had the control. But also I understand that the colonists felt mistreated because of the lack of representation in parliament. I would also be upset if, for example, I lived in Hawaii and because Hawaii was not part of the continental US. Hawaii did not really have any representation in the government. Also, I would not be happy if say, I was only aloud to buy Pepsi even though I prefer Coke, because the government has made sure pepsi had a monopoly on the market, to save the company. I would see this as the government taking advantage of their powers. So I definitely do agree with the colonists on these two issues that made Americans not like the British government. I see both sides to the argument but either way, the revolution created one of the most powerful and great countries in history, which I am proud of.
39. Kyle V December 10, 2017 at 9:13 pm

    I believe that the American Revolution was a conservative revolution and a radical revolution too. The colonists had spent over 100 years of salutary neglect from the British government, so they created their own little governments that created laws for the area under the British government. If you lived in Massachusetts that had their own government or Virginia which had the House of Burgess, you suddenly lost the little power you had to have the British come in and have you pay taxes. The French and Indian war’s debts needed to be paid for but if the British government had let the colonist be represented and not take away the small colonial government power, the revolution may not have happened till a later period. Some of the other colonist fought for a radical cause too. The African slaves are an example of people fighting for a radical cause. The slaves had no representation or power in government and the colonist promised to free slave that fought in favor of the colonists. They would have fought to be free but also to vote and have a place in the government which they never got until the 1960’s. The poor people did not have the luxury of wealth because they were mostly farmers or merchants and were severely hurt by taxes on essential goods like sugar, tea and stamps. The wealthy however could pay for these new taxes because of their wealth could pay for it but they didn’t want to pay this new tax that was never been placed before. This relates to what the census school of history said that ‘“shared commitment to certain fundamental political principles of self-government”’ was what bound the colonists together” (Bailey 140). Social changes in the class system didn’t seem to reflect until after the revolution and under the articles of the confederation. An example would be Shay’s Rebellion which poor farmers couldn’t pay for their land anymore so they locked up the court houses so they couldn’t take the land away. If there was a social problem between the wealthy and poor it wouldn’t happen until after the revolution because everyone was united to get rid of the British. Salutary neglect of the colony’s would be a factor in a conservative revolution and the British involvement in the colonies after the French and Indian war would be a factor in radical revolution, it could go either way.
40. Carolina Ishikura December 10, 2017 at 9:15 pm

    The American Revolution was definitely a radical revolution, but it can be seen as a conservative revolution due to the favoring of the white and wealthy. However, I believe that the revolution started from a conservative matter. I say this because in the beginning colonists wanted their freedom and rights in part of the British (essentially British residents wanted liberty themselves). What made the revolution radical was ‘taxation without representation’ and the general consensus of the colonists wanting to justify their rights/independence. It was the British that profoundly pushed the colonists to radicalism. American colonists would often express their grievances about the British rule towards them, and they would often defend the system or worsen the situation. For example, when Edmund Burke suggested the British rule to stop taxing the colonists because it would raise suspicion, the British ignored and continued and even created the Declaratory act to show dominance. But, once when the Declaration of Independence was created by our founding fathers it shook America. The Declaration of Independence probably showed the most radicalism from America. The ideals were almost farfetched. To have American leaders demand/support inalienable rights shows how wide-ranging their mindsets went. The Declaration of Independence brought enlightenment ideals and perhaps some humanism aspects.
    Gary Nash’s article, “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’” stresses how movements are always started by the oppressed. He also discusses how the white and wealthy never favored the poor’s views. Nash believes that radicalism is what started the American revolution. The white and wealthy absolutely feared the oppressed values and goals from women, slaves, and the poor because they wanted a true society. Their society meant abolishing slavery, women’s rights, and equality (economically). The Declaration of Independence really inspired and reassured the oppressed in America. I agree with Nash because it’s always the less fortunate that have to take a stand. Even ex-slave Frederick Douglass shows the growing example of radicalism in America. But I still believe that in the beginning of the revolution it was conservative stand. In the end when you research the American Revolution you see that it was a clear revolt. Revolting is radical.
41. Gabe Gamlin December 10, 2017 at 9:22 pm

    When you ask if whether or not the revolution was a radical movement or a conservative cause, you sort of betray the context in which the events that led up to it took place in, because if we consider the loose and unreliable state of the colonies before their largescale endorsement by the crown, the way that life and politics ran before America’s revolt in New England, and the methods used to enforce the revolutionary ideals, it becomes obvious the colonists were fighting a radical war instead of a war to preserve any running system. Many other students are choosing not to label the revolution as anything between the spectrum, thus not really answering the question, by saying “ I think it’s a little bit of both”, but their reasoning includes usually by stating that the elite white colonists were trying to preserve their “democratic power” from the British, showing a conservative side, and that the poorer citizens were trying to overthrow the elite power structure that was controlled by the British, showing a radical side but there is a glaring issue with that statement.
    The Elite Colonists were usually first generation Americans just inheriting money from their probably English parents and Grandparents, and were a new class of Aristocrats that were attempting to transfer power over to a new generation and hand of power from the classic British Oligarchs, who originally were the prime shareholders and managers of the colonies given they were British Property, and the middle class/ poor citizens were performing an act against the crown by not submitting to its demands, thus committing an act of disloyalty unseen from a layman’s perspective. These actions go directly against the proposition that the revolution was conservative and radical, because there was nothing really conservative about it.
    Many consider the previous “freedom” the colonists had before the autocratic rule of Britain took over that entailed Democracy and Taxation WITH representation, but let’s look at some circumstances here. Before Britain’s more forceful legislation of the colonies, the colonies acted as puppet states of the British Empire, and most of the colonists used to be accustomed to being simply a different kind of Englishman. They were seemingly obligated to fight alongside them in the F/I war due to their ownership of them, and their freedoms were only given by the loose but assured will of the country that ultimately they were an extension of. It was only after the French and Indian war that the British really started grabbing America by the neck and enforcing taxes and regulation upon them, as they needed to ensure that funds and resources they needed to pay off debt could be provided, because it’s simply easier to use the extra assets at your disposal then to, idk, tax you homeland citizens the full price and then some for regulatory purposes. I’ll admit, I think that it was a jerk move, but this action was in the power of the state and wasn’t going against anything a nation could do to a colony. It’s not like America was America yet, so saying that the regulations were unfair simply isn’t true, even if they were dubious. If the colonists were to be treated as regular citizens in a democratic sense, then their loose and smaller amount of representatives and power ultimately would not change the actions that a monarchy fully wanted to take place, and the colonists revolt to the taxes levied are, from a technical standpoint, deviating from the established principles of their Nation of Origin, because they were saying that they shouldn’t have to follow the rules of a Monarchy they live under. Going after the King and Nobles of England was not based upon a sense of Conservatism, because the colonists that were apparently “free-er” before the unfair taxes were already citizens in a puppet state, and their Democratic power was always limited by the attention of the British.
42. Nolan Kamoo December 10, 2017 at 9:50 pm

    Blog #106
    How Revolutionary was the Revolution?

    In my opinion, the American Revolution was a radical revolution for one main reason, which is taxation without any representation. Regardless of how “big a deal” the taxation was or how the Stamp Acts were or were not an overreaction as the blog states in the third paragraph, it is more a matter of principle. I do not think it would have mattered if the brits had to pay 10 shillings or 26 shillings. Once again, it was a matter of principle. The mere fact that they had to pay more than the colonists did in taxes when they had no representation is the matter, not the amount they had to pay. By the blog’s definition, a radical movement would be “people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one”. At least to me, separating a group of colonies from an existing conglomerate that was England and declaring yourself free from their tyranny sounds pretty radical. The colonies were under command from England and the British Parliament and had to obey by all their rules and order, and frankly, they had had enough. So, the colonists struck out against Britain’s rule by major events such as The Boston Tea Party and tarring and feathering ship inspectors. In addition, this wasn’t just a small group of people. The majority of colonists did not appreciate the control that Britain was forcing upon them and wanted to change. The only flipside was that some colonists thought that we would not be able to sustain ourselves on our own without Britain’s connections and help, in other words they wanted to stay loyal. However, still, most were not happy with the same political and social order that currently stood. Though, in the end, as the blog assessed George Bancroft’s views, this was “one phase of a master plan by God (…) toward a golden age of greater human freedom”. This assessment gives an in depth look into how the Revolution could have been “meant to be” and how what happened was right to happen. In the last part of the definition of a radical revolution, a new political and social order was created by the colonists, and at that a quite literal one. What we call the United States of America was founded on basic principles laid out in first the Declaration of Independence when we first broke ties with England, then the Articles of Confederation which served as our first stepping stones in our quest to achieve our own political and social order. When that did not serve its intended purpose, we adapted as a country and a society and the Constitution was created. Interesting enough how when we did not find righteousness and just in the order of the Parliament we changed, and then even when we did not find the same in ourselves, we did our best to adjust accordingly. These three different aspects to the American past are key in determining whether or not this revolution was a conservative or radical one, and to me the facts show clearly and specifically how it was radical.
43. Rachel Shulkin December 10, 2017 at 10:05 pm

    The American Revolution can be easily seen from many angles, depending on which class is taken into consideration. When I first studied this time period in school, it seemed like a great revolution to overturn the ruling of the colonies. But after looking into the American Revolution in great detail, I could see that there were many battles being fought in this war; not only on the battleground.
    When we look back on leaders of the revolution, the demographic is often consistently white males living in progressive cities such as Boston. Once this group of Americans had established a steady Government and living for themselves during the long neglect of their British administrators, they didn’t want to change it; a society that benefited and supported their lifestyles and needs didn’t need further progression. Supporting this claim is Robert E Brown, in an excerpt from the “Conflicting Views” article. Moreover, the Colonies had figured out how to work on their own without the British, all they needed were strong leaders to make political moves to push them out of technical ties with the British.
    The other hand of this deal presents minorities; essentially anyone excluding the white christian males at the top tier in Colonial society. “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’” presents a perfect example for this loss with the slaves in the Colonies. While their masters were busy parting from England, slaves had the concern of freeing themselves and as mentioned in the article, would go to measures as far as fighting for the opposing side to gain the freedom they so desperately wanted. But of course, their own masters seemed to be too occupied with their political issues and boycotts to give the same rights they believed were “natural” to slaves.
    Overall, these specific examples reveal the raw conservative side of the Revolution. Considering these points, it should also be said that there is more than one viewpoint in such an argument and surely this revolution had intentions from several sides. But seen from my arguments, the progressive portion of the colonies’ movement was completed mostly during salutary neglect; all that was left was the separation from England so the Colonies could continue to operate on their own free means, as they had done before.
44. Diego Roell December 10, 2017 at 10:13 pm

    Diego Roell
    AP US History B
    5th Hour

    July 4th, 1776 marks the day the Declaration of Independence was signed by representatives of the 13 colonies. This momentous occasion marked the official beginning of the United States of America, which would become one of the most powerful nations to ever exist. The American Revolution has many clear-cut facts: the war ended with the signing of the Treaty of Paris in 1783, the British lost the war, etc. However, a topic that is constantly being debated about is the reason for, and the nature of, the Revolution itself.
    It seems to me that the assertion that the Revolution was either a conservative one or radical one does not fully cover the true extent of the Revolution. I believe that the initial motive for the Revolution was conservative, seeking to maintain the previous way of life and preventing the massive change in politics and society that would occur if Britain’s ambitions were not halted. However, a desire for radical change of a different kind had been brewing in the colonies for a long time. The Revolution was partially divided since the beginning, with different groups wanting different things. Some were motivated to fight by the possibility of change: the overthrow of a government might bring an overthrow of the societal system as well. Others fought for the exact opposite reason: if the government was not overthrown, their society would radically change. Yet, both the radical groups and the conservative groups fought together against the British, even if they had differing aims. For example, the colonies had thrived under salutary neglect, a period of time during which the colonies mostly governed themselves and were able to develop in their own ways. After the economic fallout caused by the French and Indian War (also known as the 7 Years War), Britain wanted to bring the colonies into more direct control so as to extract revenue from them to pay off debts that had been accrued. It can be said that Britain sought to make the colonies behave just like any other part of the nation, with no particular privileges. This radical change set off a reactionary sentiment amongst many colonists, most notably wealthy elites and merchants. The elimination of the power that they had gained through political control and the economy would be jeopardized, a prospect that the rich and powerful did not find particularly appealing. The possibility for revolution did not exclusively attract the upper echelons of society, however. A class struggle between the wealthy political elite and the impoverished masses seemed to have been becoming more of a possibility as time passed, with economic and social disparity increasing every day. Conflicts had arisen due to these issues several times before, notably the Regulator Movement in North Carolina and the Paxton Boys in Pennsylvania. Many saw the Revolution as a possibility for change, for something better. They knew that their social situation would remain unchanged if Britain went unchallenged, so they cast their lot with the Revolutionaries and hoped that it would bring about their desired change.
    The aim of the revolution was a conservative one, but its effects were varied. The principal goal was achieved: preservation of the economic system and political system. However, the effects of the revolution would cause a ripple effect across society. Many changes desired by the radicals came about as a byproduct of new legislation created to maintain the country in the post-war environment. A more egalitarian, radical society arose from the ashes of the colonies. Such concepts like equal access to education (established in the Land Ordinance of 1785, in which a central plot of land in every township would be allocated to schools) or religious tolerance (guaranteed as an article in the Virginia Declaration of Rights, a document accompanying the Virginia Constitution of 1777) became central tenets for a Revolutionary America due to the influence from the radical freedom fighters. The goals of the revolutionaries might have varied, but it cannot be denied that the American Revolution was a revolution for every American.
45. Cariel Gamlin December 10, 2017 at 10:32 pm

    I Honestly think The American Revolution is more conservative than radical. We have been taught that it was more radical. I think the huge conservative ties is what brought the rage for revolution. First what is a conservative revolution ? Well as explained in the blog, it’s to keep rights and laws that they already have. Well, in the case of The colonies of the US they ruled themselves for years and have direct representation. All of the sudden after the seven years war Britain want to control. And above all they use virtual representation. What how dare they. First the colonies were very far from Britain so direct representation would be extremely hard. Ok but the rest was radical right? Well I would also disagree with you there. For example the very Idea of Taxation without representation. The issue was that they were taxed without the people’s approval. Of course that was not the way the colonist have been making decisions. So when the true rulers of the area made rules without their approval was horrendous. They wanted to rule the way they were priory or as school house says it “ They wanted no mothering hand,”. For example when the parliament wanted to crack down on smuggling from France or the west indie so they made the sugar act. Colonist did smuggle French goods so they didn’t enjoy this bill and they wanted to still smuggle the French goods. The colonists loved their foreign goods unless they were British. One example of this is the tea party. The Tea act restricted them to drink British tea that costed less than the dutch tea they preferred. They were used to their Dutch tea then, the sons of Liberty retaliated and threw the British tea into the Boston Harbor. So what? Well one thing I forgot to mention the Tea costed less the Colonists did not like the tea. You could say they were conservative towards their tea. Though I understand how it can be seen as a radical revolution, however there was so many parts of the revolution that out weighed the radicalizes of it. The revolution was always more conservative. ( I couldn’t find the from the bottom up article)
46. Alex Smith December 10, 2017 at 10:58 pm

    I believe that the American Revolution was a conservative revolution. The main reason I believe this is because the American people were self governed for many years and when the British came back I feel they didn’t want to adapt. Ever since the Puritans first arrived America had always been self governed even if it was for the glory of Great Britain. The American people traded with whoever they wanted to, they fought with whoever, they took land from the Indians. They loved the way they were governed because they led relatively free lives. When Great Britain came they wanted to change everything. They put restrictions on stuff made new laws and taxes and ultimately made American life different. You can argue that it was a radical movement because of situations like the Boston Tea party where they threw out British tea just to resent GB. But they only did this because Gb put taxes on other tea which made it expensive. Another event that historians could argue over was was the Boston Massacre an assessment of British power to keep the colonist in check or was it truly self defense. And while I do believe that there was some provocation i do not believe it was just to open on a group of civilians that didn’t even have guns. Also the whole riot was over an incident that happened because of a soldier. Not only big incidents like the Boston Massacre moved the revolution along but also the economic differences in class did. These differences were created because of the new laws GB implemented. Without the availability of new and to conquer people didn’t have as much opportunity to expand their land and fortune. Ultimately this led to some people not being as financially stable. With Gb gone the people would be able to conquer more land so the poor people had more reason for wanting a revolution. Finally this revolution wasn’t radical because the very first settlers were deserters of GB. They came originally for freedom. With GB in control they didn’t have the original freedom they had when they left. The cause of keeping freedom was enough to spark a revolution.
47. Annie Chernow December 10, 2017 at 11:02 pm

    I do believe the Revolution was both a truly radical one in nature and a conservative battle. It was partially radical because throughout the book, articles, and power points, we see that the lower/middle classes were fighting to obtain freedom and independence from the unfit ruling of the British, they were exhausted from all the taxing and hardships and believed they had enough. Throughout the revolution, we see the smaller, less wealthy and minorities opinions and words are not being heard by more ‘elite’ colonists nor the parliament. For women, African Americans, and even the Indians were fighting for a better social order within the colonies and wanted to create a more structured way to be equal and cause less arguments with the rich so we could ease tensions and unite as one to fight and win the war. With that being said, the revolution could be seen as a conservative fight. It could be seen as a conservative revolution because the elite colonists wanted to keep their powers they’ve had for years and keep political order intact as it’s always been. I see this fight more of a radical fight and less of a conservative fight due to the fact that Britain was an opposing country and many colonists didn’t stand by them. Britain was not fit for ruling the colonies and was very unjust.

    This revolution was mainly radical due to the unfit rulings of Britain. Through the events leading up to the revolution, we see many of the minorities wanting change within the social order, politically, and economically. We also see a legislature being intact by the colonists showing the rulings of the king were unjust and we shouldn’t have just one person ruling us, we should have the people rule us. Through government slowly being established by colonists who are perhaps more wealthier than most, we see new laws and orders being established to eventually come up with the declaration of independence. Within the declaration, we see a quote that is very crucial and important to America today and especially back the, which is “All men are created equal”. With women and african americans saying, protesting, and striking out on their own people to fight for their freedom and equality, it shows how the radicalism is shown in the revolution. They were fighting for a better social order which was equal, and eventually we adapted that to our colonies and to all the states through America which was created within the declaration. We see that radicalism is more of a fight occurring from the “inside” making it internal.

    The outside/ external fighting was from the more wealthy and elite colonists who wanted to keep exercising their power throughout the colonies. The elite colonists have been doing this since the french and indian war and have not been following the parliaments rules and orders. From creating a secret legislature to the Boston Tea Party, we see the elite colonists taking oppose to rules like salutary neglect and acts and taxes that were put on colonists at the time.

    In conclusion, the revolution was more of a radical based fight than a conservative battle. Many people have a side to it, but overall we see events that add up to make this revolution a fight with an external (conservative) and an internal (radical) side to it.
48. Kyla Hurns December 10, 2017 at 11:05 pm

    Blog #106 – How Revolutionary was the Revolution?
    A revolution is defined by the dictionary as a forcible overthrow of the government or social order in favor of a new system. When it comes to the American Revolution we must decide whether it was conservative or radical. For it to have been a radical revolution the American Revolution would have been defined as people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one. If it had been conservative it would be defined as people trying to keep powers/rights that they already have been exercising for years.
    I believe that the American Revolution can be considered both radical and conservative depending on whose point of view we are looking at. When looking at the majority of the colonial population who are white males some considered elites, the revolution is conservative. But when looking at the minorities during this time period like the slaves, women and poor or common people, it is a very radical revolution. The white colonist were fighting for a government and economy that they had already established. As well as the rights and rules they had put in place for the 13 colonies. The white colonists were fighting for the right to be democratic and rule themselves independently, as they had for the past 100+ years because of Britain’s salutary neglect. Compared to the white colonists, the slaves were purely fighting for their freedom. During the war they fought on both the British and American sides in hopes of gaining the freedom they had been promised. By the end they did not earn their freedom, but all states in the north did abolish slavery which was a big plus. The poor and common people were fighting for economic equality and qual representation in the government. Many of these problems came out as a result of the revolution and as a response to the weak government of a new independent America. Finally, while at the beginning many women just helped in the revolution by boycotting British fabric it eventually led to the start of fighting for women’s rights when it came to divorce and even property. The American Revolution when you first look at it can be considered a conservative revolution as colonists were fighting to be an independent democratic nation. But if you look deeper at all the different types of people and point of views it can be classified as a radical revolution that changed the course of America forever.
49. Nicole Bastian December 10, 2017 at 11:13 pm

    I believe that the Revolution was both conservative as well as radical. Different aspects displayed different versions of the Revolution. There were certainly groups of people who were attempting to keep powers/rights that they have been exercising for years. If you take the colonists as a whole for example, they had a way of living that they were satisfied and then when the British began to change things, they fought for what they wanted. The colonists did not appreciate the British taxing them to pay off war debt that, in the colonists’ minds, was British’s own issue. The colonists didn’t want their ways of living bothered, even if it was to help the British help them, mainly because they didn’t realize how little the British were really asking from them. Although, this could also be viewed as a radical revolution because there were indeed people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one. The minorities (slaves and women for the most part) make up the group of people who made this revolution a radical one. They realized how unfairly they were being treated and decided it was finally time to do something about it. These minorities wanted to overthrow the existing social order and create a new one, with themselves not at the bottom. A perfect example of this would be from the “Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”. In this article, Abigail Adams suggested to her husband that he give the women more power/equality. When she did this, he more or less brushed it off and thought of it as more of a joke. Another great example would be Shay’s Rebellion. If you think about Shay’s Rebellion, that incident alone was both radical and conservative. The act of the veterans rebellion and closing courts was radical, but the reasoning behind it was not. They rebelled because the government was trying to take their land because of their debt, but the only reason they had debt was because the country hadn’t paid them for fighting for the country. The soldiers were only trying to get what was right and keep the old ways (of actually being paid for fighting for the country). In the blogpost, it talks about Imperials vs. Progressive schools. It appears that Imperial Schools are more conservative and Progress are more radical. The blogpost states, “American colonies were moving in the direction of more home rule which, in essence, was revolutionary, by nature”. This implies that the colonies wanted to bring back what they had before Britain got involved, being more conservative than radical. On the other hand, the Progressive Schools were concerned about who would rule once the British left, being a complete change, meaning this was more radical than conservative. All in all, the American Revolution was both a radical and conservative revolution.
50. Joseph DeMarco December 10, 2017 at 11:21 pm

    In my personal opinion, I feel as though that the American Revolution was a more conservative revolution as opposed to a radical revolution, and that is for a couple reasons. Firstly, many if not all of the things that were upsetting the colonists that were enforced by Britain were enforced by only a few things, all surrounded by one idea, and this idea was related to one things that happened 20 years before. The British completely neglected the 13 colonies in the New World until they needed their help in the French and Indian War, and in paying the debt for the French and Indian War, and the colonists were living mostly well lives in the colonies under limited British Rule until the British needed the help of the colonists, which they enforced. I think that without the French and Indian War, the American Revolution most likely wouldn’t have happened, and so I think that the reason that the American colonists fought in a war that they had little chance of beating was not to create a new nation based off of new ideals, but to help recreate the nation that existed before the French and Indian War and before the enforcement of many taxes, acts, and duties by Britain. Many of the colonies before the French and Indian War in fact lived pretty similar lives compared to after the American Revolution, many of the colonies lived lives based off of agriculture in the south, and trade in the north, and they all had governors and leaders like in democracies, but in between these times, when Britain was in debt and needed someway to pay it off, the lives in the colonies were worse. Taxes terrorized the colonists, directly and indirectly, British Rule stopped them from expanding out west and kept them in small colonies, overpopulating the coastal regions, and even granted the land that they fought a war with Britain to obtain to the French-Catholic Quebecers (yes that’s a real word). The life in between the end of the French and Indian War, and the end of the American Revolutionary War was horrible compared to before the war, and the colonists just wanted to have their lives back and be free from the British that started this in the first place.