December 1

Blog #80 – How revolutionary was the American Revolution?

One of the primary themes that I’ve wanted you to consider over this unit on the American Revolution was the concept of whether or not it was a conservative revolution (people trying to keep powers/rights that they already have been exercising for years) or whether it was truly a radical revolution (people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one).   American historians have been debating the very nature of the American Revolution soon after it ended.

As we read over and study chapter 7-8 in our textbook, many of you are asking questions about the use of my analogy of the American colonies as the spoiled child / teen overeeacting to limits being placed on the adolescent by previously indulgent parent (Britain / Parliament) who now realizes that their child has grown up and needs to take some responsibility.  My attitudes about the Revolution have changed over the past five years since I’ve started teaching APUSH and have become more nuanced.  What I mean by that is that I used to believe what most of you have probably been taught – we were right and the British were tyrants, and it was just a matter of time that we asserted our unalienable rights by breaking away from the British empire to become the greatest nation in the history of the world.

The more I study the Revolution, the more I see numbers like the taxation issue (Brits were taxed 26 shillings to the colonists’ 1 shilling), and I wonder what the big deal was.  Parliament wasn’t asking the colonies to pay the debt of 140 million pounds sterling that the empire had accrued during the French and Indian War – just 1/3 of the 100,000 pounds that it cost for the soldiers to be there to protect the Indians on the other side of the Proclamation Line of 1763.  Part of me sees the Stamp Act riots as an overreaction, the Boston Tea Party as vandalism not patriotism, and that the Revolution was about how indebted the wealthy were to the British.

Bancroft 

The pre-Civil War era (1840-1870) was filled with historians who saw the Revolution as a quest for liberty, and the most important scholar was George Bancroft who wrote a ten-volume History of the United States.  Bancroft felt that the Revolution was a “struggle between liberty and tyranny… represent[ing] one phase of a master plan by God for the march of all mankind toward a golden age of greater human freedom” (Bancroft 13).   Bancroft represented a national historian who told America’s epic story in an ultra-patriotic way.  After the Civil War, however, historians wanted to reassess the Revolution in light of the country’s amazing industrial growth.

Imperial and Progressive Schools 

The Imperial School believed that political and constitutional issues brought on the Revolution.  Britain’s colonial policies were not as unjust as Bancroft had said.  There were benefits and burdens with the Navigation Acts, and the colonists benefited under Salutary Neglect too.  Also, Imperial School historians felt that the British were justified in taxing the Americans b/c it was British blood and treasure spent during the Great War for Empire 1754-63.  American colonies were moving in the direction of more home rule which, in essence, was revolutionary, by nature.

The Progressive School emphasized that it was the economic split caused by the competition between the colonies and the mother country.  Not only that, but the Progressives placed a great emphasis on class conflict, so this Revolution was actually two revolutions – external against Britain and internal between social classes (which social class would rule America after the British left?).  Historian Arthur Schlesinger noted that usually conservative merchants played a key role in kick-starting the Revolution b/c they feared what would happen to their positions if the lower classes won the internal Revolution.

Consensus Movement

Historians in the 1950s, the consensus school of history, feel that there wasn’t class conflict during this time period, but that a “shared commitment to certain fundamental political principles of self-government” was what bound the colonists together (Bailey 140).  It was these ideas – liberty, voting, representative government, trial by jury, habeas corpus – that bound Americans together.  The leading historian of this movement was one of my favorites, Daniel Boorstin.  It was these grand, shared ideas that bound the varied colonial interests together and minimized the social and economic conflicts that could have torn the colonies apart.

After the 1950s, historian Bernard Bailyn focused on ideological and psychological factors that drove the RevolutionFront Cover.  He had read hundreds and hundreds of pamphlets from the Revolutionary era and discovered that not only were the colonists extremely literate, they were very knowledgeable in political theory.  These American writers also grew suspicious (some say too sensitive) of conspiracies, and this hypersensitivity led the colonists to begin armed revolt in 1775 at Lexington and Concord.

New Left (1960s, 70s)

Another one of my favorite historians, Gary Nash, has examined the social and economic forces that moved the Revolution along.  He pointed out the increasing gap between the social classes and lack of social mobility before the Revolution, especially among the people who lived in the countryside.  Attacks by the poor (the Paxton Boys in PA and the Regulators in N.C.) on the wealthy before the Revolution are prime examples of the frustration and resentment that laborers felt at being left out of the rapid economic change.  Unlike the Progressive historians, the New Left historians like Nash don’t pin all of the conflict upon economic conflict but include social changes as well.

Not only have you gotten a lesson in historiography (the history of the history – of the Revolution in this case), you can see that history is not a static thing and changes over time.  The history usually reflects the political and social conditions of the writers / historians living at that time.

Using what you’ve read here and in chapters 7 and 8 (“Whose Revolution?”), provide with me some insight into what you think our American Revolution was – a conservative revolution or truly radical one in nature.  Also, please provide some rationale for your answer from the ideas above and the Gary Nash article, “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up'”. 

Due Friday, Dec. 4 by class time.  Minimum of 300 words.  

Sources:

Bailey, Thomas Andrew, David M. Kennedy, and Lizabeth Cohen. The American Pageant. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1998. Print.

Wood, Gordon S. “Rhetoric and Reality in the American Revolution.” The Idea of America: Reflections on the Birth of the United States. London: Penguin, 2011. 25-55. Print

Tags: , , ,

Posted December 1, 2015 by geoffwickersham in category Blogs

78 thoughts on “Blog #80 – How revolutionary was the American Revolution?

  1. Paige Stearn

    I think that the American Revolution was truly a Radical one over a conservative one according to the notes that we took and other evidence. Although there were a few counter examples, there are many more examples of people who were fighting to overthrow the government or lessen the power of the government then trying to stay in power. The British were trying to stay in power during this time, but the reason that the revolution began was to lessen the strength of the British government in America. There is evidence that all three of the social classes; lower, middle, and upper, were fighting to gain more freedom from Britain, including the slaves. After one-hundred fifty years of salutary neglect, America had developed a sense of freedom and independence. First, the lower classes wanted to overcome their new risk of being in debt from the new system of credit that was being used in America. Second, the middle classes were fighting against the new taxes that were put on everyday products such as tea and sugar. The middle class led many uprisings which triggered the revolution in the first place. Third, the upper classes were affected as well. Since the revolution started, the class systems began to fall, angering the elites. This was the fault of the British, probably causing the upper class males to get involved with the revolution. Finally, the slaves wanted freedom. They thought that America was being hypocritical by asking for “freedom” while they enslave other people. Many slaves rebelled against their masters and the British. Although, if caught, they were burned alive. Some British officials even offered the slaves freedom if they joined the British in the Revolution. Even women wanted to be a part of the revolution! Abigail Adams threatened to rebel if John Adams did not include women in the decisions of freedom and independence. Clearly, the revolution was America’s and not England’s. There is much more proof that the revolution was Radical then Conservative. More groups were on the Radical side. Only the British were on the Conservative side.

  2. Josh Klein

    After many heated discussions, informative articles, and reading passages from the textbook, I now have a better understanding of how revolutionary the American Revolution actually was. Based on my personal opinion after studying this topic for the past few weeks, I have come to the conclusion that what took place in the late 18th century was a radical revolution and not a conservative one. Although I can state an argument on how one may see it as a conservative movement, I feel more comfortable and at home stating my case for the radical revolution. In class, we read an article entitled “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’” by Gary Nash. In this, the historian breaks down the revolutionary era. In the beginning of the article, Nash immediately states a claim for a radical revolution. He stated that the radicalists dreamed of a future with better conditions than the ones they experienced when the fighting began with the British. The radicalists, or the average colonist, felt that they weren’t given equal political, social, or economical opportunities as the economic gap increased. Most of these colonists were backland farmers or didn’t even own the property they worked on. From this point of view, the colonists wouldn’t want to be conservative and fight to keep the rights that they have been exercising, but instead, fighting to remove a political and economical power and creating a new one. I strongly agree with historians of the New Left, such as Gary Nash, for the evidence provided to prove the existence of a radical revolution based on growing social, political, and economical gaps between the elite white male and the backwoods farmer. In this revolution, I would say that the elite white males were affected because the mass of the colonists wanted to destabilize those who held a strong grip on economical and political power.

  3. Victoria Lurz

    In my personal opinion, I struggle to pick an approach to side with. The American Revolution was a sequence of events and certain aspects of it lean more towards the conservative side while others appear to be radical. As I read chapters 7 and 8 my thoughts and opinions also changed over the revolution. As you said, growing up in elementary school I remember being taught that the British were all bad and that the revolution was their fault. After reading these chapters I’ve learned that the British can’t take all the blame for the events that occurred. I do agree with the Americans that after all those years of salutary neglect, to be “woken up” with an abundance of new laws and taxes would be extremely threatening. If the British were going to enforce all of those laws, they should have brought them forth in a timely manor not to overwhelm the colonists. On the other hand, the colonists definitely overreacted when they rebelled and organized events such as the Boston Tea Party. Yes, I understand that they were boycotting British goods, but they definitely did not need to vandalize their materials and throw them into the Boston Harbor. I also found that the Americans fighting for their freedom and declaring their independence was beyond hypocritical due to the fact that they had slaves. In Britain, the British were being taxed far more than the American colonists who remained under British rule. This was a conservative revolution because the American colonists wanted to keep their rights and not be taxed on goods they previously weren’t taxed on such as tea. Then again, the colonists were still under British rule and them lashing out against their government also makes it a radical revolution. Several interpretations have been taken to the American Revolution and Bancroft’s History of the United States of America happens to be one that was/is widely accepted. Bancroft’s interpretation was put on the back burner for quite some time, but was then reintroduced in the 1950’s during the rise of conservatism. In my opinion, Bancroft’s ideas seem to stem the whole idea that the revolution was all the British’s fault. He believed that this revolution was a struggle for freedom and liberty and that the colonists basically weren’t at fault. Although this idea is widely accepted, I tend to disagree with it. Post reading and dissecting these chapters and articles, I must say that I think the revolution was both conservative and radical.

  4. Christian Zeitvogel

    While there are many aspects of the factors that contributed to the revolution that suggest the revolutions was radical, there is more evidence overall to suggest that the revolution had more prevalent conservative motives.
    One of the largest explanations to point to the idea that this revolution was conservative is the idea of salutary neglect. For over 150 years, since the foundation of Jamestown, Britain was engaged in various domestic crisis’s such as civil war and other economic, religious, and political conflicts for power. Due to this reason, the colonists were left on their own for the most part to establish their own new way of life. When Britain finally gained some internal stability, they yearned to regain control of their foreign colonies in North America. However, during this time the colonies had become a melting pot for a variety of religions, ethnicities, and cultures. When Britain attempted to grasp for control over the colonies, not all of these foreign citizens approved of this. For instance, in the outskirts of Pennsylvania and other regions along the Appalachian Mountains, towns of Scotts- Irish folk scattered throughout this strip of country. These people fled to the colonies partially in order to escape the persecution and abuse of their people by the British back in Britain-occupied Scotland and Ireland. These people opposed a strong government, especially the British crown.
    Furthermore, these new colonies established governments that granted certain rights that the British government didn’t necessarily ensure. For instance, after the seven years’ war, it was required for colonists to share their homes with soldiers and provide them with food, clothing, and other necessities, if needed. This was further enforced in 1774 with the new Quartering Act which allowed soldiers to revoke citizens from their homes to use as barracks, if they deemed it necessary. It was because of these laws that the 3rd amendment was included in the Bill of Rights. Also, the judicial and law enforcement of the country was heavily partial to favor the police and government. For instance, police and soldiers had the exclusive right to search and seize property of citizens without a search warrant or probable cause. This reason is why the framers included the 4th amendment. The lists goes on and on for all of the constitutional infringements that were imposed upon the colonists by parliament. Many other of our basic constitutional prerogatives were established because of these violations including most of the rights given in the Bill of Rights, particularly the 1st, 5th, 6th, and 9th amendments. To summarize, the colonists lived much more granted lives that had a drastic amount more of flexibility and privileges than what the British government permitted.
    Another huge factor to play into the revolution was the colonists’ right to an open market and economic sovereignty. When Britain began to spread its rule back into the colonies, they integrated the trade system of mercantilism. This economic system, along with the restrictions placed under the Navigation Acts, the colonies were coerced to trade strictly with Britain. Before, the colonies were a global trading partner, trading foodstuffs with the West Indies, or trading raw materials with other European countries and parts of Africa. Now, the colonies ended up importing more items from Britain than they were exporting, hurting their economy. Furthermore, parliament ratified the Currency Act. This disabled the colonies from printing and using paper currency. Instead, they had to use British gold, pounds, shillings, etc. Many colonial businesses couldn’t adjust to this and had to shut down their businesses. To add to the pain, the colonies experienced a massive depression in 1772 with the “credit crisis”. Britain allowed colonists to start using credit, but many of these colonists soon found themselves in debt and couldn’t repay their dues. British bankers soon confiscated many colonial citizen’s property, such as their land, slaves, or personal belongings such as furniture or even pots and pans. Many businesses weren’t only bankrupt, but were also soon foreclosed. During this time, as mentioned in the DBQ completed on December 2nd, in the first excerpt, a discernible income gap continued to increase between the white male elite, and the lower class. This direct cause-and-effect from the credit crisis and overall poor economy set the ground for a major economic reform to occur at the conclusion of the revolution. This also raised another question, who would lead the country if the colonies won the revolution. The Progressive School argued that there was an internal secondary conflict because of the income gap: a clash between the social classes for who would lead the country and have more influence after the revolution. Historian Arthur Schlesinger added that many wealthy merchants stoked the sparks of the revolution in fear of being more equalized with the lower class.

  5. Camille Rochaix

    I believe the American Revolution was a radical revolution because even though the conservative revolution term makes sense with the American Revolution, technically the American Revolution was more than that, and more about how Americans were starting to see themselves separate from their mother country Great Britain, and wondering about political change. I agree and disagree with Bancroft idea of the revolution, yes, I do think that the Americans were seeking liberty from what they was a tyranny, but I don’t entirely agree with how the American revolution was a step needed for liberty of all mankind. Using mankind is such a broad and vague category that I think Bancroft should have been a little more specific. What is essential for other countries in Europe for the American Revolution to happen? Maybe, the French Revolution had sparked a few years later of the American Revolution, and they copied many steps that the Americans did. But was the Revolution essential for the women or the slaves? Not exactly, in Great Britain, the land that Thomas Jefferson accused for forcing slavery upon America, actually freed their slaves long before the Americans did. So did that part of mankind need the American Revolution as step for their freedom? No. When I stand by the radical revolution idea, I have a limit. I think the American social class issue was a problem at the time, but as you defined radical revolution you said “overthrowing a political or social order and creating a new one”, I believe that the social class did not change much in the Americas. The Social class change didn’t happen in the Revolution, a part of it may have happened during the time, but not by the Revolution. The social change issue is an example of a problem that people felt they needed to change, just like Abigail Adams, saw how women were treated and wanted it to change, or how the slaves heard liberty and this word began to make them think of their own liberty. Like historian Daniel Boorstin I think a major aspect, and the most important part of the American Revolutionary war was about what brought the people together. They started to see themselves as Americans, no longer British. They had their own laws, and their own culture different from the British, and the Americans wanted to make their own government, with their won laws like innocent until proven guilty, a representative government, a leader who has limited power, etc.

  6. Mia turner

    After learning much about the revolution, I believe that it was a truly radical revolution over a conservative one. There are a few examples to show that the war was conservative, but I believe that the radical actions of the colonists during the revolution outweigh the conservative ones. America wanted it’s freedom, and did whatever they could to make sure they would get it. All three of the social classes were fighting to gain freedom from Britain, including slaves. The lower class fought for a more equal society and to overcome the risk of being in debt. The middle class fought because they were unhappy that Britain was taxing them without representation, and wanted all taxes to be lifted. The middle class lead many of the uprisings which started the revolution. With the start of the revolution, class structure bagan to fall, which angered the upper class. I also believe that the revolution was a radical one, because it was about how Americans were started to see themselfs as seperate from Britain. They put their lives on the line to get the independence they wanted. They also broke many laws. Acts such as the Boston tea party were a huge symbol of rebellion, and if the revolution was conservative I don’t think there would have been anything like that happening. Colonists even woke up in the middle of the night to fight against the British, which shows how dedicated they were to defeating them. I think the revolution was a radical one due to the amount of patriotism in it and because they weren’t afraid to do what they had to to gain their independence

  7. Isabella Levitt

    Although there are mixed messages about the American Revolution, I believe that it was a radical revolution more than anything else. Of course there is what is on the surface, the colonists fighting to keep the independent way of life they had for so long before the British brought it upon themselves to intervene, but there is more underneath what is right in front of us. Similar to the ideas brought up by New Left historians, I believe there are many social and economic issues that are finally being fought for. They are issues that might’ve always been around, but when the Revolution came around, they came to the surface and the front of people’s minds. As the rich, white men with a fair amount of privilege revolted, it gave those who had less privilege the idea that they could have more too. This included women, Native Americans, slaves, and the lower/middle classes who were all hoping for social change somehow, as talked about in “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”. Though there are reasons for it to be considered a conservative revolution, it makes sense for it to be considered radical. If it was conservative, then the people who had less privilege wouldn’t be fighting for new rights, they would be fighting to keep things the way they were. Abigail Adams was a strong feminist icon of the time, and if she were conservative, she wouldn’t have put her opinion out so strongly on topics such as slavery and the way women were treated. The Revolution was not to get things back to the way they were, where the colonists were apart of Britain, whether they had influence or not. It was more focused on the attempt of colonists to start fresh and be on their own, creating a new society, which brought along changes for all the different groups that have been mentioned.

  8. Connor Bradbury

    The American Revolution was definitely a radical revolution. The definition is said to be people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one. I think the Americans did exactly this, seeing as democracy was not even a thing up until that point; monarchs and prime ministers had ruled the planet. A conservative revolution is one where people are trying to keep powers and rights that they already have been exercising for years, and Americans had been taxed without representation and denied simple rights by Britain. The Declaration claimed all men had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The colonies had been denied liberty, and even though they basically ruled themselves during the period of salutary neglect, Britain had ended that with the Proclamation of 1763, taking away the land west of the Mississippi River that the colonists had fought blood tooth and nail for during the Seven Years War. In the Bancroft interpretation of the revolution, historians claimed the revolution was a “quest for liberty… a struggle between liberty and tyranny”. The Imperial School believed political and constitutional issues brought the revolution on. They also said Britain had good reason to tax the Americans because British blood and gold was spent during the Great War for the Empire. The Progressive School emphasized an economic split caused by competition between the colonies and the mother country was the cause, along with an emphasis on class conflict. They claimed that there were essentially two revolutions: external against Britain, and internal between social classes. The Consensus Movement felt that there wasn’t a lot of class conflict during this time. They believed that a “shared commitment to certain fundamental political principles of self-government” was the cause for the revolution. The ideas of liberty, voting, representative government, trial by jury, etc. was what brought Americans together against Britain. The New Left view was that an increasing gap in social classes and economic conflict was the problem. There was a lack of social mobility before the Revolution in the countryside, and there were also attacks on the rich by the poor. I think it was a combination of these ideas that caused the revolution. I think despite the lack of total unity and organization, there was a sense of nationalism as described in the Bancroft and Consensus views. Americans were desperate for self-government and liberty. But I don’t think the British were totally wrong in their actions. They basically shouldered the weight of protecting the colonists, and just wanted to tax them to help pay for the army. (Only a third of those taxes were to be paid by Americans!) I think there was definitely an internal revolution of sorts, as African Americans and women both desired their own liberty, and they deserved it as much as the average white male landowner did from Britain. I think that instead of the social issues described in the New Left version, where they described the difference between countrymen and the wealthier plantation/city men, there were larger issues between the general social classes in America and Britain. The British were all pomp and fancy, while most colonists were working to live, or had worked to become successful. I think this was a huge cause of the revolution, as Americans didn’t want to be ruled by a people so different than them, and who knew next to nothing of them. Although, I think the economic issues between Americans as described in the New Left view was a main cause in the internal revolution shown in the Progressive School view, where colonists struggled to establish which people would be left ruling the colonies when the British were kicked out. I don’t think there’s any one cause of the revolution, I think there has to be a combination of all of the views given because it was such a large movement that was supported by people of all beliefs, economic and social condition, and nationalities. Given these reasons, I would definitely consider the American Revolution to be a radical one, as democracy was revolutionary in nature, and they started a new age of government: one of self-representation and liberty.

  9. Alexis Arbaugh

    I believe that the revolution was more of a radical revolution then a conservative revolution. A radical revolution is a revolution were people are revolting and acting out against the political power that they don’t want anymore. The colonies first started fighting for freedom because they felt that the British government was too controlling and wasn’t letting the American colonist do their own thing and just leave them alone. In the beginning it was only the whites but in time the blacks and slaves started to realize this too. The slaves asked themselves, “what about us”, so they felt the need to also fight for their rights. Women also started to join in the fight for freedom. They realized that they are sick and tired of being the house wife, raising the children and not having any rights outside of the house. The Native Americans wanted protection from the colonies so they went to the British for help, that didn’t end well. So they came up with the idea that if all the Native American tribes got together and protected themselves that they would be protected from the colonists. The reason that this is a radical revolution is because in order to get their point across each of the groups fighting for freedom revolted very harshly to get what they wanted. For example the colonists threw that Boston Tea Party in which they dumped all the British tea into the ocean because they didn’t want the tax on tea from the British. The lower and middle class colonists were upset because the rich could get away with a lot of things that they had to do or they would be punished. The slaves wanted freedom from their owners, they didn’t want to be laves anymore, so they would not work, fake an injury or even break tools. They went as far as to almost making an alliance with the Native Americans which the colonists were afraid of happening. They women didn’t really do a whole lot of rebelling physically, they wanted rights just as bad as everyone else but they did it with petitions instead of attacks. A radical revolution is a revolution that involves a lot of physical means of fighting for freedom and that what I believe happened in the colonies.

  10. Ruby Kolender

    The Revolution was definitely a radical revolution for many reasons. It is clear that the colonists actually overthrew the British government because the colonists needed to completely reestablish their government after the war. It was not a conservative revolution because the Americans realized from the war that they needed to completely reorganize their government and make laws that are fair where the people have a say, rather than go back to the loose, unorganized government in Virginia. For example, the colonists established aspects of government that were not there before the war such as the Articles of Confederation. I completely agree with Bancroft’s idea that the Revolution was a quest for liberty and for the breakaway from British rule. The Revolution was definitely not property owning men just trying to get back the power that they had before. Like what Bancroft said, they were actually looking for the freedom that they needed to run their own government. I also disagree with what the Imperial School said about the British being allowed to control the colonists. I disagree with this because they were just following the rest of the Britains who migrated there, so they were able to start controlling and taxing the colonists like nothing was wrong. People went to America in the first place to be free of persecution from religion or poverty, so how does it make it make sense that the the British should be allowed to just control a group of people who left their home so no one could be in charge of them? The Revolution was clearly a radical one because of the reasons the colonists went into fighting and the changes that took place in the lives of the Americans after the war.

  11. Alanna Rosenthal

    Based upon what we have studied in class and the notes of pages 162-163, I believe that the American Revolution was a radical revolution. This claim is based upon the overall disrespect the Americans had for the British. This is shown through the way they treated British goods and how they treated British soldiers.
    Just a few ways that they showed disrespect for their soldiers was by creating unnecessary fights and confrontations with the people that were supposed to be protecting them. Yes, some could say that this anger was triggered by the way that the British treated the Americans, but I feel that they weren’t as brutal as the Americans. The red coats would also get tar and feathered by the colonists. You could say that being a soldier, or even a loyalist, in America was dangerous and highly unpopular.
    They showed disrespect for British goods by going against the Tea Act (Boston Tea Party) and the Sugar Act, to name a few. The British may not always have the Americans best intentions at hand, but they were the leader, and when the British did tax the Americans, it was to get themselves out of the war date they have accumulated through the years for helping the colonists and as punishment for the colonies’ wrong doings. The Boston Tea Party could be, and was considered a terrorist attack at the time. To the colonists it was liberty, but to the British this was millions of dollars down the toilet. Even though the Tea Act lead up to this, it was not a fair trade. The Tea Act would have been good for the colonists because it would save them a lot of money on other goods that they wanted to buy. The Sugar Act also showed the meaner side of the Americans because of the fact that they would smuggle their sugar from places outside of British territory. The colonists were taking this too far.
    Overall I feel that the lack of respect America had for Britain was ungratefully given. The British had already don so much for them, and they did nothing in return. This may have lead to our countries freedom, but it took a slippery slope to get to where we are today.

  12. Jackson Mahle

    Based on the reading I have done about chapters 7 and 8 I believe that the American Revolution was a radical revolution. I believe this because while the colonists were under Britain’s rule they were part of a monarchy, but during the revolution they were moving towards a self-lead government and trying to break away from Britain’s grasp. Also after the revolution the colonists were constantly worried about one of the branch of government having way too much power and their government turning into a monarchy. The American Revolution was also a radical revolution because they were striking out against their government and trying to establish their own government the way they wanted it to be run. The America Revolution was not a conservative one because the colonist were not trying to break away from their ruling country but keep their regular government type, they were trying to break away from their country and establish their own government. Another example of radicalism in the American Revolution was a lot of the colonist wanted to abolish slavery this was a big change in the lives’ of the colonist living in the original 13 colonies, this would have been a huge change in the colonies but the South was worried that if slavery was abolished then they would lose most if not all of their businesses. The colonists also wanted to be able to trade with other countries other than Britain so once they broke away from Britain they were able to do that so this was a huge radical change because it allowed them to receive goods from a ton of other countries increasing their amount of foreign goods. Also the last Radical revolution example is the fact that the colonists were fighting for taxation with representation because they currently had taxation without representation this would have been a major change in the lives of the colonists.

  13. Sean Bonner

    I perceive our nation’s revolution as a more radical revolution than a conservative one. Despite the fact that these men may have truly been fighting Great Britain to keep their wealth and way of life, the newborn country was also fighting for radical change.
    One of the biggest motives for independence from England was the disagreement of government between the colonies and their mother country. The colonists resented the absolute power that the king held and how they were taxed without representation, no matter whether the taxing was fair or not.
    Throughout the revolution, the colonies hated the overpowering of executive and judicial branches. They hated that the British-held trials against the colonies that took place without a jury. The judges were also always British, which was seen as biased by many colonists. Colonists wanted government where most of the power was held in the legislative branch.
    When the colonies succeeded in declaring their independence, the Articles of Confederation was proof of this. This new government drastically weakened the federal government by stripping it essentially completely of executive and judicial powers. The federal government had no right to enforce laws over the states or check their power.
    Americans probably hated the taxation without their representation that England was enforcing on them. Whether or not this was an overreaction from the colonists is still constantly debated among historians. One this is for sure, though. The colonists fought for a new republican government that would give its citizens the representation that these colonists were fighting for.
    There were many Americans who pushed for slave freedom during the revolution, as well. Thomas Jefferson wanted freedom for slaves when helping write the Declaration of independence. Pennsylvania, the Quakers especially, already had a burning passion to end slavery. In addition, any new north state after America became independent made slavery illegal, thus creating a new way of life during the revolution.

  14. Heather Flannery

    After learning more and more about the American Revolution, I have a much better grasp on the many factors that were in affect to push a revolution. Personally, I believe that the Revolution was more radical rather than conservative. The colonists wanted to maintain their rights, but they did so in a way by rioting and doing things to show the British government that they were done being under their rule. Pre-Revolution, the colonists were in a time of salutary neglect and had established their own sense of freedom, which they refused to give up. Once the British tried to regain their grip of the colonies by enforcing acts and taxes, the colonists began rioting and doing anything in an attempt to regain the rules and the freedoms of the colonists during the time of salutary neglect. Besides textbook and PowerPoint facts, the article “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up'” by Gary Nash includes how radicalists awaited a future with better conditions compared to how they were currently feeling in effects of fighting with the British. These radicalists felt as though they were not as equal and free as those in Britain. There were many economic problems among the lower, middle, and upper class. With the many economic problems the nation was going through, the colonists obviously wanted a change rather than to continue the same practices. Another example of this is how Abigail Adams wanted to change the rights and freedoms of women. She began a petition in order to make a change rather than dealing and continuing with the little rights women had. Along with the social changes, I completely agree with New Left historians like Gary Nash. Economic problems may have been a major factor, but these economic problems ultimately led to the social problems the colonies were undergoing. No matter what side one is on, whether it be more radical or conservative, the American Revolution was one of the most important moments in history.

  15. David Kent

    Even though there is some evidence to the contrary, I stand firm in believing that the American Revolution was truly a radical revolution. Once the colonies were all set and running, they enjoyed 150 years of salutary neglect from their mother country of Great Britain. However, that all changed after the French and Indian War in 1763 when England decided to not allow the colonists to expand westward. This angered the colonists, and prompted rebellious actions of settling there anyways. For the rest of the 1760s and through the 1770s England started to enforce previously ignored regulations and laws as well as drafting up new acts and taxes that hindered the colonial lifestyle. The colonists were enraged by how they were being taxed by a parliament that they didn’t even have representation in. They were also appalled by how the King of England and his government had seemly no respect for the colonies and the way they conducted themselves. This rage boiled over into a revolt where the colonists looked to throw off the yolk of the British and replace it with their own American republic. This revolution was not conservative because the objective of the revolution was to cast out the British Crown. Once the Olive Branch petition was shut down by King George the Third, there was no going back to the good old day of salutary neglect under British rule. Instead of a monarchy, a new political order in the form of a republic was to be born from the rebelling colonies. However, this revolution also was overthrowing the existing social order of America. As stated in the Gary Nash article, “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up,’” women were starting to try and gain more of a foothold in the social ladder. The revolution came with women like Abigail Adams and Mercy Otis Warren and the opportunity to voice their opinions about the status of women. People of the lower and middle classes also started to rise up and shake the existing foundation of society. The idea that lower class people who didn’t own property should still be able to vote floated around the revolution’s radical nature. Slaves even saw the change as a chance to rebel against their masters as the colonists rebelled against the British. With the political and social changes that came about with the revolution, its status of a truly radical revolution was cemented for the ages.

  16. Yuval K.

    The Revolution is both conservative and radical. There is proof for it being both, although I believe that the Revolution was more radical. Though, the conservative mind sets were a big part of the Revolution. For instance, the British were afraid to lose the country they worked on and developed for so long. They were afraid that they will lose the name that they founded for themselves. They were also afraid that they will lose all trade that they had with the Americas. But, the radical people were a slightly bigger influence on the Revolutionary War. First off, economic issues had big influences on the Revolution. The British were taxing the colonists a lot, as we learned with, for example, the tea act. The problem was that not a lot of people can pay the taxes that the British demanded. Some weren’t able to pay taxes or debt because of their class. Some were too poor to pay taxes and/or keep land. Even the Progressive School emphasized the differences class differences and their conflict. The Progressive School also believes that the class and economic differences could also have affected the relationship between colonies and their mother country. Gary Nash, historian, saw an increasing gap between social classes and the lack of mobility before the Revolution. This was especially occurring in the countryside. These social and economic helped guide attacks made by the poor, like Paxton Boys and the Regulators. These attacks were on the wealthy before the Revolution started, to show the frustration and resentment the lower classes felt by being left out of the economic change. Moreover, because of this economic injustice, people, like Samuel Adams, started to revolt against taxes and other acts that impacted the colonists in a negative way. For instance, the Boston Tea Party, where colonists dumped many pounds of tea in the harbor. In addition, some historians in the 1950s believed what got the colonists together were the want of self-government. These historians believed that liberty, voting representative government, trial by jury, and habeas corpus bounded American colonists together. After the 1950s, Bernard Bailyn found that during the Revolutionary era that colonists were extremely literate and “were very knowledgeable in political theory.” Since the colonists were highly knowledgeable, they started growing “suspicious of conspiracies,” and this led to the revolt at Lexington and Concord. This political resentment also helped the First and Second Continental Congress. Even though the Revolution was partially conservative, it was mostly radical. The Revolution was mostly radical because the many colonists who were radical actually did something that they believed in and the conservative British didn’t put as much effort as the colonists.

  17. Allison Miller

    The revolution was a tumultuous time in many aspects. It was a major turning point in our nation’s history, and should always be well remembered and accurately recounted. However, this is where people go astray from each other’s individual beliefs and reasoning. Some groups of people, such as the pre-Civil War era historians like George Bancroft who was one of the strongest and most well written Patriotic leaders of thought. He described the war as an All-American fight for our god given rights to freedoms and democracy. I would like to admire this way of thinking because it is so supremely confident and pure. The British are the bad guys and we, the Americans, are the best. This Patriotic way of thinking is the most confident and secure branch, but before I made my own decision on whether the revolution was a conservative or radical one I needed to understand other looks on it. Other schools of thoughts include the Imperial and Progressive schools. They argue that the political and constitutional issues, or the economic issues, that were plaguing our early country in the 17 and 18000’s brought on the Revolutionary war. These groups of historians give Britain a lot more lenience towards their policies. They see where the English were coming from in their taxing of America and don’t hold a grudge with them for doing so. Lastly an important factor in the Revolutionary war, which is noted by both groups of Historians, is the growing tension between social classes in America. The mid to lower classes wanted to make sure they kept and built up their say in the governmental proceedings, and wanted to make sure the minority wealthy white farmers don’t get total control. In looking at all the reasoning and sound evidence, I am unable to call the Revolutionary war either Radical or Conservative. I believe that it was time for a new country to arise; created by and for the people of the world, for immigrants. I support the measure the colonists went to in order to attain their freedom, however I understand why Britain did what they did. In fact, if I was an American colonist at the time with the same info I have now I imagine that I would understand what the British were trying to do (beyond just trying to keep a powerful influence on us) but I would still fight for America’s freedom and independence.

  18. Katie Westerlund

    I believe the American Revolution was a radical revolution and definitely not a conservative revolution. Americans changed themselves and became independent and better. Under British rule, the Americans were unhappy and felt that the British were forcing the colonies to be underdeveloped. The British tried to make it so the colonies had to rely on them for safety, money, and support, but once the colonies figured out that wasn’t true many changes occurred. Historians like Gary Nash have made reports of how before the revolution the gap between social classes was very large, thus making an unhealthy relationship between rich and poor in pre-revolutionary times. The sentence “All men are created equal” in the Declaration of Independence holds the intentions of decreasing that gap between rich and poor therefor making all white males equal at the time. This would bring the colonists together in a new way. Colonists also felt that the British Government was unjust and that they could do a much better job governing themselves. When America first started to govern themselves they did not have a judicial or executive branch because the British had had that and the Americans had disliked it. To Americans, the British were tyrants, the Americans didn’t need the British and didn’t like their rules and that’s part of the reason they created their own country. The British also put taxes on the colonists that were unnecessary, like the stamp tax. They even restricted the colonies from making certain products and buying goods from other countries. This was quite unfair to the colonies. By making themselves independent they could make, buy, and sell whatever they wanted to. So, the American Revolution was truly radical. They wanted change so they went out and got it. The Americans persevered through everything the British put them through and created the amazing country that America is today.

  19. Rachel Berg

    I agree with the idea that the Revolution was truly a radical Revolution and the idea from the Imperial and Progressive Schools are what really started the war. Our American revolution was a sense of hope for the colonists that they could start their own country, play by their rules, and be able to start a democracy. The Imperial Schools say that the American Colonies started to move away from their mother country and started to home rule by nature. You can see this by all of the riots and issues the colonists crated because of what Brittan was doing. For example, during the Sugar Act, Brittan taxed the colonist very heavily but they could not do anything about it because sugar was an essential item in every day life. Also, the Stamp act created lots of riots because the colonists saw the extra money being raised for England but inside their territory. After riots, mobs, and uprising all over the acts were repealed. This shows that the colonies can break away and beat Brittan to start their own country. The Boston Tea Party riot showed that the colonists are not going to put up with all of the acts and taxes that the Britt’s were giving them and they had to do something. After all the acts when Salutary Neglect started, this showed the colonists what it would be like to have their own country and not have to worry about someone doing something to them that they didn’t want. The Progressive Schools says that Class conflict inside the colonies was a very important thing to consider because if America won the Revolution what class would rule the new country. If the upper class won I think that it would sort of be another form of “Brittan” because they would put heavy taxes on the middle and lower class for their benefits and not care about what happened to them. If the Middle class won I don’t think much would change because they keep the economy going and sell food and supplies to everyone else, therefore they are an essential part of the class system. If the lower class won riots would start and the class system would fall because they want to be the ones on top of the “chain”. Also, the country everywhere would go into chaos not knowing who should rule so really the internal revolution between class systems would never end. For these reasons, the Revolution was truly radical and not conservative.

  20. Justin Sherman

    I believe that the American Revolution was more of a radical revolution than a conservative one. I did however, see ways that someone could fight the other way while we were taking notes and looking at articles. The main reason that the revolution happened was to lessen the power that the British had in America and over the colonists. The system of credit was a big way in which the lower class people felt as if the British had to much power. This system handed these people a great risk of going into debt. Also, during this time there were a lot of revolts and uprisings against the new taxes that were being put onto daily items and foods such as stamps and tea. These acts were being forced more upon the middle class than the lower class or upper class. A major revolt that came out of this was the Boston Tea Party. Now I can see how people could say that this was taking everything a step to far, but in the end if the Boston Tea Party never had happened then the revolution most likely would never have happened and the colonist would continue to get taxed and be controlled completely by the British. While John Adams was writing the declaration his wife, Abigail Adams, sent him a letter telling him that she should add a section in it that talks about women rights not only by the British, but also from their own husbands. She noticed that women were being treated very poorly by their own husbands and wanted this to change. However, John Adams did not see this in the same way as her and wrote her a letter back laughing at her. Also, during everything that was going with the start of the revolution, the slaves in America were getting more and more angry. They wanted freedom and did not like that the Americans were asking for more rights and trying to get the British out even when they were being enslaving people on their own. These slaves believed that they deserved freedom before the British was going to leave America. As one can now conclude, the revolution was not a conservative but a radical revolution as it focused greatly on the classes in America.

  21. Lizzie Kompus

    From what I have read so far and the in class notes, I believe that the American Revolution was truly radical. I do see both perspectives and how both sides have created their beliefs but in my opinion, I think it was a radical revolution. A radical revolution is when people over throw their existing government for a new one. This is exactly what the American Revolution was. During that time period, the British have “owned” the colonies for over 150 years however major of that time was solitary neglect. Under solitary neglect allowed the colonies to form their own trading, jobs, seek more land, form government, ETC. However in the mid- 1700s when the British came back they were strict on the colonies, and they didn’t like it. Agreeing with Bernard Bailyn from “Whose Revolution”, they hated paying their taxes, colonists didn’t have any representation and the proclamation line made them furious. The colonists began to crave liberty because they didn’t agree with the British rule. The New Englanders started rebel with outbursts like the Boston Tea Party and Boston Massacre, eventually the other colonies joined in. This would have to be a radical revolution because they were protesting the original government. After the revolution, the Continental Congress had written the Declaration of Independence, created new laws and limited the power of the executive and judiciary branch because they didn’t want to give anyone too much power, fearing to repeat their past. This falls directly hand in hand with the Consensus Movement from the Gary Nash article, “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”. The colonists came together by disagreeing with laws like the Stamp Act and the Intolerable Acts, Americans during that time were not in favor with Parliaments new acts because they felt that they weren’t given justice. The new government system in America was made to be different from the British rule because they wanted to be their own powerful and successful nation.

  22. Bianca G

    The Blog How Revolutionary Was The American Revolution poses the interesting question: was the american revolution a conservative revolution or a radical one. The american revolution, at its core, was truly a radical revolution, because it was a new regime quiet different than anything seen before it. What it turned into was quiet different but we must address the revolution itself. The reason it happened was because the British were taxing the colonies unfairly, but was it really unfair? The British neglected america for more than one hundred years but never the less they were still our mother country. It was unfair of them to taxes us but rarely did they actually collect those taxes (with the exception of the tea act) and governments need money to run. What the British were asking for wasn’t so out of the ordinary. The colonists revolted at the taxes, which then lead to the revolution. The colonist were no better than disobedient children in this way. The point is that the colonists wanted to live in a fantasy world were governments don’t need money to run themselves and everyone just does whatever they want.This, was a radical new idea, and it didn’t work. Following the American Revolution the US came up with a new way of running the government. The articles of confederation was americas first attempt at running their new country. The colonist were pretty much in agreement that a republic was the way they wanted there government to be run, which wasn’t such a radical idea, however they also wished there to be no taxes and each state should have its own government. It quickly feel apart which lead to the constitution which established a stronger central government and taxes which were two things the colonists were hellbent on not having in the beginning. It also included a system of checks an balances so that no one branch of government was stronger than the other. One of the branches of government was the general populace.The fact that everyone (white males of a certain age) had a say and not just the land owners was a crazy idea. These were truly new ideas, or at least they were when compared to how the British were running things. The american revolution was one new radical change after the next, which leads me to believe that the american revolution was radical in nature.

  23. Maggie Bills

    I believe that the revolution was more of a radical revolution then a conservative revolution. A radical revolution is a revolution were people are revolting and acting out against the political power that they don’t want anymore. The colonies first started fighting for freedom because they felt that the British government was too controlling and wasn’t letting the American colonist do their own thing and just leave them alone. In the beginning it was only the whites but in time the blacks and slaves started to realize this too. The slaves asked themselves, “what about us”, so they felt the need to also fight for their rights. Women also started to join in the fight for freedom. They realized that they are sick and tired of being the house wife, raising the children and not having any rights outside of the house. The Native Americans wanted protection from the colonies so they went to the British for help, that didn’t end well. So they came up with the idea that if all the Native American tribes got together and protected themselves that they would be protected from the colonists. The reason that this is a radical revolution is because in order to get their point across each of the groups fighting for freedom revolted very harshly to get what they wanted. For example the colonists threw that Boston Tea Party in which they dumped all the British tea into the ocean because they didn’t want the tax on tea from the British. The lower and middle class colonists were upset because the rich could get away with a lot of things that they had to do or they would be punished. The slaves wanted freedom from their owners, they didn’t want to be laves anymore, so they would not work, fake an injury or even break tools. They went as far as to almost making an alliance with the Native Americans which the colonists were afraid of happening. They women didn’t really do a whole lot of rebelling physically, they wanted rights just as bad as everyone else but they did it with petitions instead of attacks. A radical revolution is a revolution that involves a lot of physical means of fighting for freedom and that what I believe happened in the colonies.

  24. Claire B

    After learning about the American Revolution in a more in-depth way, I still believe that the Revolution was truly radical. I think that the Revolution was radical because the colonies had stuck out against the British empire in a way that had never been done before. In the Old World, the ruling empire-like countries had complete control over their land and businesses, no one tried to cross them. Up until that point, no other colonies had struck against the mother country, Brazil hadn’t broke away from Portugal, Mexico hadn’t gone up against Spain, etc. But, then 13 American colonies sign the Declaration of Independence and officially do something that no colony had done before, and that is truly radical. By definition a radical is someone who advocates thorough or complete social or political reform. Using that definition, events like the Boston Tea Party, Stamp Act riots, and the meeting of the first Continental Congress were all radical. All events and gatherings occurred because they were trying to invoke change. The actions of specific figures in the Revolution can also be used to show that the Revolution was people striking out on their own. For example, George Washington broke away from the British Army just to support the colonies, John Adams wrote a new code of laws, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration, and John Hancock led the way for patriotism everywhere. Furthermore, Benjamin Franklin helped spread American policy across the seas. All of these actions were radical because they inspired change and they happened all on their own. I tend to agree with the Consensus Movement when it comes to historiography. I think this backs the idea of a radical Revolution because it shows that the American people united together all on their own to overthrow the existing government. Overall, I think the Revolution was truly radical because the 13 colonies did something that was unprecedented before that and the actions and events that took place had truly risen on their own to inspire reform.

  25. Ari Mattler

    After being reeducated on the topic of the American Revolution, I believe that the Revolution truly was a radical movement. Before the revolution the British Empire had started enforcing major taxes among the colonists. There was no more salutary neglect that the colonists held ever close to their hearts. In outrage of the new taxes the colonists reacted in a riots and protest. After years of abiding by rule the colonists knew that they could not live under this new way of life or the British Empire and revolted officially becoming Americans. Colonists knew revolting was the only answers. The average colonist felt they were lacking fairness in the economic, political and social world. Nash stated in his essay that the colonists dreamed of a better future when fighting of their British rulers. The gap between the average colonist and aristocrat was widening and those lower class citizens wanted better. The lower class farmers who worked on land without having owned such land, fought for a better life where they would have such land and be successful. Also, because the colonies weren’t being represented fairly in parliament, they wanted to have a new government that would be on the opposite side of the political spectrum as the British scum they so dearly despised. They were taxed without representation, and ruled by and king with absolute power. Proof of this would be that after they had successfully revolted, the colonists drafted the Articles of Confederation, their own new government, and even replaced that with the Constitution to assure their government would not be like the British and assure a success. And while you could argue it was conservative for some colonists were fighting to keep their way of life, the vast majority wasn’t living the bland life they desired. Clearly, the American Revolution was a radical one that was meant to change, and not maintain, the average colonist’s life.

  26. Matt August

    Many historians argue that the American Revolution represented a completely new political order. However, these same historians dispute whether or not this revolution was radical or conservative in nature. While there are several schools of thought that emphasize political, social or economic change, I propose that the conflict brought about changes only in some respects and continuities in others. The Revolution was radical in its ideological and governmental changes by turning away from the King-Parliament model of Britain and more towards placing power in the hands of its citizens. Unlike Britain, the colonists (later Americans) shared a common vision of fuller participation in their government and their society. Despite these factors, the Revolution was also partially conservative as it did not significantly impact everyday life. Through Salutary Neglect, the colonists were already used to less restrictive trade, lower taxation, and lessened war. Furthermore, the leading colonists such as George Washington also played a great role in the Revolution itself. On the other hand, the French Revolution (a relatively radical series of changes) resulted in a dramatic shift in the lives of everyday civilians, culture and society were completely transformed, social classes and land ownership was entirely renovated, and the political leadership experienced turnover every few years. One of the reasons that this revolution was so brutal and radical was because there was a deeply entrenched political and economic system in which the social elites held all of the power. In the case of America, however, the Consensus School of historical thought states very clearly that the colonists possessed a widespread “knowledge of political theory.” This would mean that they were more informed than their French counterparts and that they were more prepared to take part in the Revolution. When we take a look at this Revolution it has elements of both Radicalism and Conservatism. When compared to the British political system, it appears radical since the “people have the power”. However when the American revolution is compared to the French Revolution, the American Revolution is extremely conservative as a result of the continuities with its colonial past.

  27. Matthew B.

    In my personal opinion, I find it hard to not view the American Revolution as a truly radical revolution. Upon reviewing and pondering over the notes and articles that we were presented with in class, to me the revolution was very radical. In repeated instances, the Colonists stood up to their mother country, Britain. A specific, and well known, instance where this occurred was with the Stamp Act. The colonists organized a revolt, even if it may have been out of haste and anger, and stood up to the King. Eventually, the Stamp Act was repealed and the Colonies felt victory. The rebellion against these taxes symbolizes the concerns of the American Colonists. For one, the colonies simply did not like being taxed, even if it was fair. Also, the colonies hated the idea of “taxation without representation”, meaning the colonies should have a say in what their hard earned money goes to.

    Recently in class, we have been reading and going over the article “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, written by Gary Nash. This article goes on to explain the ways in which the revolution was actually radical. For one, it states that one of the main causes that led to the revolt was that the colonists thought they were being treated unfairly with regards to their political, social, and economic concerns. The gap that existed back then, and still does today, continued to widen. This led to the back wood farmers and many of the un-educated becoming angry at the white, land-owning males, leading to the people on the lower rungs of society wanting to claw their way closer to the top. The American Colonists seemed to be driven by the want for change, and also the craving for a new, much more reasonable society. Overall, I believe that the Revolution was truly radical due to the ideals that the majority of the colonists were driven by to found their own strong, and free, nation.

  28. Isaac Thompson

    Based on the information in the textbook, class discussions, and previous knowledge, I believe that the American Revolution was truly a radical revolution over a conservative revolution based on different reasonings. An opinion of the revolution being conservative can easily be argued and backed up with facts, and both could be valid terms describing the American Revolution. Although, the American Revolution was on a much larger scale than a basic conservative revolution, because the Americans began to see themselves better off independent from the Mother Country, Britain. Also, the American colonies desired political and social change that in terms came from them, and they wanted their own form of government and constitutional rights. As wealthy, American colonists began to revolt, it gave less wealthy classes such as servants, slaves, women, and Native americans as well, who were all in to have a social shift. I believe this is a great example to back up the broad definition of a radical revolution, which was “people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one.” The Declaration of Independace was created on July 4th, 1776 and stated that all men had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In contrast, the colonies were taxed without representation and their own rights were denied by Britain. This caused a lot of controversy and people were getting extremely harsh towards Britain. The colonies believed they deserved more beneficial rights that guaranteed their lives to be safe and individually controlled. Britain somewhat allowed the colonies to rule themselves for a short period of time during salutary neglect, but eventually went back on that idea with the passing of the Proclamation of 163, which took away the land that the colonies earned from the seven years of war. I believe these examples provide a valid argument on the tensions of Britain and the colonies, what began the revolution, and why the revolution was radical.

  29. Olivia S.

    In my opinion, the revolution was a radical one more so than a conservative one. The colonists were suffering heavy taxes from the British and dealing with harsh acts placed upon them, and in addition to this, their own social and political struggles were what set them over the edge. The colonists were enraged at most of the acts and laws the British placed on the colonies after 150 years of salutary neglect. To make sure the British understood their anger, the colonists did everything they could to provoke fights, rebel against acts, not pay taxes, and overall show a general disliking of England.The colonies were also becoming more divided as time went on, partially because of the wealth gap that separated the rich planters from others in the colonies. Not only were the whites unhappy with their social and economic conditions, but women and slaves began to come to this reality as well. Slaves, for example, began to desire freedom. They thought, like many others, that it was extremely hypocritical for the colonists to want freedom when they were enslaving Africans. After witnessing the colonists’ cries for freedom, the slaves decided it was their turn, too. They revolted against their masters, some going as far as to even killing them. Women also sought an opportunity to climb the social ladder. According to “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, women such as Abigail Adams pushed for women to have a bigger role in society. Women wanted a chance to be equal in society, and many other minorities felt this way too. Backwoods farmers, merchants, etc. wanted a voice in government. They felt as if they had no say, and that they were being taken down by the wealthy, white, landowning man. I agree with the New Left historians in this sense that the social and economic gaps were the basis for the frustration that drove the radical revolution. Many steps were taken throughout the revolutionary period to create a new system of government, such as when the Articles of Confederation were written. The colonies wanted a new, republican system of government that was completely unlike that enforced by the British. Overall, the colonists had to show their anger and push for a new way of life using relatively harsh and rebellious methods, which in conclusion makes the American revolution a radical one by nature.

  30. Mary K.

    After reading chapters 7 and 8, and looking back through all of the notes and articles we went over in class, I came to the conclusion that the American Revolution was more of a radical revolution than a conservative revolution. The definition of a radical revolution is “people striking on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one.” And I think that that is exactly what went on during this revolution. Leading up to the revolution, the colonists did many thing to rebel against the British, including the Boston Tea Party, which was the colonists showing they’re rebellion of the new taxes (tea act, sugar act stamp act). They also enticed the British Soldiers on Kings Street, on March 5th 1770, to shoot at them by throwing rocks, clubs, ice, and sticks- this was known to be the Boston Massacre. The colonists rebelled here because they were unhappy with the taxes imposed by the Townshend Acts. I realize that the colonists were trying to fight for their independence, but I do think that they were over reacting a little bit in the ways that they rebelled. I think that if this were a Conservative revolution, the colonists wouldn’t be willing to risk losing so much, they put their lives on the line in order to break away from the British government. In the “Radical Revolution from the Bottom Up” they talked about how the upper-middle class white males who owned land and were wealthy started this revolt, and it inspired others (middle-lower class, women, Native-Americans, and slaves) to revolt as well, because they were hoping for a change in the social order. Because a Conservative revolution would be people trying to keep powers/rights that they already have been exercising for years, it would make sense for this revolution to be considered radical because the poorer people of America, who were revolting, weren’t trying to keep powers or rights, they were trying to gain some.

  31. Ro Arambula

    The revolutionary war, in my personal opinion, can not be seen in any other way besides a radical revolution. In the article we went through in class, the author said that the revolution, in large part was a poor, lower class revolution. The author said that the poor and lower class colonists started a revolution because they wanted equal opportunity as the other citizens. Also, with the idea of liberty spreading throughout the colonies, you see groups of slaves, motivated by this idea, to try and fight for their freedom. An example of this would be when 107 slaves ran away from their plantation in Charleston, South Carolina. Many whites and slave owners feared of uprisings of slaves. Another example of how this war was radical, was how slaves would run away from their plantations to fight for the British. This shows a large population of the colonists wanting a change, making an argument for a radical revolution. People for 150 years had been profitable and had flourished on their own. Once the British tried to take a little from them, the colonists decided to completely abandon the British. Over salutary neglect, the colonists almost got greedy, and kept wanting more until they realized they did not need the British. I think that the revolution started out as a conservative one. For the most part, Salutary Neglect benefited the colonists in the long run, and set up there reasoning and motives for wanting to separate from the British. However as people realized what they were capable of, and how things could change, people took advantage of the way the world was working. It was a good time to get something done in the colonies because things were changing. As the revolution went on, people had new goals which made the revolution shift from a conservative one, to a radical one. You can almost see the continuation of the revolution in todays society. A conservative revolution would mean to go back in time and go back a few steps. As a country, thats just not who we are. We are programmed to continue to move forward and upward, and this is evidence of that.

  32. Max C

    I believe that the American Revolution was a conservative revolution. Throughout the decades of salutary neglect, Americans had become accustomed to their standard of living, which was in many ways superior to that of Britain. One only has to look at the fact that the British were taxed 26 times more than the Americans to see the relative wealth the colonies had. Compounding this wealth inequality was the French and Indian War, which drove Britain further into debt than they already were. Eventually, British leaders realized the untapped goldmine of the colonies, and proceeded to take advantage of it. Regardless of how well they had it in comparison to others, Americans hated the changes and responded rather violently in response. In essence, the Americans were fighting for the rights that that they historically held. Another point against the theory of a radical revolution was the social order before and after the war. If Americans were fighting to change society from the relatively stratified model that Britain had implemented, then there should have been some significant changes in society after the Revolution. Instead of that, the wealthy planters and other “aristocracy” retained their political and economic power well after the revolution. Even in areas of the country where the aristocratic planters could not farm, there were merchants and other powerful individuals to take up the mantle. In essence, I believe that the Revolution had little to do with social order because of the relative similarity between the 13 Colonies and America.

  33. Piper Meloche

    The American Revolution was not as new as many people would like to think. In schools, children are taught that the British harshly ruled the Americans for hundreds of years and the brave colonists decided to take a stand. In reality however, the colonists seem to be fuller of angst than of bravery. For years, the British left the colonists almost completely on their own. There were laws that directly affected the colonies but few to none of them were enforced. At this time Americans were completely loyal to the King and the government under which they ruled. It was only when the rules were actually enforced that revolutionary feelings started coming out. So really, you can’t blame what the British. All they did was enforce pre-existing rules. I draw comparisons to the cell phone policies at schools. When a teacher does not enforce the rules, they’re no big deal, however as soon as a teacher says that they follow the district guidelines for cellphone policy, suddenly that teacher and what they advocate are the most evil and immoral things in the world. Not to mention that the ideas that they were fighting for in the revolution were extremely self-serving. They fought for liberty, but not for those enslaved by the colonists, the right to live where they want, govern the way they want, and live the way they want, unless you are an Indian unfortunate enough to live in close proximity to the colonies. It is difficult however to call the American Revolution a completely conservative revolution because of the fact that at a time, the rules that the people felt were infringing upon their liberties were being violated. However to call the revolution completely and totally radical would be simply inaccurate due to both salutary neglect and the hypocrisy within the revolution itself. The radical revolution being taught in our schools is not only wrong, it is textbook American Exceptionalism in our schools and around the country.

  34. Stephanie Johnson

    From what we’ve read from the pages in the book and articles, I think the American Revolution was more of a radical revolution than a conservative revolution. Americans had started to separate themselves from Great Britain because they wanted change. The Americans were fighting for their independence, which they had gotten a sense of from the periods of salutary neglect. They fought to overthrow the government and gain their own power. The British fought back to stay in power and keep control. There was a large gap between the social classes, which created the social and economic problems of the angry lower classes leading to their revolts. The colonists were focused on pushing for changes to be independent, not for things to return to how they were. Women, slaves, and Native Americans also joined this fight for freedom because of their wants for freedom and change as well. In the article “The Radical Revolution From the Bottom Up”, Gary Nash showed how people were afraid of the slaves wanting liberty because they would rebel and create an uprising. They started their part of the revolution for freedom by leaving and fighting to help the British, who may have freed them in return, to remain in control. Abigail Adams showed women’s wants to fight for freedom and representation. She had thought of the women’s revolution while her husband, John Adams, was gone. The Native Americans fought to defend the Ohio River Valley
    Also, I agree with Bancroft’s idea of the revolution being a quest for liberty. The colonists wanted to be separate from the British and gain the freedom of their own government. A radical revolution is people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one. That is exactly what colonists had done.

  35. Morgan Flynn

    I happen to think that the revolution was more radical than it was conservative. The colonies learned how to be independent after 150 years of salutary neglect from Britain, and were able to function on their own. This changed though, and after the events of the French and Indian war, the colonists were left with somewhat extensive taxes and limits on settling westward. These colonists, dead-set on settling past the Proclamation line, instead disobeyed the rule and settled there anyways. The mother country fought back against this rebellious behavior, making new acts and taxes which further raised the desire for revolution in the colonies. The colonists were enraged that Parliament taxed them so heavily, yet they had no representation in Parliament. The harsh actions of the British against the colonists led them to revolt and plan a revolution, and ultimately overthrow the British government and establish an American government of their own. What makes the American Revolution radical is the fact they did want to completely redo the government in the colonies. However, the colonists decided to make an attempt at peace with the Olive Branch Petition in 1775. The British king shot this peace arrangement down, which could be seen as the final straw for the colonists, who, a year later in 1776, wrote of their independence from Britain. In “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, Gary Nash talks about not only how the colonists as a whole rebelled against the rules given to them, but how women were also trying to defy social rules, starting somewhat of a revolution of their own. He also talks about non-land owners trying to be able to vote, as well as slaves being so inspired by the American Revolution that they decided to rebel against their masters just like the colonists did to the British. This shows that the American Revolution was an inspiration to revolutions even today.

  36. Sean S.

    I believe that the American Revolution was a mix of a conservative revolution and a radical revolution, but closer to a radical revolution. It was partially a conservative revolution because colonists liked how their lives were during statuary neglect, and hoped to get back to something similar. It was more of a radical revolution because colonists disliked being told what to do by the king, who was not even living in the colonies, and the poorer colonists hoped to lessen the gap between themselves and the rich, and wanted more social power than they had at the time.

    One of the reasons this was a radical revolution was because American colonists were sick of being told what to do by someone who had no knowledge of what the effect was, or cared about the people he was affecting. Colonists knew that the King and Parliament did not care about the people in the colonies, and only wanted the tax money. This angered the colonists to a point of no return. They were mad that they were being told what to do after almost 150 years of no interaction with their mother country other than new immigrants migrating to America. This fits the definition of a radical revolution because colonists wanted to create a ne political power and get rid of the old.

    Another reason that this was because not only the colonists wanted a major change. According to “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, the slaves were also ready for change. After the 7-years war, there was a major increase in the number of slaves being imported to the colonies. Due to this increase, and the slaves constantly hearing the word “liberty” from all of the whites, people feared that African American slaves would wonder about their own liberty, and maybe even have their own revolt against their white owners. This also fits the definition of a radical revolution because African Americans wanted to change the social order and gain some political presence.

    This revolution was partly conservative as well; due to the colonist hopes to return to the old ways, during statuary neglect, when they were left to themselves and were not forced to do things by some random people. During statuary neglect, colonists were happy to be left alone, and govern themselves. This fits the definition of a conservative revolution because they were used to being left alone and they wanted it the stay that way.

    In conclusion, the American Revolution was a mix of conservative and radical revolutions. While it is more like a radical revolution, there are also aspects of it that fit as a conservative revolution. Many people feel the need to classify things under only one category, but many times, as in this case, nothing is ever as simple as black and white. There is always a spectrum of classifications, and the American Revolution is one of the many things that cannot be classified as one simple thing.

  37. Janae G.

    I believe the American Revolution was truly radical in nature more so than it was a conservative. I believe the power that was contained within the government became to be too much for the people and because of this they joined together to fight against the government, strip them of their many powers, and overthrow them. In other words, the united thirteen colonies wanted their independence from Great Britain. This included not only all three social classes but slaves as well Americans felt they deserved all rights of Englishmen but the British felt different. Instead, they believed the colonies were created to be used in the way that best suited the crown and the parliament. If it was conservative instead of overthrowing the government they would’ve supported them as the loyalists did. Although, yes the American Revolutionaries fight for liberty did begin as a conservative argument for rights as British subjects. Radicalism was tempered by the failure of the American founders to extend political rights to all those who naturally deserved them. The Americans used The Declaration of Independence to the best of their advantage. It listed grievances against the King for the violations of the rights the colonists deserved “all men are created equal; they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” It is said that if government fails to follow what was stated in the previous quote, it is right of the people to alter and institute a new government. Due to the many uprisings, and the motives of the people I believe this was a radical revolution. The goal was to gain their independence and that was the outcome. But yet still minimal conservative, it only began that way so in my opinion radical overall.

  38. Vanessa H

    I believe the American Revolution was a radical revolution that consisted of the American people overthrowing the British government in favor for a new, non-monarchical government. I believe so because even though there had some semblance of government—which would mean it was a conservative revolution—it did not hold over all the colonies as a single government, but rather each individual colony had its own form of government it upheld. Afterwards, when the British were cast out and America claimed its independence, they formed a new government that applied to all of the newly formed America—the Articles of Confederation. I agree with the Consensus Movement idea: that the American colonial people felt bonded together by a “shared commitment to certain fundamental political principles of self-government”. Once the British started to impose taxes and other acts on them, they shared a common enemy as well as political principles they felt were just. The Gary Nash article “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’” also points towards the revolution being radical, since it describes how the Americans wanted a different government than the British one they were living in, such as when Abigail Adams wanted to change the rights for women. As well, in the “Whose Revolution”, it mentions that historians believed the colonists ‘took up armed insurrection in defense of their intellectual commitment to liberty’. This quote explains that the Americans started to revolt against the British for a new government because they felt their liberty was threatened under that government. This further proves that the revolution was radical. The colonists didn’t trust British government and didn’t like how it treated them in comparison to how they had lead their lives beforehand, and decided that it was time to overthrow the British government for a new one that was better adjusted to their new lifestyles.

  39. Chandler A

    Although the American Revolution had both radical and conservative parts, I believe the revolution was more radical than conservative. The revolution was truly about how the colonists started viewing themselves as independent from Britain and becoming less accommodating of Britain’s laws “forced” upon them. The colonists wanted freedom badly, and they also wanted to change many of the things they thought were wrong with the British government. You defined radical as people striking out to overthrow an old government and create a new one. This is exactly what happened during the revolution. The colonists did want to keep some of the same rights, which is why I think it was still slightly conservative, but the way they made changes by rioting and fighting pushes it into the more radical side. Also, there were many things that the colonists wished to change completely. Such as, they created a new democratic government instead of monarchy and made a bill of rights. The colonists wanted to take away power from the judicial branch and instead give more power to the legislative branch, as is evidenced by the Articles of Confederation created after the war. The whole purpose of the revolution was that the people viewed Britain as a tyrant that imposed unfair laws and taxes, although in reality it wasn’t that bad it’s still how many colonists perceived it. All classes of Americans fought in the revolution, although for different reasons. The lower class fought for a more equal society, while the middle class fought against taxation without representation and were leaders in many battles against the British. The upper class fought to maintain their wealth and power. Besides these facts, the article “The Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’” by Gary Nash talks about how the radicalists wanted an improved and different life than the one they had been living under the British rule. These radicalists felt oppressed because they were not being given the same rights and liberties as were being given to the British. For these reasons I believe that the revolution was more radical than conservative.

  40. London McMurray

    The American Revolution based off the definitions given of a radical and conservative revolution, I would have to say it was a mixture of both conservative and radical. The revolution was conservative because in the beginning America was in Salutary Neglect from the British for 150 years. The colonists governed themselves with little help from Britain. It wasn’t until the French and Indian War when the British wanted to reclaim their control on America after they helped fight. I would have to agree with the Imperial School in believing that the taxes the British started to enforce wasn’t that bad considering the British fought for the Americans. And the taxation wasn’t an outrageous amount compared to the taxes the people in Britain were paying. Yet I do understand how the colonist could feel threatened since they’ve been running their colonies independently for so long then having someone come in and try to change everything. However the revolution was also radical because once the British began to tax and set restrictions on the colonist that caused them to want official independence from Britain. As Bernard Bailyn explain the colonist began uniting together because they all shared resentment toward the British and wanted to break away from them and create they’re own government. Another way it was a radical revolution was because the slaves also wanted to “overthrow” the system in a way. Since the colonist were crying for freedom the slaves thought it was their chance to gain freedom too. The colonists were however hypocrites and freedom for all really meant freedom for the wealthy white men so that didn’t necessarily work out. In conclusion the war was both radical and conservatives because although the colonist were already governing themselves for 150 years while under salutary neglect they had to remove Britain completely in order to be free.

  41. Joe Behrmann

    In my opinion the American Revolution was undoubtedly radical. The colonists had been under some form of British rule for hundreds of years and ending this control was not only radical just because the colonists had split off from the British government but also because this showed the rest of the world that British weren’t as strong as they may have been thought to be. After reading chapters 6 through 10 I have learned much more about not only the revolution itself but also why the revolution itself and the economics behind the war. I believe that all wars start because of economics in some form, and this war was no different. The colonists did want to maintain their rights from the salutatory neglect, but I believe they wanted something even more. They wanted to be recognized as a completely separate nation from England and the King. The colonists wanted it to be known across the world that they were their own nation. This movement was not conservative at all because even during the salutary neglect, the colonists were still connected to the King. When parliament began to create what the colonists thought of as ridiculous taxes such as the Stamp Act, Tea Act, and the Quartering Act, the colonists were infuriated. They were committing acts such as the Boston Tea Party, and tar and feathering British Soldiers. I would consider these radical acts of terrorism. They were committing acts in order to make a political point to the King and Parliament. They did not want to be a part of the British Kingdom and these events eventually spiraled into a war between the British, and the colonists who were much more liked by other groups and countries such as the French. I completely agree with Gary Nash in that the revolution was not only pushed by economics, but also by social issues. Many of revolutionary figures that are remembered such as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were at the top socially and economically and were social elites. This revolution was driven by all social levels of America from slaves to women. Everyone seemed to want more rights. Abigail Adams, the wife of John Adams, in my opinion was a feminist. She was pushing for more rights for women during the revolution and this was overshadowed by the already social elites of America pushing for more rights for themselves. This revolution was all around defiantly more radical than conservative.

  42. Courtney D

    The American Revolution was a radical revolution in nature based. The American Revolution was radical because of the way the colonists reacted to issues they were presented with. For example, in Gary Nash’s article called “The Radical Revolution from the ‘Bottom Up’”, Nash writes about John Adams’ opinion about social gaps and that people would soon become more disobedient if this gap continued to widen with the economy going sideways. This position taken by Adams and Nash contributes to what is one of the important factors contributing to the Revolution: class issues and economic separation. I agree with the Progressive School’s position that because of competition between the colonies and also with Great Britain, the colonists became very agitated and tense with which class would rise to power in the future. I think that that this Revolution fits the description of “people striking out on their own by overthrowing an existing political or social order and creating a new one” because of how they reacted to things that the British Parliament did and to situations that occurred on their own soil. Examples of radicalism because of something that British Parliament did would be when the colonists rioted over the Stamp Act and the whole incident with the Boston Tea Party because of the remaining Tea Tax. The British had decided to tax the colonists in the first place because of the French and Indian War /Seven Years’ War and this was a reasonable action taken but the colonists did not take it lightly. A situation that occurred on American soil that caused radical responses would be when the Native Americans petitioned Congress to return their land to them and were met with a threat of attack if the Native Americans did not cooperate with the expansion of Americans. Also, a historian by the name of Bailyn believed that the paranoia colonists had about the security of their liberties was a large component to the radical Revolution. The colonists were very tense about making sure that their liberties were secure when the British started getting involved with their lives, they snapped and retaliated in extreme ways.

  43. emma gillard

    I believe that it was a radical revolution because Americans were trying to change what was happening. They didn’t want the British to rule over them even though I don’t agree with why they didn’t want the British to rule over them. I agree with your analogy that America was a spoiled child for most of the topics we talked about but for example during the Stamp act it might not have been a lot of money but they didn’t have internet or computers back then everything was on paper. So every single piece of paper they used would cost (that’s the way I think the tax was used). I know a lot of people would say that it’s not a lot of money but if you consider how much paper use. But I wonder if that rule also applied at kids at school. Did they have to pay for every book they used? How much money would people use if they liked to read? They would pay for every page in the books which is a lot. That’s why I think they did not overreact to the stamp act. Other than that i mostly agree with The Imperial School they talk about how the British were right about putting some of the taxes on the Americans because it was the British fighting for them not anyone else. Sure they were fighting for themselves but it was mostly British people fighting and British people dying so the colonists would get more land. I do also agree that the economic problems could have cause the war but that would still relate to it being a radical revolution because people want to change things and everything the Progressive Schools say would just end up proving the British were right to cause the Americans didn’t want a class to lead they wanted to be equal which is good but has never happened. But they were also selfish, merchants didn’t want the British to continue taxing because they were losing money and might end up poor and they did not want to be part of the poor society, I mean no one wants to be poor but they could have trusted the British that everything was for a good cause and once every dept was payed off the could finally earn their money back. They would only have to wait for a while and I think that if they weren’t selfish that would have a good way to show your loyalty to your people because you should be loyal to your own people.

  44. John Doyle

    The American Revolution was far more radical than it was conservative. The analogy that the colonies were acting like a group of spoiled teenagers that were not getting their way would only make sense if the teenagers were being raised by a parent that could spoil them, instead of being on their own for 150 years during the salutary neglect from Britain. It was during this time that the colonists learned how to be independent and build lives for themselves and their families. After the French and Indian War, the colonists were left with taxes to pay off the debt it accumulated, along with limits on the westward settlement that they so longed for. The colonists came to the radical conclusion that (for some inexplicable reason) a country across an ocean had no authority over them since they did not want anything to do with them anyway, so they went ahead and settled across the Proclamation Line of 1763. Great Britain fought back hard against these rebellious acts by implementing things like the Stamp Act, Currency Act, Sugar Act, and Quartering Act, thereby adding gasoline to the fire that was the discontent in the colonists. The colonists attempted to make peace with Britain with the Olive Branch Petition in 1775, after the Boston Tea Party and the Boston Massacre, but this only provoked the British government. The dismissal of their attempts at peace is considered to be the “final straw” amongst the colonists. One year later, in 1776, they crafted their famous Declaration of Independence from Great Britain. In this document, they express all of their largest issues regarding their treatment, such as unfair taxes. In his article, “The Radical Revolution From the ‘Bottom Up’”, Nash discusses that the American Revolution was about more than just independence from Britain. This was also a time for women to break through gender roles, those without land being able to vote, and slaves perhaps being inspired by rebellion against oppression in their uprisings against their owners. The American Revolution is often given credit for inspiring other revolutions around the globe, such as the French Revolution. The eventual writing of the Constitution showcases how set the colonists were on crafting their own laws and ways of life, which is one of the most important proofs as to why the American Revolution was truly radical.

  45. Aldo Buttazzoni

    The Revolutionary War was, in my opinion was a truly radical revolution. After 150 years of salutary neglect, after the colonists learned to live without the British government and their rules, they came back to insult the colonists progress and tax the hell out of them until they were forced to resist and rebel against these injustices. The colonists were denied the right to expand westward past the Appalachian and were taxed without representation. This was a huge disrespect from the British to the colonists and they had to rebel against it. The Revolutionary War was just that, the colonists took their country they made over the prior 150 years into their own hands and rebelled against the tyrants that were the British. Gary Nash talks about how colonists as a whole rebelled against the rules given to them and also how women were also trying to defy social rules, starting somewhat of a revolution of their own. This is even more evident as we looked at the letters Abigail Adams to John Adams expressing her wishes to not forget the women of the revolution and to include them after they win. He also talks about non-land owners and the poorer more common man trying to be able to vote, as well as slaves being so inspired by the American Revolution that they decided to rebel against their masters just like the colonists did to the British. The whole purpose of the Revolutionary War was to overthrow the government that was harshly oppressing them and enslaving their rights and to gain their own freedom. They took their lives into their own hands and took on unbeatable odds and fought extremely hard for they’re country they worked so hard for, for over 150 years. For these reasons, the Revolutionary War can only be seen as a radical one.

  46. Giovanni Romano

    The way I see radical revolution is a drastic change in the government and how the people are perceived in the eyes of others. This is true of the US revolution in many ways. Firstly the revolution was as George Bancroft said” a struggle between tyranny and liberty” this is a large part of why the revolution started, the English were taxing the colonists without them having any say in the matter , and they made tons of laws that made the lives of the colonists difficult. The Currency act was one of those, the Currency act of 1764 was where the English outlawed paper currency, and since the colonists usually only had access to the currency of their respective towns it made it very difficult to pay off the debt that they had to English and Scottish loaners. This bankrupted many of the people in debt to the English and Scottish which now makes the colonists unable to dig themselves out of this hole that the English made by banning their money. The amount of issues that the colonists faced was impressive and the fact that they didn’t revolt sooner was a shock to me. This revolution resulted in many drastic changes to many things that the English had thought were okay because they ruled everything. The US was considered its own separate and legit place, it was practically its own country; we could do what we wanted, we could use whatever currency we wanted and we would no longer be pushed around by the English because they thought that we were their property and were only around to buy their stuff. We became the rulers of ourselves and there was no country that could have any power over us politically, we were separate and had thrown off the shackles of the old “government” that ruled us and made a path for us to follow. The radical changes of the government, and the way that the US was perceived makes the US revolution Radical not conservative.

  47. Victoria A.

    Through my reading in chapters seven and eight and the several documents we have analyzed as a class I find the Revolution to be more radical than conservative. Everyone in America became involved from slaves to white plantation owners. The Americans didn’t just want life to go back to normal they wanted their independence and rights to liberty and justice. From the viewpoint of Gary Nash a main cause of the revolution was the inability of social classes to mix and the growing gap between the plantation owners and the small country side farmers, as the people began to notice these effect worsening they wanted a change and not life to go back to how it was with the ever growing social gap. The Baxton boys and the Regulators are examples of violent occurrence stirred by the mistreatment of the poor by the higher class. Once people started to see the pushing away of Britain by America during several riots and boycotts against the new acts and taxes enforced after Salutary Neglect all classes, even slaves, began to see that fighting for what you want can get you there. The Revolution wasn’t only between America and Britain it soon became part of internal struggles of separation in America as well. During the Salutary Neglect America created its own new sense of political and economic freedom giving them a taste of what they truly wanted. It could be argued that Americans only wanted to return to that state but they are forgetting about our loss of raw goods/materials American’s had to supply to the British because they were our “Mother Country”. By declaring independence America would be supplied with more of our own goods that we could use for trade within other countries. If America wanted to go back to before then why did we create the Declaration of Independence and send it to the King, with our message of independence? America new the benefits of protest and violence to get your point across because they had witnessed them before through triumphs against acts Britain imposed on America. They finally were lead to a point were refusing and protesting over and over was beginning to highly irritate the colonies, and that lead to fighting for America’s new independence from Britain.

  48. Joan L

    The American Revolution, in my opinion, was a conservative revolution that was surrounded by a lot of propaganda. The revolution can be broken down into four main parts; taxes, unity, rights, and government. American colonists were governing themselves for about 150 years, but the British parliament recognized the importance of the colonies after the 7 Years War. King George III wanted to control the colonies more as they had been unregulated in their actives; like laws the Navigation Act that restricted the colonies from trading with other countries besides Great Britain. Britain was in a major debut so they taxed their colonies to help cover the debut. The American colonies were taxed 1 shilling, comparing that to the 26 shillings the citizens of Britain was paying it wasn’t much; the reason for the massive outcry and protest was because they weren’t represented in Parliament about the decision. Other acts like the Proclamation of 1763, the Sugar Act, the Tea Act, the Currency Act, the Quartering Act, and the Stamp Act also followed and all were taken badly by the colonies. Riots, protests, feathering of tax collectors, the infamous Boston Tea Party, and Boston Massacre, and lastly moving west where all reactions to British insertion in the colonists government. The colonists where also in debut because of the 7 Years War and though they won the Ohio Territory they weren’t allowed to settle past the Application Mountains (Proclamation of 1763), a law passed to protect the colonists from the Native Americans and resolve tensions. A disliking of parliament grew in the colonies not only because of the proclamation but British taxes as well. The colonists didn’t vote on the taxes so they felt like the British where taking away their rights to vote on the laws they had to follow. The colonists had their own form of government where they were represented; in the British Parliament they weren’t physically represented the decisions were made for them. The best I can describe it is: a child chased out by its parent and left to fend for itself, the parent sends its things over time. Then after the child had grown up and learned to provide for itself the parent want to move in a watch over every move the adolescent made enforce their rules and ask the adolescent to help pay off its debut, when they haven’t spoken in years. The result of the revolution separated the American colonists from Britain and left the colonists to continue governing themselves as they pleased, but they were doing that beforehand, though it was a catalyst for the French, Haitian, British West Indies revolutions.

  49. Claire Cassar

    Whether or not the Revolutionary War was radical or conservative depends on perspective. I think looking at the war from an American point of view, it looks radical and like a dramatic change. But looking at the whole picture, I think that the war was a conservative revolution. America was very salty about all of the taxes without having their say or representation in the government, which makes sense. Instead of thinking of a solution or a compromise, America decided to just protest. If America wanted to be a part of Britain, then they have to follow Britain’s rules. Of course they can have a say but I don’t think they should resort to just throwing a fit. I see the Boston Massacre as an example of throwing a fit. I don’t think there was any logical reason to torment the soldiers. The soldiers couldn’t exactly just change the laws right then and there. What did the colonists expect to come out of this? In the video about John Adams, the soldiers said the colonists were harassing and provoking the soldiers to shoot. Americans, in my opinion, were not being logical and seeing that if they wanted change, then they should have thought of a solution to the problem. England needed money, so they taxed America. You can’t expect to be part of a country without supporting them. Yes, some of the acts were not necessary, but that does not mean the only solution is to rebel. I think America raised tension for itself and blamed it on the British for trying to deal with America. The political and social order didn’t change much for America, it’s pretty much always believed the American ideals are the correct ones and that’s how it should be. They wanted to be independent and were acting that way prior to declaring independence. The colonies weren’t exactly united and the government following independence only bounded them loosely together. The Declaration of Independence was about liberty and freedom, but for the people who didn’t really need it. “All men are created equal” had its own definition of what counted as who is guaranteed rights when the document was written. I think our country would definitely be extremely different without the war, but back then it wasn’t a radical change.

  50. Dahvi Lupovitch

    The American Revolution was a radical war. During the Revolution, the American colonists rebelled against Britain, the mother country. However, even though it may seem that all of these actions happened suddenly, according to the British, it is not the case. After having been through Salutary Neglect, the Stamp Act, the Navigation Acts, and much more, the colonists already had a revolutionary mindset. The Revolution began because of their desire for liberty, and the unalienable rights that they were entitled to. George Bancroft was a patriotic historian who said that the British were tyrants. I agree with this statement because despite having to pay less than citizens in England (one shilling as opposed to twenty-six), the natural rights of man, life, liberty, and property, were being controlled by the British, all the way from England. However this did not happen until 150 years after the colonists arrived and settled in America, or the period known as Salutary Neglect. I also agree with the Consensus Movement, which stated that what brought the colonies together to fight the British was not internal conflict, but that the Americans were in search of a self-government system. After winning the Revolutionary War, the Americans got to work. They gave all the power to the states, and very little power to the federal government. This was a radical movement because it was very different than the British way of running their country. While the British had a king and a Parliament, which made all of the decisions of the nation, this new founded country, America, had no executive branch, no judicial branch, thusly giving all of the power to the legislature, or the people. The Americans decided that this was a good idea because they were so scared of turning into another English society. Because after the Revolution ended, the American colonists changed the government system that had been known in Britain into something radically different, the search of liberty was a radical movement set out for by the American colonists.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*