Skip to main content

View Diary: Bill Maher on what the Second Amendment crowd is missing (124 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Didn't the redcoats just want us to pay our taxes? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ER Doc, LeftyAce, catwho, slothlax

    And Americans just went bonkers?
    Thats what the Brits think

    Happy just to be alive

    by exlrrp on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 06:11:40 AM PST

    •  New England was under massive military occupation (7+ / 0-)

      ....for every 3 New Englander; there was a British Regular.
      Before open hostilities commenced, the Royal Navy was blockading the coast.  

      The thing that chaffed the Revolutionary Whigs was that there was no effective representation within the British  Parliament.  The Tax issue could never be resolved for them until they got some form of representation

      This space for rent -- Cheap!

      by jds1978 on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 06:38:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  More complicated than that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy, elginblt, vcmvo2

      A big part of it was that the colonists were willing to raise revenue for the British government, but they wanted to self-determine how those funds would be raised.  In other words, they wanted to have a say in how they were taxed, either by getting representation in Parliament and having a voice in what taxes were established, or by establishing their own taxes via their own colonial governments.

      Hence, "No taxation without representation".

      There were other issues, too, but that was probably the biggest.  Of course, then things started to spiral out of control and more issues started to amplify the unrest.

      •  It's even more complicated than that. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sharon Wraight, orlbucfan

        The first question you need to be able to answer in order to fully understand the American Revolution is, "What effect was the Tea Act of 1773, which sparked the Boston Tea Party, going to have on the price of tea in the colonies?"

        To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

        by UntimelyRippd on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:05:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  It was to raise money to pay for (5+ / 0-)

        the French and Indian War, which the colonists started and primarily benefited from (it freed up enormous tracts of land west of the Appalachians for eventual colonization, which land speculators like Washington who laid claim to much of those lands expected to profit hugely from) but refused to pay for.

        Those taxes were quite modest, btw, and fully justified IMO even if it was unfair to impose them without giving colonists a chance to argue against them in parliament (an argument they would likely have lost).

        And the "taxation without representation" motto was not entirely sincere, as many rebels, like Sam Adams, didn't really want representation, as they knew that it would take away their main reason for rebelling. They wanted independence, and wanted to be able to complain about "taxation without representation" without actually wanting that representation.

        So many myths about US history that still need to be shattered.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:34:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  "French and Indian War" wasn't the whole picture (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a2nite, vcmvo2, Laconic Lib

          It was actually a colonial sideshow to the Seven Years' War, which raged all over Europe at the same time. England and France got into it with each other, in fact, everywhere either or both had colonies. (And various allies had their own agendas, too....)

          The cost of the war, however, was ruinous, and the Brits felt, rather reasonably on the whole, that the Colonies should bear their "fair share" of the burden. And if they'd been asked and been a party to the discussions, who knows? They might even have agreed. But they weren't asked, they were told. Nobody likes that approach.

          If it's
          Not your body,
          Then it's
          Not your choice
          And it's
          None of your damn business!

          by TheOtherMaven on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 10:30:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It was hardly a sideshow (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            a2nite, Laconic Lib

            It was one of the main shows, the other, IIRC, being the naval battles in the Caribbean for control of the West Indies and such. Remember that the FIW wasn't just about the lands west of the colonies, but also about Canada. England ended up vastly increasing its land and sea empire as a result of the war. Arguably, since colonists weren't allowed to colonize and develop the lands gained west of the Appalachians, they shouldn't have been taxed to help pay for the war since they didn't directly benefit from it. But being part of the empire, it was only fair that they paid for some of it, and it was understood that eventually those lands would have to be colonized since it was impossible to impose that restriction. Obviously, though, the British mishandled how they imposed and collected these taxes.

            "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

            by kovie on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 11:44:18 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're still missing the big picture (0+ / 0-)

              and focusing ONLY on North America.

              North American sources of course focus on that aspect, because it's part of their history. But there was also fighting in Central Europe over Silesia and Pomerania, in South America (Spain was allied with France, Portugal with Britain, so this was an early "proxy war"), in India (where a fellow named Clive made his reputation, much good it eventually did him), and even in West Africa, where the British grabbed control of Senegal and Gambia via naval assault. It was all very messy and hard to follow, but when the dust settled Britain and their allies had the upper hand.

              If it's
              Not your body,
              Then it's
              Not your choice
              And it's
              None of your damn business!

              by TheOtherMaven on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 12:01:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  I've also heard arguments made (0+ / 0-)

        that the representation in Parliament thing was the norm for all British colonies, and that we were actually treated better than most of the colonies at the time.

    •  there's also the monetary issue (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      taxes were paid in gold or silver, but outside the port cities America was largely a barter/credit economy with very little cash changing hands.  Coming up with gold to pay taxes, when you're trading commodities and living on credit until harvest, is harder than it would be in a cash economy.

      the purpose of the second amendment is to promote a well-regulated militia, in the same sense that the purpose of the first amendment is to promote a well-informed electorate.

      by happymisanthropy on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 10:00:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (172)
  • Baltimore (88)
  • Community (84)
  • Bernie Sanders (66)
  • Freddie Gray (60)
  • Civil Rights (58)
  • Elections (41)
  • Culture (38)
  • Hillary Clinton (36)
  • Media (36)
  • Racism (33)
  • Law (32)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Labor (27)
  • Education (26)
  • Environment (25)
  • Politics (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site