The American Revolution: the Stuff You Should Know: Part Two

How are the Colonies like an unruly teenager?
    The colonists residing in the thirteen American colonies act like indocile adolescents because they resort to barbaric methods of handling their issues with Great Britain and its devoted supporters, revel against Mother England without considering to negotiate peacefully, and do not attempt to understand the reason for the numerous taxes charged against them. The colonists used violent, inhuman, and cruel ways to settle the quagmires between them and Britain. They formed a mob at Hutchinson’s home and destroyed everything in sight and started using committee justice against people by tarring, feathering, and hanging them. Instead of using peaceful discussions to settle problems, the colonists decided to rebel against England. The rebellion was shown through the boycotting of English goods and the throwing of snowballs filled with rocks at the British soldiers, thus leading to the Boston Massacre. The current king of England at the time might have had a legit reason for issuing the taxes. Some of these possible reasons could have consisted of an economical recession, a war against one of the rival countries such as Spain or France, or a political corruption within the royal family. Although the colonists acted like foolish children to Britain, their actions led to their independence.

Was the Boston Massacre a massacre or the original case of American “spin doctoring?” Support your answer.
    On March 5, 1770 when British soldiers were sent to punish rebels in the colonies, a crows of colonists pelted them with snowballs, and in response, the soldiers shot and killed five people. I believe this to be an actual massacre and not a case of spin doctoring because the British soldiers had personal intentions to kill those people, blood was spilt, and the colonists had no way of defending themselves. The soldiers purposely aimed at the colonists and fired at them. I believe that it is not the number of people killed, but the intentions that tell what a massacre is, and the soldiers had every intent to kill those five people. The lives of five, possibly very valuable members of society were lost. Those people might have had jobs and families, and to take those people away from others who need them is an act of injustice. While the British had guns, all that the colonists possessed were snowballs. It was an uneven match, and for the British to take lives away from a group of people that do not have access to effective weapons is unfair. A massacre is judged by the intent of those causing it, and not by the number of people that were killed.

Why did the British think the Americans would pay the Tea Tax?
    A tea tax was issued by the king of England in the fall of 1773, which was thought to be a reasonable tax because it was at a low fee, the American colonists used tea on a daily basis, and the king thought that the Americans would not mind being forced to pay a tax that would be less than previous taxes placed on them. The rate of the tea was three pennies per pound, which was a very low fee at the time. It is very unlikely for one person to consume an entire pound of tea in a day, and with only a few pennies of tax for tea that could last a week, it seemed reasonable. Tea was an English good that the Americans used on a daily basis. Since it was practically a necessity to the colonists, the king thought that they would be willing to pay the very small tax for a product that they depended on. The tax was small compared to the one that came with the Stamp Act. Because the tax was so small, it could be easily overlooked by the Americans and just defined as a small sacrifice, but unfortunately, they did not want to be taxed in any way. Despite the several, positive reactions that the king thought the colonists would show, the dislike that they showed against the Tea Tax led to a historical event: the Boston Tea Party.