However, the colonies were still outraged and could not stand being taxed for things that had previously been free of charge, so they organized a sanction of British goods, only to fail after a short period of time. Had the French and Indian War not taken place, the British and French would have had much mo... ... middle of paper ... ...quity and hardships unimaginable, the colonists knew that their goals were within reach, and through their hard work, they were able to win autonomy. In due course, the Declaration of Independence justified the colonies’ ultimate separation from the British, which culminated in a war between the colonies and Britain. We refer to this war today as the American Revolution, or the colonists’ paramount attempt at becoming independent from British supremacy. Ultimately, we are still lucky that we can retain a fair relationship with Britain and France to this day, because although these wars occurred hundreds of years ago, that does not mean that their effects will simply dissipate.
Within the context of the period 1847-1947 to what extent was Indian independence primarily the result of the growth of Indian nationalism? The decision to grant independence to India was not the logical culmination of errors in policy, neither was it as a consequence of a mass revolution forcing the British out of India, but rather, the decision was undertaken voluntarily. Patrick French argues that: “The British left India because they lost control over crucial areas of the administration, and lacked the will and the financial or military ability to recover that control”. Whilst the growth of Indian nationalism put considerable pressure on the Raj, historians offer many interpretations as to the fundamental cause of Independence. Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement and subsequent campaigns meant that nationalism began to appeal to the masses and helped establish a broad based movement for Independence.
However, as India got closer to independence, Hindus and Muslims began to disagree on government but in 1947 independence was granted. Immediately after independence India was split into two different nations, Pakistan, which had a majority of Muslim, and East Pakistan (“The End of Imperialism & Colonialism”). The 190 years of Imperialism in India by the British were over all a negative experience for the country. However, a few good things did come out of imperialism like transportation. Britain became selfish and inconsiderate towards the Indian people and only did what helped their country and their economy.
This apparent aversion of strong central government was rooted in the former colonists’ fear of a sequel to their monarchial horror that was England. Some believe that the Articles proved an efficient government for post-Revolution America serving as a successful conclusion to the war. However, while effective in avoiding an executive power, the Articles of Confederation proved ineffective in the successful governing of the United States. By the lack of assistance in solving post-war financial issues, the inability to maintain law and order in events of opposition, along with the disorganization of diplomatic relations exposed the shortcomings and the inadequate nature of the Articles of Confederation. America’s vulnerability can be attributed to the post-wartime economical situation.
Although the French revolution did further the divide between some members, many of the ideological differences existed prior to the outbreak and were simply exposed showing the party to be split and erratic. A split and erratic party would never be elected into office. The ‘Friends of the people’, established by Lord Gray also added to the lack of party unity. Fox’s own leadership of the Whig party must also be criticised for the lack of political succ... ... middle of paper ... ... astute, did not just admit these men to the back bench seats but offered them prestigious places as ministers in his cabinet. This subsequently caused a further disintegration of the Whig party in politics between the period 1783-1815.
In addition, by accepting the crown it would have supported the army's charges of hypocrisy and ambition. Therefore, some historians believe that Cromwell was deterred because the majority of his senior officers were against the idea of the crown, as shown by R. Hutton (in Source 5), "Lambert, Fleetwood and Desborough all told the Protector that they would resign", this shows that there was a threat from the senior officers, particularly by those who "loved him". However, other historians find it difficult to believe ... ... middle of paper ... ...seen throughout the Protectorate. There were 'fatal internal contradictions' in the sense that there were too many conflicting interests to please, and that the Cromwell was far too closely associated with the army and its politicisation. There were further conflicts between establishing godly rule for which Cromwell needed the army and arriving at political settlement which would be long-lasting.
However, this act was avoidable and rarely paid. Following the long and harrowing French and Indian War, Britain was deep in debt and George Grenville was appointed British Chancellor. He was determined to pay off the debt by brutally taxing the colonies. He not only reinforced the ignored Navigation Acts, but he placed the new Sugar Act which was similar to the Molasses Act which put a tax on rum and molasses imported from West Indies, but this Act would be enforced. Needless to say, the colonists were not used to this intrusion of Parliament and felt that it was wrong because there were no members in Parliament to represent the colonies.
The irregular and disorganized British rule of the American colonies in the previous years led to the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. Most Americans did not originally want to separate from mother England. They wanted to stay loyal to the crown. England’s unwillingness to compromise, mismanagement of the colonies, heavy taxation of the colonists that violated their rights, the distractions of foreign affairs and politics in England and the strict trading policies that England tried to enforce together made the revolution inevitable. The British were definitely expected to win the dispute because they significantly over powered the Colonists in most areas.
The colonists broke away from Britain because they were isolated and became used to self- governing. Once Great Britain tried to take control, the colonists were angered. Also, when Great Britain tried to limit the westward expansion of the colonies, the colonists felt that their rights were being infringed. The lack of representation in Parliament played a gigantic role as well. The British taxed the colonists even though the colonies did not have an American representing them in Parliament.
The rump appeared to be more interested in issuing restrictive legislature - such as the aforementioned adultery and blasphemy acts -- rather than creating law and social reform. It also failed to pay the army, perhaps the biggest strain on the nation since the outbreak of the civil wars. The rump did have certain achievements which have been highlighted in this essay. The reason they have been labelled a failure is due only to the fact that did not achieve enough. Cromwell had left them there to create reform, and the political utopia he felt was necessary for England.