More handpicked essays just for you.
The ideological causes of the american revolution
The ideological causes of the american revolution
The ideological causes of the american revolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The ideological causes of the american revolution
First published in 1967, this book was itself the offshoot of Bailyn's celebrated work, Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750-1776, which was published in 1965. This work is in fact an edited and expanded version of the introduction to that first volume. In the ensuing decades the work has become the acclaimed centerpiece of intellectual historical thought on the American Revolution; the stalwart of Neo-Progressive historiography on the topic. Bailyn effectively rejected earlier progressive theories regarding the causation of the revolution, presented most notably by Charles Beard, based upon his exhaustive research into the favored medium for exchange of ideas in colonial America, the pamphlet. Here it is according to Bailyn, that the evolution of American republicanism can be seen in the ideology presented in hundreds of like publications, which were widely distributed and read throughout the colonies, can be clearly comprehended as one of ideals, rather than economics or class.
Casting aside the prevailing progressive views of the revolution as an inevitable class based socia...
In Woody Holton's Forced Founders, that most revered segment of the revolutionary generation, the elitist gentry class of Virginia, comes across very much as a group of self-serving reactionaries, rather then the idealized revolutionaries of the great patriotic myth of popular history. He sets about disassembling a central portion of the myth created by earlier generations of Consensus historians, by asserting that rather then gallantly leading the charge for independence, Virginia's elitist gentry resorted to independence as their last and only means of saving their elite ruling status, their economic futures, and even their very lives many feared. While this is very much an example of revisionist history, Holton has not so much rewritten history, as he has provided the back story of the complexity and diversity of the Virginia colony on the eve of the American Revolution. For while the book's title may insinuate otherwise, lowly groups like slaves and Indians discussed here are afforded only the status of “founders” by pressing those traditionally thought of in this role to take the plunge for independence. Still the papers and correspondence of the iconic figureheads of the revolutionary generation like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison make up the bulk of primary sources.
In “Becoming America: The Revolution Before 1776”, Jon Butler argues that there was massive economic and a political transformation occurred in the era of 1680 and 1770 which had been less examined to the American colonial history. In this book, Butler makes a strong argument for the early modernism of American society which helps to define the growth of American identity. The transformation improved the American socioeconomic character and demonstrated itself almost in every aspect of colonial life. I totally agree with the Jon Butler’s argument that the victories and defeats of the revolutionary war would not define America; it was the middle years of the colonial period that would. And his arguments in this book also challenge the existing history. Butler supports his argument from his own note which he collected from by researching huge amount of specialized history books.
In chapter eleven, The Age of Democratic Revolutions: The North Atlantic World “Turn Upside Down”, Wells discusses the American and French Revolutions. Both of these revolutions shook the world and turn the world around. After the Enlightenment, there were many revolutions across Europe; however, the American and French Revolution had more power in them to change the world. Because of the books, pamphlets, and sermons, the idea of rationalism moved from philosophes to many of other people. With these new ideas, the people started to believe in change which led to stress and upheaval. In America, the revolution was not like other revolutions. There was no reigns of terror, no mass deportations, or forced labor camps. However, the American
In his essay “The American Revolution as a Response to British Corruption”, historian Bernard Bailyn makes the argument that the American Revolution was inherently conservative because its main goal was to preserve what Americans believed to be their traditional rights as English citizens. He argues that the minor infringements on traditional liberties, like the Stamp Act and the royal ban on lifetime tenure of colonial judges (even though Parliament ruled that judges in England should exercise this right), made the Americans fear that they would set a precedent for future greater infringements on their English liberties. To prove this argument, Baliyan quotes famous primary sources, like John Dickinson, Sam Adams, and various colonial rulings.
On the brink of revolution, the colonies were divided amongst themselves. Two factions with different ideologies “The Patriots” & and the “The Loyalist”, to know these factions we must first know another. Because both parties played a pivotal role in the “American Revolution”.
Gordon Wood’s Radicalism of the American Revolution is a book that extensively covers the origin and ideas preceding the American Revolution. Wood’s account of the Revolution goes beyond the history and timeline of the war and offers a new encompassing look inside the social ideology and economic forces of the war. Wood explains in his book that America went through a two-stage progression to break away from the Monarchical rule of the English. He believes the pioneering revolutionaries were rooted in the belief of an American Republic. However, it was the radical acceptance of democracy that was the final step toward independence. The transformation between becoming a Republic, to ultimately becoming a democracy, is where Wood’s evaluation of the revolution differs from other historians. He contributes such a transformation to the social and economic factors that faced the colonists. While Gordon Wood creates a persuasive argument in his book, he does however neglect to consider other contributing factors of the revolution. It is these neglected factors that provide opportunity for criticism of his book.
As Rand refutes a principal concept of socialism, she illustrates multiple counts of insubordination and social class structures. Socialism’s attempt to remove class structure fails miserably. The most prominent demonstration of rebellion rises from Equality 7-2521 and his emotions and desire for knowledge. After being denied by the Council of Scholars, Equality 7-2521 rashly breaks a window and flees “in a ringing rain of glass” (Rand 75). Equality 7-2521’s actions illustrate the ‘working class’ rebelling against the ‘elitists’ though this society attempted to eliminate social structures. Furthermore, Equality 7-2521 was not alone in rebelling against ‘the brotherhood’, Liberty 5-3000 followed his example. Unsatisfied with her life and the suppression of emotion, she followed Equality 7-2521’s example and “on the night of the day when we heard it, we ran away from the Home of Peasants” (Rand 82). The rebellion of the two members reflects the means of a social rev...
The essay under critical analysis is entitled, “Philadelphia’s Radical Caucus That Propelled Pennsylvania to Independence and Democracy,” written by Gary B. Nash. This analytical essay consumes the fourth chapter of the book Revolutionary Founders: Rebels, Radicals, and Reformers in the Making of the Nation, edited by Alfred F. Young, Gary B. Nash, and Ray Raphael. His essay, along with the twenty-one other accounts in the book depicting lesser-known individuals, whose contributions in securing independence from Great Britain and creating a new government in America rival that of the nation’s more notorious and beloved founders, such as Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. Dr. Nash focuses his efforts on Philadelphia’s Radical Caucus of the 1770’s and 80’s and the lasting influences of the 1776 constitution it created within American politics as well as several nations around the world. Within his analysis and interpretation of Pennsylvanian politics during the American Revolution, Dr. Nash utilizes a pro-whiggish, radically sympathetic stance to assert the Radical Caucus’ remarkable ability to gain support from and bestow power upon the common working man, take political power from conservatives within Pennsylvania’s public offices, and revolutionize democratic thought through their landmark reformations of the state’s constitution. Respecting the fact that Dr. Nash’s position on this subject required extensive research through first hand accounts, pamphlets, newspapers and the analysis of countless preserved records, indicates that the account he has given is very credible. Complying with his presentation of facts and the significance of the topic within early American history has prevented a well-rounded counter-argument ...
“If we measure the radicalism of revolutions by the degree of social misery or economic deprivation suffered, or by the number of people killed or manor houses burned, then this conventional emphasis on the conservatism of the American Revolution becomes true enough. B...
According to Carl N. Degler, the entire Revolution should be viewed as a conservative change. In “A New Kind of Revolution,” Degler talked about how the new actions taken place by the English had help structure and shape the colonial government. Not only did the colonies lack the affection of their motherland, Britain, they were also taxed unfairly. On the other hand, “The Radicalism of the American Revolution,” by Gordon S. Wood talks about how the American Revolution was a radical movement. His thesis covered how the country was transitioning from monarchy to republic, and now, democracy. The framers wanted to create a free nation where no single person rule. As well as, the people of the nation having the ultimate say so.
Among the many complex factors that contributed to instigating the American Revolution, two stand out most clearly: England’s imposition of taxation on the colonies and the failure of the British to gain consent of those being governed, along with the military measures England took on the colonists. Adding to these aforementioned factors were the religious and political legacy of the colonies, and the restriction of civil liberties by the British. Parliamentary taxation was undoubtedly one of the greatest factors inspiring the American public to rebel in the years leading up to the American Revolution. One of the most striking examples of this kind of taxation was the Stamp Act of 1765. After many years of fighting, England badly needed revenues from their colonies, and they sought to acquire these revenues from the New World, thereby increasing their influence over the colonial governments. These theories of “New Imperialism” were what prompted Prime Minister Grenville to pass the Stamp Act. The Stamp Act of 1765 stated that persons of almost any profession were obliged to buy stamps for their documents. In other words, the act imposed a tax on every printed document in the colonies. For example, a printer had to buy stamps in order to legally be able to distribute his publications. While the act itself was not so detrimental to the economy, it was the ideals behind the act (a direct attempt on the part of the mother country to further itself and raise revenues in the colonies) which drove the revolutionaries’ cause.
For over a century Great Britain had ruled the colonies in America. Since the founding of the Chesapeake Bay colony in the south in 1607, and the Massachusetts Bay colony in the north in 1630, the colonies had relied on the crown for many of their needs. Over time the colonists established a social and economical system that was almost independent of the British Empire. In April of 1775, after many transgressions on both sides, the colonists decided that they no longer needed, or wanted the support, protection, and leadership of the country that founded them. There were many factors, both immediate, and longstanding that lead to the decision to fight for freedom from British rule.
However, the author 's interpretations of Jefferson 's decisions and their connection to modern politics are intriguing, to say the least. In 1774, Jefferson penned A Summary View of the Rights of British America and, later, in 1775, drafted the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (Ellis 32-44). According to Ellis, the documents act as proof that Jefferson was insensitive to the constitutional complexities a Revolution held as his interpretation of otherwise important matters revolved around his “pattern of juvenile romanticism” (38). Evidently, the American colonies’ desire for independence from the mother country was a momentous decision that affected all thirteen colonies. However, in Ellis’ arguments, Thomas Jefferson’s writing at the time showed either his failure to acknowledge the severity of the situation or his disregard of the same. Accordingly, as written in the American Sphinx, Jefferson’s mannerisms in the first Continental Congress and Virginia evokes the picture of an adolescent instead of the thirty-year-old man he was at the time (Ellis 38). It is no wonder Ellis observes Thomas Jefferson as a founding father who was not only “wildly idealistic” but also possessed “extraordinary naivete” while advocating the notions of a Jeffersonian utopia that unrestrained
When one explains his or her ingenious yet, enterprising interpretation, one views the nature of history from a single standpoint: motivation. In The American Revolution: A History, Gordon Wood, the author, explains the complexities and motivations of the people who partook in the American Revolution, and he shows the significance of numerous themes, that emerge during the American Revolution, such as democracy, discontent, tyranny, and independence. Wood’s interpretation, throughout his literary work, shows that the true nature of the American Revolution leads to the development of United State’s current government: a federal republic. Wood, the author, views the treatment of the American Revolution in the early twentieth century as scholastic yet, innovative and views the American Revolution’s true nature as
In Gordon S. Wood’s The Radicalism of the American Revolution, a new, postmodern take on what the word ‘radicalism’ really means. He focuses on not only the political and social effects of the American Revolution, but also on its lasting contributions to American society. Wood uses a fresh- but still knowledgeable- point of view while making his claims, and uses examples to support these claims. The biggest weakness of the source is that it is a secondary source that was created over two decades after the American Revolution ended, creating a lack of firsthand primary knowledge given in the