More handpicked essays just for you.
Boston tea party from the british perspective
Importance of the boston tea party
Importance of the boston tea party
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Violent protests were more effective than peaceful measures in resolving the colonists’ conflicts with the British. The colonists were unhappy with the British and their actions, so the colonists wanted to show that they were mad through violence. The colonists demonstrated many acts of violence towards the British. Violence is better than nonviolence because they need to get their point across, it will change for the better, and lastly will scare them to make it change it their way.
The British were taxing the colonists on sugar and tea. The colonists were not happy about this because they don’t want to pay the taxes. The colonists were mad and wanted to get revenge. There were three ships that were allowed to come into the Boston Harbor with tea on them. During the night, the colonists went to the ships. The colonists took the chests of tea and threw them all into the Harbor that night. This was the Boston Tea Party Act. This shows that violence was better than nonviolence because the colonists got their point across. If the colonists didn’t do what they did the British would have done nothing. For instance, if the colonists had a peaceful protest, the British would have ignored it. Now that the colonists
…show more content…
threw the tea into the harbor, the British are annoyed at and don’t want it to happen again. The Boston Massacre also caused violence.
Because of what the British did during the Boston Massacre, their colonists resulted in violence. The colonists threw rocks and snow at the Customs House. This shows that violent protest makes sure the British change their policies. If the colonists weren’t throwing rocks there wouldn’t be any change made. Now that the British see that the people are bad, they are going to change their policies. Also if the colonists are made, they aren’t going to do what the British want. The colonists will protest and not follow what the British are doing. They will boycott them and the British will not make as much profit as they would have. This violent protest will cause people to change their policies in favor of the
colonists. Lastly, if the colonists scare the British with violence they are going to start to change the way they are doing things. If they can scare the British then the colonists will get the policies put into their favor. For instance, if the colonists have a violent protest harming the British, the British are going to get scared, so they will have to fight back. The British would rather not fight back and just change their policy to make the colonists not hate them. All in all, violence is better than nonviolence because the British will not like it, thus making them change it, then the colonists will be able to show the British what they want, and lastly, the British will be forced to change their policies because of their actions. Without violence nothing would have changed during the colonists times.
The number one reason that the colonists began protests, and boycotts, against the British was because they believed their natural rights as citizens were being violated. After the french and Indian War Great Britain was in massive debt. So the King began to tax the colonies. For example the heavy taxes in the colonies led to the Boston Massacre and to the Boston Tea Party. The British then adopted the policy of mercantilism.
During this entire period the British were starting to make attempts to intimidate the colonists in hopes to end the rebellions. It seemed that the more and more England tried to scare the people, the angrier they got. The tactics obviously didn't work, but instead pushed the colonists even further into standing up against Britain. The British soldiers in America were told not to entice violence, and especially not to kill anybody.
Before the American Revolution, there were social and economic changes which upset frontiersmen. They became agitated due to their social situation with Indians and their failing local government. In response to these annoyances, frontiersmen chose to use violence to achieve their demands. During this period of civil unrest, two attempted revolutions in particular made national headlines: The March of the Paxton Boys and The Regulator Movement. The movements differed because the Paxton Boys demanded social change while the Regulator Movement called for economic change. Both revolutions were similar because they used violence as a way to achieve their demands. The Paxton Boys rallied around the concept of retaliation against Indians; The
Before the Boston Massacre even occurred, tensions were high in the city of Boston between the Bostonians and the British. At this time people were just getting over the Stamp Act and were now angered by the new taxes also known as the Townshend Duties. This new tax caused Bostonians to become more aggressive causing the British to send more soldiers to impose the laws of Parliament and to restore order among the people. The arrival of more soldiers only caused more of an uproar between the people of Boston and the red coats. Bostonians went out of their way to harass British soldiers whenever they got the chance, but on March 5, 1770 both sides acted unacceptably resulting in the Boston Massacre (84-85).
Through many means of protest such as the Boston Tea Party, boycotting British goods and products, and the formation of many protest groups such as the Sons and Daughters of Liberty that made it possible for the colonists to fight off the English influence. The Boston Tea Party in Boston was a major factor when it came to the independence of America because it showed that the colonists could work together and formulate a plan such as disguising themselves as Mohawk Indians to intimidate the enemy and successfully dispose of hundreds of barrels of tea into the Boston Harbor. Now with cause comes effect, the cause was that the English had lost a lot of money and profit once the tea was disposed of, but the major reaction of the English was to retaliate. England had sent an increase in troops to the colonies to oversee what was happening with the formulation of protests and the British government had also passed the Intolerable Act, which closed down the harbor to repair any damage caused by the actions of the Boston Tea Party, and made it so that more restrictions were put on the colonists for their actions. As a result of this act being put into place, the colonists had also retaliated by forming the First Continental Congress which was a meeting of the delegates of the thirteen colonies except Georgia because Georgia was a state that homed debtors and criminals. As stated in Document E, “A Declaration by the Representative of the United Colonies of North America, now met in Congress at Philadelphia, setting forth the causes and necessity of their taking up arms.” This has showed that the colonists would do anything and everything within their power to rid the colonies of the oppressive and selfies rule of the British empire forever even if it meant violence and death would be a result of their
The Americans acted on this plan, so British troops would be removed off American soil. The Americans had to plan about this riot for days and knew that some lives was going to be lost. The citizen were not thinking about the outcome of their plan, or how lives would be changed forever because their decision to pick a fight with the British troops would have been changed. My personal ethic perspective would be deontological ethic because I would react to by thinking about the wrong and right way because of my religion. Since I am a Christian, I would have to think to see if the result going to affect me in a negative way or influence my life in a positive way. If Americans would have thought about their religion and beliefs, then the Boston Massacre would have been an idea not an event. If I was one of the Americans in the Boston Massacre, I would have tried to talked people out of doing the deed. I would have questioned their beliefs and make them picture the outcome of picking a fight with the soldiers. Some of the American citizen would have backed down, but most of them was going to act upon the deed. Even someone would have tried to stop the angry mob, the results would have been the same anyways. If the Boston Massacre was avoided, American’s history would have been very different in terms of what would have happened with
In Cesar Chavez’s article, he uses many rhetorical devices to help give the reader a better understanding of how important nonviolence vs violence is. Chavez explains how Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi have endowed reasons of nonviolence worth following.
Imagine a powerful organization from a different place coming into your town taking your jobs, destroying your possessions and telling you what you can and can't do. This is what the British were doing to the colonists during the time of the Boston massacre. The Boston Massacre was a conflict that happened on March 5th 1770. It happened near the courthouse in front of the church on a street called King Street. British soldiers had shot at a group of colonists killing 5 of them. Some think it was the British to blame for this tragedy but others think it was the colonists fault for this event.
According to the theory of mercantilism, the colonies only existed to serve the interests of Britain. But it seemed as if Britain was abusing their right over the colonies. They enforced many policies such as the Stamp Act, the Townshed Duties, and the Tea Act which caused many problems for the colonists. One problem that the colonists faced was the Stamp Act of 1765. This act imposed a new tax on legal documents, newspapers, playing cards and dice. The Americans did not agree with it. It was not the cost of the stamp that angered them, it was the principle. They had no say in what the British Parliament did. The tax provoked a fire storm of protests, and the boycotting of British goods began. Some colonists did not limit their protests to words. In several cities, groups of people attacked officials who defended British policy. The Stamp Act was not a good idea, and one year later it was repealed. But that wasn't the end. The Townshed Duties posed as another difficulty. These duties required the colonists to pay minor import duties on tea, lead, oil, papers and painter's colors. Since Britain had imposed unnecessary taxes on the colonies before, this was not new. John Dickinson encouraged protesters to join in the battle by writing the first twelve "Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania". Protests began once again and cut British trade in half. Britain sent troops to be stationed in Boston to enforce the Townshed Duties, and the colonists refused to quarter the troops. The Townshed Duties were repealed in 1770, three years after it began. And three years after that, a new act arose. Parliament passed the Tea Act in an attempt to save the East India Company from bankruptcy and reassert its right to tax. A group of Boston patriots destroyed a shipment of tea in a protest known as the
The American Revolution was sparked by a myriad of causes. These causes in themselves could not have sparked such a massive rebellion in the nation, but as the problems of the colonies cumulated, their collective impact spilt over and the American Revolution ensued. Many say that this war could have been easily avoided and was poorly handled by both sides, British and American; but as one will see, the frame of thought of the colonists was poorly suited to accept British measures which sought to “overstep” it’s power in the Americas. Because of this mindset, colonists developed a deep resentment of British rule and policies; and as events culminated, there was no means to avoid revolution and no way to turn back.
On March 5, 1770, an event occurred in Boston, which consisted of British troops shooting upon colonists. People refer to this as a massacre, but they only look at one side of the story. The Boston Massacre in 1770 was not really a massacre, but a mutual riot (Boston Massacre History Society). British soldiers went to America to keep the people of Boston in order. However, the soldier's presence there was not welcomed by the Bostonians and this made things worse (Boston Massacre History Society). The British had to fire their guns because the Bostonians were antagonizing the soldiers, which caused five people to die. The Bostonians made the soldiers feel threatened so in turn they acted in self-defense. The British soldiers and their Captain had to go through a trial, to prove they were not to blame for what had occurred.
one event that shows the colonist acting against the British was the Boston massacre. The Boston Massacre Historical Society said that, British troops arrived at a scene. “It was the culmination of tensions in the American colonies that had been growing since Royal troops first appeared in Massachusetts”. colonist where vandalising a building. colonist then started throwing snowballs and sticks at soldiers. After a soldier was hit with a stick and was on the ground shots were fired from the British. “killing of five colonists”. This shows how angry the colonist were with the British. Another event where the colonist acted out was the Boston Tea Party. This act of defiance served as a protest against taxation. “Seeking to boost the troubled East India Company, British Parliament adjusted import duties with the passage of the Tea Act in 1773. While consignees in Charleston, New York, and Philadelphia rejected tea shipments, merchants in Boston refused to concede to Patriot pressure.” says US Historical events. On the night of December 16, 1773, Samuel Adams and the Sons of Liberty boarded three ships in the Boston harbor and threw 342 chests of tea into the water. These events show that violence in the colonies was a leading role in loyal British citizens transforming into rebellious American
Most people have heard of The Boston tea party. When American patriots dressed as Mohawk Indians boarded the British ships in the Boston harbor and dumped all of the tea into the ocean. But what most people fail to realize is the great importance behind this protest. To fully understand a topic of history one must first acknowledge the actions behind it. The French and Indian war, the Stamp Act, the Townshend Revenue Act, as well as the Tea Act are all important catalysts of the legendary Boston tea party. Which is why we will discuss these topics before examining the events of the Boston tea party.
In the 1760s, Boston was full of disorder. With each new British law came protest from American colonists. The people of Boston believed that Britain did not have the right to tax them because they did not elect their representatives in Parliament. Only the Massachusetts Assembly, whose members were elected every year, had the right to tax its citizens. The Stamp Act of 1765 and the Townshend Acts of 1767 led to boycotts and unrest, steered by a group known as the Sons of Liberty. As a result, the British government sent troops to Boston to keep order. Instead of staying in a fort on an island in the Boston harbor, the British troops stayed on the commons and were living in buildings in the middle of town. The British troops’ presence in Boston was not welcome and Bostonians viewed them as a threat. Because they did not like the English army in their city, fights between the American colonists and the British troops were common.
In a document on the Boston Massacre, it describes all the events in the Massacre. The document shows, “a group of young men began pelting some British soldiers with snowballs and curses.”. This quote shows how it was the colonists that started the fight. It caused the American Revolution because after the colonists attacked the British, they defended themselves and killed 5 colonists. The British killing the colonists was what started the American Revolution, so if the colonists did not attack the British thoughtlessly, than the Boston Massacre would not of happened in the first place. Also, in an eyewitness account of the Boston Tea party, it shows everything that the colonists did in the Boston Tea Party (Document 7). The document says “we had thus broken and thrown overboard every tea chest to be found in the ship, while those in the other ships were disposing of the tea in the same way.” There were many other ways the colonists could of told the British they would not pay the taxes, but they did a direct attack. The British’s punishment was placed because they knew it was the colonists during the attack. If they were a little bit more sneaky, than they could of have the same effect without having to face punishment. So, since they were “caught” the colonies had to face punishment, which kind of led to the American Revolution. The colonist’s actions were also a part of