English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i need help understanding the reasons for and results of the attempts of colonial elites to foster social and political stability in the American colonies during the 17th century.

if u want to criticise me for asking for homework/class help, please don't because it's a waste of time, kay? but for those of u who DO have anything useful and helpful to tell me, please do- ur help is so greatly appreciated. thanks so much everyone.

2006-09-20 13:47:19 · 5 answers · asked by ♥_mrs.smith 4 in Arts & Humanities History

5 answers

Social and political stability is desirable in any society. The Elite class would have benefited the most from a stable society in colonial times just as it does now, instability leads to uncertainty which is detrimental to the economy.

2006-09-20 13:57:47 · answer #1 · answered by ligoneskiing 4 · 0 0

I think the key is that, for a long time, the colonial experience was the attempt to graft European societies onto brand new settlements. So you would often see landed elites coming over to the New World to make their money.

But because labor was always scarce, the rules in Colonial North America were far different than n Europe, or even Colonial South America. As a result, societies had to become much more egalitarian, with a man's self-worth based on what he could accomplish, rather than what his parentage was.

One could always view the Massachusetts Bay Colony as a result of tryiing to establish a new society based on rigid religious mores. But that simply did not work.

Good luck!

2006-09-20 23:36:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, who are the elites? The rich people. So, why do you think that they would seek both social and political stability. They did not want a revolution or any kind of uprising by other segments (i.e., the poor, Indians, and slaves) of society.

They wanted to stay rich and protect their wealth.

2006-09-20 20:51:02 · answer #3 · answered by retorik75 5 · 0 0

Political stability is always admonished by those with wealth. To do so protects their property. the wealthy are generally NOT the radicals who want massive societal change--to do so would jeopardize their wealth. In most instances throughout history, it is the poor, the displaced, the under-represented, and the needy that foment change. That is why the wealthy are generally labeled the conservatives, because they want to CONSERVE what they have (wealth.)

2006-09-20 23:57:24 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Curious 6 · 0 0

okay, i took that class last year memriose the battles and people, e-mail me please!!
i am really good at early american history!!!

2006-09-20 20:56:26 · answer #5 · answered by auska 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers