Why didn't the king and parlement of Britain let the colonists vote for parlement?
2006-11-29 10:24:16 · 6 answers · asked by Ty H 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
The colonies were not created to give people equal representation. They were there for conquest and bringing riches back to European powers. Britain was more interested in how to balance out power across the globe to combat the French and Spanish. I could see them say it now: "The colonies have a say in how overall Imperial resources were distributed? What the bloody hell for??"
You have to keep in mind, that the colonies were not the only ones that hated the English. The Scots were defeated not long before and Scotland would have loved to declare independence. Later, Ireland would have loved to declare independence. A few other countries were able to pull it off, but for the most part revolutions like that in the US colonies taught Britain how to better oppress or co-op their colonial forces.
Even today, even people in England will complain about how most of the UK power is tied up in and around London. They were piggies.
It could have been possible that London could have been more thoughtful and careful with its tax hikes and manipulations, but they were not AND they were snobby about it. Who likes a boss that is both incompetent AND conceited?
2006-11-29 11:22:08 · answer #1 · answered by Cheshire Cat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The fact is noone knows. The king did allow the colonists representation however which is confusing due the slogan, "no taxation without representation." The problem with this representation was they were advisors at parliament and lacked voting ability.
2006-11-29 18:33:44 · answer #2 · answered by bluedevils2302 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they wanted they wanted the power! They didn't want the colonists to have too much to do with the government, probably so they could lie about it and find a false reason to tax them more.
Why do you think the Americans revolted? King George just wanted as much land and subjects as he could get.
2006-11-29 19:12:34 · answer #3 · answered by Cayleen O 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The best speculation would say that it was because he did not think that we were informed enough on the topics which pertained to the election to have an intelligent opinion. After all the news that we received was at least three months old.
2006-11-29 18:36:09 · answer #4 · answered by Lion_Heart 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know. Nobody knows.That's why America revolted. The king did many things that made no sense and had no reason why. That's what caused the rebellion. The king asserted his autority simply because he was king and could.
2006-11-29 18:28:51 · answer #5 · answered by naphythespiffyone 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they disagreed on representation, virtual representation vs actual represention. so even if he let them vote, it would not have done anything
2006-11-29 20:55:08 · answer #6 · answered by FeEeF 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋