Liberals the cause of the Revolutionary War?

Question

I am a conservative and have been reading a liberal book in which the author has said something that sparked my interest. He says that even though there was no "left" or "right" wings in the days before the Revolutionary War, it was the more liberal men who were the ones that brought about the war and also the Declaration of Independence. Is this a true fact, or is it just a speculative opinion brought on by his political ideals? Just curious as to what people think.

Answer 1

Liberals are not the cause of the Revolutionary War. It was the rich who orchestrated everything. The rich had the most to gain by not paying taxes to England. The poor were actually against it, but they were forced to do most of the fighting, either by coersion, or by dangling rewards in payment for their services.

If the rich of old are anything like the rich of now, I would say that the conservatives orchestrated and manipulated the masses in America to fight for independence.

Answer 2

Well, when we took Saddam out of power in Iraq we removed the safety valve for Iran. They were held in check by the Iraqi's not anymore. And BTW, if having nukes is really such a bad thing to have, why are we giving the tech to the Indians? Our government is set oon one thing their profits, plain and simple. It doesn't matter which side of the isle they sit on. Both parties want the same thing money. The two party system in this country is a mirage. They have the same global agendas and use social issues to drive a wedge in the populace in order to get more of their side into office. Neither of them would be handling the current situation any differently. But to answer the question, I guess they want to separate them because they aren't the same thing. If we wanted to get terrorists so badly then why are we not in Saudi Arabia, which is where most of the hijackers of the 9/11 attacks were from? Why Saddam's regime? The man ran a secular dictatorship that wanted nothing to do with religious zealots, in fact he had them killed. Why now? He was OK in the 80's when he was fighting on our side in the Iran Iraq war. It just doesn't make much sense, but maybe they have some shocking evidence for war that will show us in a few years, I doubt it though.

Answer 3

The terms 'Liberal' and 'Conservative' are dependent on the time frame. Societies have evolved for thousands of years. For most of that time, the ruler was seen as a god. The liberation of the people has been a long slow process.

The movement toward giving power to the people has followed the development of educational systems within that society. To free people from the despotism of a ruler or ruling family or party, is to 'liberate' them. But freedom requires responsibility or anarchy ensues.

There is a balance between the development of a society and the political power that they can wield. This is the fundamental reason democracies encourage education. A democracy depends on an educated population.

During the revolutionary period, most Americans were farmers with little education. But the growth of a merchant class and the exercising of self rule for many years before the English government required the English Colonies to help reduce the debt incurred in fighting the French had raised expectations in the colonists.

The new ideas resulted in more power to the people and less for the King. They were liberals. They were liberating the people from despotism.

When the French copied the Americans, the French Revolution resulted. But the people who were leading the French Revolution went too far. They, like the Chinese 170 years later, tried to remake society in a logical way, doing away with traditional values as well as the upper levels of educated society. In doing this they produced a government with more power over the people than before. Their liberalization resulted in chaos. Chaos resulted in the rise of Bonaparte. The energy of the state was being dissipated by chaos and the state was saved from destruction by the rise of despotism.

Liberalism can be carried too far. Liberalism depends on an educated people capable of setting their own goals, formulating and carrying out national policies. 'Liberals' who pander to an uneducated populace have forgotten the lessons of history, or they haven't.

;-D Education must come first. Self rule follows. In order to participate in government, one must understand the complexities of the modern world. An uneducated populace is not capable of self government, liberal theories aside.

Answer 4

Well, when was the last time that a stay the course conservative ever started a revolution. Maybe never, of course these were progressive thinking people that wanted to change the course and become an independent state from England. As an side bar, the liberal French helped us to achieve independence, that is why I have never ordered freedom fries, I love my french frys to much.

Answer 5

More than likely, it depends upon your definition of liberal. Franklin was infamous for his kooky behaviors, such as air baths. Jefferson and the other founding fathers were also known for their radical thinking. All that points towards the stereotypes of liberalism. However, they were both somewhat hawkish, which is considered more of a stereotypical "conservative" trait.

I would lean towards the speculative. Republicans and Democrats experienced extreme change as late as the Dixiecrat excurstion thirty, forty years ago without stretching all the way back to the Revolutionary War. The world was too different to be encompassed by our modern labels of liberal and conservative.

Answer 6

Think about it.

It was a very liberal idea at the time to want to have the people govern themselves, with no governance from a sovereign or the Church.

Now, in primitive societies, democracy is the norm, but as the European societies evolved, that democratic idea was lost.

Answer 7

Today in this pitty conservative vs liberal each side has gone to the founding fathers and saying they were on thier side.


Something like people who claim that Jesus was a _________.
(put your favorite side here)

The truth is not even close what passes today for conservative or liberal can't be apply to the past.

It makes that side feel good about thier position. That is all it is doing not stating any truth.

Answer 8

Liberal-then is a whole lot different than liberal-now.

Then, the liberals were classical liberals, who wanted maximum freedom and personal responsibility. No government welfare, no government retirement funding, no government medical pay, no government cheese, no government telling them what wages they earn, no government telling them how to discipline their child, no government intruding in their education, family, or busineess, no government telling them who they can hire, why they can fire employees or if they can smoke in their private place of business, no government daycare, no government license to sell goods they make, etc.

This is very different from today's "liberal", who wants no restrictions on personal actions, but wants no responsibility for taking care of themselves. They have elected to surrender important freedoms and give unbounded authority to government so they can be taken care of by government.

This is an important distiction between the two. The "liberal" of today and the "liberal" of 1776 are two completely different animals.

Answer 9

We have been led to believe that the "Patriots" were what has been called "apostles in knee britches". They were well-educated intellectuals who applied philosophy and economics to their position as colonists and believed that significant changes would improve life for people in America. They were mostly not Christians, they were Deists. Absolutely, they were liberals by definition...seeking improvement through change and reform.

Answer 10

i dont know but liberal thinking is behind the way the world market runs. inequality is certainly the cause of much unrest in poorer countries.