opinions on Radicalism of American Revolution?

Question

in my opinion, gordon is just stating that many others may believe that the revolution wasnt revolutionary, when in fact it was. There doesnt have to be some big movement right away for a revolution to take place.

It seems as though he also feels that events of the past deliberately affect today

Answer 1

Washington and the Founding Fathers were not radicals as people today would consider the term. They opposed "taxation without representation" and felt that Great Britain was unfairly taking advantage of the Colonies; this was true.

The same CLASSES of people were in charge after as before. The Revolution did not automatically do away with hereditary monarchy as shown by the fact that Washington was called upon to declare himself king and that would have been OK with most people. It was Washington himself who set the nation on the path away from monarchy and also set the precedent, de facto if not de jure, of not serving more than two terms. When Franklin Roosevelt was elected four times, the precedent was enshrined into law.

The Revolution did not result in the Constitution, and the consequent republic we now have, until almost a decade after the Revolution. Great Britain actually abolished and fought slavery before the U.S. did, so the mother country was in one way at least more liberal than the offspring.

The French Revolution got most of its ideas from the American one but was much more radical and even terroristic and so extreme that it didn't last and was replaced ( as frequently happens ) by the dictatorship of Napoleon who subsequently became "emperor".

Answer 2

This is an old debate. Many people feel that the revolution wasn't radical, because it left the same people in charge as before - wealthy white landowning men. They have a point. But I would argue the more important issue is that for the first time in modern history people had declared their ability to rule themselves without kings or hereditary nobility - and that was a truly radical idea.

Answer 3

It may have been radicalism, but the end product is that we have our own country controlled by Americans not people from other countries. I do believe that our history books have been slanted one way and may not be exactly as we have been taught in school. I still think Americans make better friends than subjects.

Answer 4

George Washington was a "radical" by todays standards. Thats common knowledge. A revolution is a revolution is a revolution...

Answer 5

We under no circumstances study at college simply by fact that's notably beside the point to us. The British Empire at that factor did no longer fairly care approximately u . s . a . it grew to become into increasing very much in different areas of the international. the actuality is that many Colonial people at that factor have been professional-Britain and needed to stay area of the Empire, i've got constantly theory that if Britain surely cared with regard to the 13 colonies and surely fought back they could have smashed the creative people into the airborne dirt and airborne dirt and mud. the main important reason Britain lost is that we did no longer care adequate, wore pink jackets which allowed the yank snipers to %. off squaddies very actual. with regards to the British being snobs around it relatively is unquestionably genuine with nobility, defense force officers (for a protracted time wealthy nobles ought to purchase a cost of any rank in the kings military even with skills) and a few MPs. however the hardship-unfastened line infantry guy tended to be from the gutter and a dreg of society, criminals could in many circumstances serve in the ranks. Britain permit the Revolutionaries Win, think of roughly it the British military grew to become into the desirable in the international at that factor.