Sure the American Elite joined in, well, some of them did. Mostly it was revolution driven by the middle class. Maybe the upper middle class, but the stamp and tea taxes were incredibly unpopular.
I’d imagine the sentiment among the poorer people was something along the lines of “better to be lorded over by a local asshole, than one half the world away”.
Also, the quartering bullshit. That was just as unpopular, so much so that we have an entire amendment banning it specifically.
Not very understandable. Britain had become a new and particularly liberal democracy by this point. The colonists were paying much less tax than their cousins back home, and “The Empire” didn’t really get started until after the Americans had revolted anyway.
What made them “particularly liberal”? They were exporting their “prisoners” to the American colonies. They were still colonizing other territories, extending their reach. They were still selling African slaves via slave trade through The East India Trading Company. The Empire was in full swing by the 1600s, through the 1700s, well into the 1800s where they started to lose steam through the century.
It was almost the only place in the world with a free press in the 18th century, and even enjoyed a healthy satire industry. Religious freedom was effectively the rule, and there was no lese majesty law that was effectively enforced.
The Empire didn’t “lose steam” in the 19th century. That was where it went into overdrive with rapid expansion, the biggest addition being India in the 1850s. It was only in the 1920s when it peaked.
Americans didn’t, the American elites did. Americans just died in yet another war started by the aristocracy.
Except that’s not 100% correct.
Sure the American Elite joined in, well, some of them did. Mostly it was revolution driven by the middle class. Maybe the upper middle class, but the stamp and tea taxes were incredibly unpopular.
I’d imagine the sentiment among the poorer people was something along the lines of “better to be lorded over by a local asshole, than one half the world away”.
Also, the quartering bullshit. That was just as unpopular, so much so that we have an entire amendment banning it specifically.
Middle class as in bourgeoisie?
Tradesmen and Merchants.
The layer under the actual elite of the time.
To get out from under The British Empire, which is pretty understandable during the time period.
Not very understandable. Britain had become a new and particularly liberal democracy by this point. The colonists were paying much less tax than their cousins back home, and “The Empire” didn’t really get started until after the Americans had revolted anyway.
All of this is bullshit.
What made them “particularly liberal”? They were exporting their “prisoners” to the American colonies. They were still colonizing other territories, extending their reach. They were still selling African slaves via slave trade through The East India Trading Company. The Empire was in full swing by the 1600s, through the 1700s, well into the 1800s where they started to lose steam through the century.
It was almost the only place in the world with a free press in the 18th century, and even enjoyed a healthy satire industry. Religious freedom was effectively the rule, and there was no lese majesty law that was effectively enforced.
The Empire didn’t “lose steam” in the 19th century. That was where it went into overdrive with rapid expansion, the biggest addition being India in the 1850s. It was only in the 1920s when it peaked.