2nd Semester_American civilisation

For the most part, the American colonists had come to the "New World" seeking political , religious and economic liberty. Consequently , when King George III and the British parliament began encroaching on these new-found freedoms, the colonists were greatly alarmed . There was no single act or event which led the colonists to commence a war against the British Crown. Rather, there was a litany of abuses and insults which, taken together, convinced the colonists that revolution was their only acceptable course of action.
Generally well-read, the colonists had "devoured" the writings of 17th Century Civil war writers and their successors, such as Milton, Trenchard and Gordon. From these authors, the colonists aquired a powerful sense of moral indignation toward political corruption of any kind . Moreover, while recognizing that government is necessary to save man from the "state of nature" depicted by Hobbes and Lokcke, they also believed that their liberty rested on their ability to maintain superiotity,i.e.physical military power, over their government . As the British government continually pressed itself and its authority on the colonists, they concluded that England's dominion over the colonies was essentially the power to destroy their liberty. Together, these beiefs laid the philosophical foundations for the Revolution.








The Declaration of Independence, primarily written by Thomas Jefferson , contains some of the familiar political phrases and dotrines in America. It's most famous signer , John Hancock, and fifty-five other delegates to the Second Continental Congress affirmed their belief in popular sovereignity and pleded their lives and their "sacred Honor" to the Revolutionary War which ultimately won the United States of America her independence from Great Britain . It is document that emphasizes liberty, even at the expense of societal order.



Defining federalism has never been a simple task. As colonies, the states had developed independently and, even after the Revolutionary War, they remained "distinct", different and insular communities. Consequently, bringing the states together in a federal system was fraught with controversy. The states had become very jealous of their independence and autonomy and many people were suspicious of the new Constitutional arrangement that would require the states to give up power to the national government. Indeed, it was the states' reluctance to surrender even the smallest amount of sovereignty that had made the government under the Articles of Confederation so weak.
The events that had prompted the states to delegates to the Constitutional Convention, however, had also made them much more willing to accept limitations on states power than they had been before. If a stronger national government could help solve the states' trade and commerce problems, they were willing to relinquish some of their independence. Then as today, however, there was controversy about just how much independence would have to be given up to make the national government strong enough to achieve the ends it was being created to pursue .
The Framers of the Constitution created a federal system with a national government strong enough to unify the states in their pursuit of common goals without completely robbing the states of their independence. If they had not done so, it is unlikely that the ratifying conventions in the several states would have approved the Constitution.





Good Luck

Thank you Laflouf86 !!! it's very helpful !!!

this was a very nice article

If I may to add to your article

You are correct that it was no single incident that led to the American Revoultionary War.

But I would like to point to a couple of the leading incidents that helped push for our independance.

Taxation without representation

By 1763, Great Britain possessed a vast holding on the North American continent. In addition to the thirteen colonies, sixteen smaller colonies were ruled directly by royal governors. Victory in the Seven Years' War had given Great Britain New France (Canada), Spanish Florida, and the Native American lands east of the Mississippi River. In 1765, the colonists still considered themselves loyal subjects of the British Crown, with the same historic rights and obligations as subjects in Britain.

The British government sought to tax its American possessions, primarily to help pay for its defense of North America from the French in the Seven Years' War. The problem for many American colonists was not that taxes were high (they were low) but that they were not consulted about the new taxes, as they had no representation in parliament. The phrase "no taxation without representation" became popular within many American circles. London argued that the Americans were represented "virtually"; but most Americans rejected the theory that men in London, who knew nothing about their needs and conditions, could represent them.

In theory, Great Britain already regulated the economies of the colonies through the Navigation Acts according to the doctrines of mercantilism, which said that anything that benefited the Empire (and hurt other empires) was good policy. Widespread evasion of these laws had long been tolerated. Now, through the use of open-ended search warrants (Writs of Assistance), strict enforcement became the practice. In 1761, Massachusetts lawyer James Otis argued that the writs violated the constitutional rights of the colonists. He lost the case, but John Adams later wrote, "American independence was then and there born."

In 1762, Patrick Henry argued the Parson's Cause in Virginia, where the legislature had passed a law and it was vetoed by the King. Henry argued, "that a King, by disallowing Acts of this salutary nature, from being the father of his people, degenerated into a Tyrant and forfeits all right to his subjects' obedience."

1765: Stamp Act unites the Colonies in protest

In 1764, Parliament enacted the Sugar Act and the Currency Act, further vexing the colonists. Protests led to a powerful new weapon, the systemic boycott of British goods. The colonists had a new slogan, "no taxation without representation," meaning only their colonial assemblies, and not Parliament, could levy taxes on them. In 1765 the Stamp Act was the first direct tax ever levied by Parliament on the colonies. All newspapers, almanacs, pamphlets and official documents --even decks of playing cards--had to have the stamps. All 13 colonies protested vehemently, as popular leaders like Patrick Henry in Virginia and James Otis in Massachusetts rallied the people in opposition. A secret group the "Sons of Liberty" formed in many towns and threatened violence if anyone sold the stamps, and no one did. In Boston the Sons of Liberty burned the records of the vice-admiralty court and looted the elegant home of the chief justice, Thomas Hutchinson. Several legislatures called for united action, and nine colonies sent delegates to the Stamp Act Congress in New York City in October, 1765. Moderates led by John Dickinson drew up a "Declaration of Rights and Grievances" stating that taxes passed without representation violated ancient rights. Lending weight to the argument was an economic boycott of British merchandise, as imports into the colonies fell from £2,250,000 in 1764 to £1,944,000 in 1765. In London the Rockingham government came to power and Parliament debated whether to repeal the stamp tax or send an army to enforce it. Benjamin Franklin eloquently made the American case, explaining the colonies had spent heavily in manpower, money and blood in defense of the empire in a series of wars against the French and Indians, and that further taxes to pay for those wars was unjust and might bring about a rebellion. Parliament agreed and repealed the tax, but in a "Declaratory Act" of March 1766 insisted that parliament retained full power to make laws for the colonies "in all cases whatsoever."

The Boston Massacre

The incident began on King Street when a young wigmaker's apprentice named Edward Garrick called out to a British officer, Captain John Goldfinch, that he was late paying his barber's bill. Goldfinch had, in fact, settled his account that day but did not reply to the boy. When Garrick remained quite vocal in his complaints an hour later, the British sentry outside the customs house, Private Hugh White, called the boy over and clubbed him on the head. Garrick's companions yelled at the sentry, and a British sergeant chased them away. The apprentices returned with more locals, shouting insults at the sentry and throwing snowballs and litter.

White sent a messenger to the Main Guard for reinforcements. The Officer of the Day, Captain Thomas Preston, according to his account, dispatched a non-commissioned officer and twelve privates, all soldiers of the 29th Regiment of Foot, and he followed soon after. The mob grew in size and continued throwing stones, sticks, and chunks of ice. A group of sailors and dockworkers came carrying large sticks of firewood and pushed to the front of the crowd, directly confronting the soldiers. As bells rang in the surrounding steeples, the crowd of Bostonians grew larger and more threatening.

In the midst of the commotion, Private Hugh Montgomery was struck down onto the ground by a piece of ice. He fired his musket, later admitting to one of his defense attorneys that someone had yelled "Fire!" All but one of the other soldiers shot their weapons into the crowd. Their uneven bursts hit eleven men; three died instantly, one a few hours later, and a fifth several days later. Six wounded survived.

The Boston Tea Party
On Thursday, December 16, 1773, the evening before the tea was due to be landed, on a signal given by Samuel Adams, the Sons of Liberty thinly disguised as Mohawk Indians, left the massive protest meeting and headed toward Griffin's Wharf, where lay the HMS Dartmouth and her newly arrived, tea bearing, sister ships the HMS Beaver and the HMS Eleanour. Swiftly and efficiently casks of tea where brought up from the hold to the deck, reasonable proof that some of the "indians" were, in fact, longshoremen. The cask were opened and the tea dumped overboard; the work, lasting well into the night, was quick, thorough, and efficient. By dawn 90,000 lbs (45 tons) of tea worth an estimated £10,000 had been consigned to waters of Boston harbor. Nothing else had been damaged or stolen, except a single padlock accidentally broken and anonymously replaced not long thereafter. Tea washed up on the shores around Boston for weeks.

It's a helpful addition . Thanx

Thank you guys!!


About the melting pot,
it's like a summary of what we had in the class with Mrs Mestiri, it's from wikipedia,the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting_pot