Revolutionary Stirrings, 1763-1775: Stamp Act, Continental Congress, Tea Act, American Revolution

What were the causes of the American Revolution?
The period from 1763-1775 is the period in the American colonies between the French and Indian War and the American Revolutionary War. This period is an era of incredible social, political, and economic change in the colonies that ultimately led to the Declaration of Independence in 1776.
King George III is the monarch. Some prime ministers during this time include George Grenville, William Pitt, Lord North, and Lord Rockingham.
In 1763, the French and Indian War is over. However, Pontiac's Rebellion pits Native Americans against British North America. However, redcoats put down the rebellion.
The Paxton Boys in Pennsylvania cause trouble, attacking natives in Conestoga, Pennsylvania.
Britain is victorious in America, but she is in great debt. British Parliament motions to raise duties on the colonies. A Sugar Act taxes molasses imports. A Quartering Act requires the colonies to provide supply and shelter for soldiers on the frontier.
The colonial assemblies oppose quartering. Riots occur in New York City.
What was the Stamp Act?
A Stamp Act is imposed, which taxes paper products. Lawyers, politicians, newspaper printers, and other paper professions oppose the tax. A Stamp Act Congress meets in New York to oppose the tax.
In the Summer of 1765, the Sons of Liberty attack taxmen. Parliament will repeal the Stamp Act.
What were the Townshend Acts?
The Townshend Acts tax imports like paint and tea. The Townshend duties will cause boycotts of British imports. The boycotts mean that Britain is losing more revenue through lost trade than the revenues would raise.
In 1770, a fight at the Boston docks escalates. The Boston Massacre resulted in the deaths of five people. John Adams came to the legal defense of the redcoats.
In North Carolina and South Carolina, Scotch-Irish Baptists and Presbyterians in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains demand local courthouses. Militia called the Regulators organize. The Battle of Alamance occurs between the Regulators and North Carolina militia.
George Washington is envisioning the Ohio country a possession for Virginia. But Pennsylvania also has interest in the Fort Pitt area.
The Boston Tea Party occurs in 1773. The British East India Company has an overabundance of tea. Parliament passes a Tea Act to remove some of the import duties for this tea in America. However, Americans protest the company's monopoly. In Boston, the Sons of Liberty dump the modern equivalent of millions of dollars worth of tea into Boston Harbor.
In response to the Boston Tea Party, Thomas Gage's redcoats occupy Boston. The harbor is shut down.
However, the colonies respond by forming a Continental Congress in Philadelphia. The Continental Congress implements a policy of nonimportation, which will be enforced by Committees of Safety. No British goods are to be accepted in American ports.
Some of the men at the Continental Congress include John Adams, Sam Adams, Richard Henry Lee, Benjamin Franklin, and others.
In December 1774, nonimportation goes into effect. Transatlantic trade shuts down.
Lord Dunmore of Virginia fights a battle against the Shawnee at Point Pleasant on the Ohio River.
In Boston, Thomas Gage moves against Concord, Massachusetts. However, Paul Revere rides in front, warning against the incoming redcoats.
Music credit:
Atlantis by Audionautix is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. creativecommons.org/licenses/...
This film was made by Jeffrey Meyer, historian and librarian

[@markaxworthy2508]

This series may be dry, but it is packed with informational gold. More please.

[@hui83]

like fine beef jerky

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

More to come!

[@troyjohnson7154]

Perfect second monitor material.

[@mostlychimp5715]

Good video. The Seven Years War (French & Indian) has got to be the least appreciated war relative to its impact on the modern day.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Yes, the French and Indian War defined North America, and it should be a bigger part of story.

[@mostlychimp5715]

@@JeffreytheLibrarian North America, India, not to mention Europe itself with the rise of Prussia and the impact to the French economy.

[@kaneinkansas]

There probably wasn't an "American" identity before the French and Indian war. It appears to have begun to emerge as a byproduct of that war. That war was fought over who would have hegemony and control over the rich resources of the North American continent. As anyone who has sat thru Sunday readings in Christian church might realize, the manifestation of control over a territory is the ability to tax, which means to extract tax from the territory. The British, after having won the French and Indian war - at least east of the Mississippi proceeded to attempt to extract revenue from the territory they now control. The biggest beneficiaries of the out come of that war were the Anglo-American colonist. Yet they those in the north refused to pay taxes. (I think the Southern states joined the American Revolution because, in 1775, Common Law found slavery illegal (a violation of the writ of habeas corpus), and so that meant emancipation was on its way if they remained part of the British Empire. The inability to extract revenue from North America necesarily implies that the British had not yet manifested control of the territory yet - just acknowledgement from other European states that they were not going to contest for control of that land any longer. Interesting that the French in Quebec had no interest in joining up with the Americans to their south in the revolt. I think the whole entire thing was a mistake - on the part of the British and the part of the Americans. America would be much better off now if we had accepted the end of slavery shortly after 1775, and we would have universal health insurance now too.

[@jackkrauss]

It was the first world war.

[@Senor0Droolcup]

If Jeffrey the librarian is posting a new historical video, that is a very good day

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@theskycavedin9592]

It's pretty clear that by the 1760s/1770s the American colonists had developed their own distinct identity, culture, and systems of governance. No wonder the change in attitude amongst the populace happened so quickly.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

John Adams said the revolution happened in the decade before the conflict, when the minds of the people changed.

[@WellRaverOfficial]

it seems that with the crown holding back westward expansion revolution was inevitable at some point@@JeffreytheLibrarian

[@user-ff6gl4dw7u]

Result of salutary neglect, Robert Walpole’s laissez faire policies made the colonies flourish and become de facto independent. All came crashing down when pelham was removed from office in 1762, in my opinion

[@user-ff6gl4dw7u]

“Salutary neglect had meant the conscious thwarting of Britain’s grand mercantilist design for controlling and restricting American commerce and industry for the benefit of British merchants and manufacturers. Furthermore, the Walpole-Newcastle policy of laissez-faire toward the colonies had allowed the representative colonial assemblies to wrest effective power from royally appointed governors by wielding the power of the purse over colonial taxes and appropriations, notably including the governor’s own salaries. Thus, from 1720 through the 1750s, the American colonies were virtually de facto independent of British imperial control, an independence bolstered by a libertarian spirit and ideology eagerly imbibed from the radical libertarian English writers and journalists of the period.” Conceived in Liberty, Murray Rothbard

[@davj1586]

Thanks for posting!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you for watching!

[@FreeSubtitlesAI]

As many videos like this that you make I will watch!

[@stevearchtoe7039]

This is excellent! (As always). Great vid.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@jasaranewman978]

Enjoyed this video and all the others I watched. Thanks for the slow and deliberate explanations. You really do great work!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Much appreciated!

[@JimJul1888]

Jeffrey, thanks. Enjoy your work.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Much appreciated!

[@lpgalmeida]

Amazing videos. Disappointed that there isn't a sequel to this one.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

I am working on one now. It's coming!

[@Squatch_Rider66]

Great presentation. The more of your videos I watch the more I learn how little of American history I know

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you, sir. I greatly appreciate it.

[@teacopem]

Wtf bro you can't stop right there the video was just getting good! I demand for the continuation of this video right now!

[@nancychandler3673]

Lol

[@ricardogalves1196]

Amazing series of videos, very informative!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@amendingamerica]

This is a great presentation! Helpful since I am developing an online course and making videos about this time period for my channel! Keep up the great content!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you very much!

[@michaelleblanc7283]

Excellent !

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@Phantom2316]

Love the videos

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@corycardwell]

Really well done. Thank you

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Much appreciated!

[@jamesweigh3178]

Excellent…love this!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Much appreciated!

[@myradioon]

One of the earliest acts of outright rebellion was in Exeter, NH when local mill owners beat and ran off the local "Crown Surveyor" of trees who was there to fine them for milling trees with the "Crown's Mark' on them. Trees were often claimed by the Crown no matter who's property they were on. The 'Commonwealth States' like Massachusetts were not only mad about 'Taxes' but also their autonomy under their signed charters. Many lumbermen who rebelled in NH were later part of the 'Sons of Liberty". Timber for masts was one of England's main reasons for starting the Colonies and granting Charters there. Governor Craddock of Massachusetts was given a Charter there to build ships and fell timber for ship "Spars" for the Royal Navy. "White Pine" is an excellent book on the topic.

[@carywest9256]

Isn't a White Pine on the N.H.State flag?

[@myradioon]

@carywest9256 Yes. Also on the MA State Seal with Native. And MA Shilling minted in 1600's. Maine State Flag too. It was on the Flag flown at Bunker Hill. It was the cornerstone of all their economies.

[@TempoDrift1480]

These are friggin awesome!

[@michaelservey6069]

Stirrings, let's talk about Iron Act of 1750? Many years before. Love the page and thanks for your time & efforts!!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@RickJones222]

I finally understand the events leading up to the American revolution. Thanks, Jeffrey!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you for watching!

[@garrybrown3165]

My wife and I are retired and our residence is Washington state, our birth state. Several years ago she visited friends in Williamsburg. When she returned she told me she wanted to buy a house in Williamsburg. Fortunately, I did NOT say out loud the thought that crossed my mind, "Are you ... CRAZY???" Who knew that after 45 years of marriage I would learn of her interest in US History? 3/21/2023 11:13 Eastern GJB (listening in Williamsburg)

[@peterneijs387]

what history ? lol

[@JL-ze5qm]

Thank you for these wonderful summaries! I find them very helpful.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you! I have a Revolution summary coming soon. I just need to get over a cold so I can read it.

[@JL-ze5qm]

Sounds great! I enjoyed your summaries on the different religious sects of early Colonial America, and of early Colonial life in general. It never occurred to me before how culturally different the New England settlers were from the Virginian-area settlers (I was raised in Canada, so these details were not taught in school. I live in US now, so I'm studying its history more deeply.) Hope you feel better soon. Cheers! @@JeffreytheLibrarian

[@hugechimp]

aWesome. Crispus Attucks. The shot heard 'round the world. This my FAVE period of American History.. TY!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Much appreciated!

[@xaspirate8060]

Only because I have not seen his name in print for a while, just want to mention as a 1776 buff - it amazes me at how far down the list Crispus Attucks (re: all thigs AmerRev. )was when I was in school. Not even sure he would crack the top 100 most significant or wtvr. When I first read up on BosMsscr, he was 1 of 5 but now they teach that it was Attucks and 4 other guys but we forget their names.

[@SharonMacNeil]

I love your videos and will patiently await your video covering the Revolutionary War 1775 - 1783.🙂

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you! I am working on a big Civil War video now, but the Revolution is on deck after that.

[@SharonMacNeil]

@@JeffreytheLibrarian Awesome! Now I'm watching your Civil War videos. Very well done. Battle of Fredericksburg reminds me of Gallipoli WWI (ugh).

[@Sussy1738qowieie]

i've watched your series on early american history over the last few days, very informative and well put together videos. thank you for putting out this content!

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@js-xe4oe]

Help, I'm looking for your book titles. I love your channel. Much more interesting than Mr Sussman's American History class , cica 1969.

[@RGL01]

Excellent history lesson.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@martinadams8877]

Fantastic again. i love this series and just don't want it to stop. Should be taught in schools, especially here in the uk. Everyone needs to understand how power mad politicians with vested interests, forcing their will on people only makes everything worse. Thanks for the education. looking forward to the next one. btw, what efforts were made to convince the colonies of the need to pay for security and what was the opposition to that? did the colonies want to raise and pay for their own armies? Thanks.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you! We need to teach this history in the USA, too.

[@automaticmattywhack1470]

Bravo! Another excellent video! Again, I love how you can explain history better than a whole quarter of high school American History. I do have a follow up question tho: did William Pitt believe/want the Americans to have representatives in Parliament? Or did he believe in an open global economy with no duties or taxes?

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

I think he was envisioning a reshaping of the Empire, and was open to the Continental Congress representing those middle colonies. Pitt was pro-colonist, a position he had during the French and Indian War. That may have actually kept the Empire together by granting the American colonies that degree of autonomy. However, most Parliamentarians believed you couldn't have a "government within a government."

[@WellRaverOfficial]

Brilliant job, you must have put a lot of time and effort into these

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you! Yes, these videos take a lot of time and research, but they are worth it. Thanks for watching!

[@WellRaverOfficial]

never even knew about the tea surplus before and how parliament tried to force it onto the colonies. Seems like an arrogance of how far the colonies had come in recent times@@JeffreytheLibrarian

[@amendingamerica]

oh and do you have a citation for the North Carolina petition of the Sugar Act 1764? I am trying to collect primary source documents but I can't seem to find that petition you mentioned.

[@steventhompson399]

I hadn't heard about the regulators fighting in north Carolina a few years prior to the revolution... I like how you did the video chronologically with maps, thank you

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you!

[@myradioon]

I live in NC. NC claims to be the earliest State to separate from the Crown during an oral vote at a Courthouse on May 20th, 1775. It has never been officially proven but the date is on the NC State Flag along with it's date signing the Declaration of Independence, April 12th, 1776. Many NC Regulators went further into the wilderness and founded The Watauga Association on the border of NC/TN, truly being the first entity to break from the Crown in 1772. South Carolina also had a group of armed citizens called "Regulators" but they were rich loyalist landowners who made up armed posses to protect their lands from illegal hunting and timbering etc..

[@ronalddevine9587]

Did the Stamp Act apply to Canada as well? If so, how did they react to it?

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

The wording in the Act is "British colonies and plantations in America." This would include Canada, because the act states Quebec cannot be charged anything higher than what is printed in English (which is quite fair). Quebec and Nova Scotia remained quite loyal to the Crown, and it's actually where Loyalists living in the future USA would flee to.

[@ilFrancotti]

What shocks me the most is that, in the face of a clearly degenerating situation, the King did not travel to pay visit to the colonies.. almost as if he had already given up on the idea of directly talking to or showing himself to that portion of his subjects. Even a single visit could have reinforced the perception of being part of a bigger picture rather than letting feelings of isolation and negligence take the lead.. or simply remembered those people that they had indeed a King above their heads. A catastrophic underestimation in my opinion.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

That's an interesting point. Though this is something a modern royal would do, I can't recall a king visiting the American colonies during the colonial period. I think such a visit would be very unique.

[@ilFrancotti]

@@JeffreytheLibrarian Indeed. I can only think of Portugal's royal family who momentarily moved to Brazil in order to escape Napoleon's armies in the early 1800's. It would have definitely been an unprecedented event, but so was Great Britain position on the world stage and in North America after the Seven Years War (my apologies, I am European, we call it this way).. After all, that was a time studded by unheard-of changes. As you yourself mentioned some, the industrial revolution for example.

[@antonyjones4259]

even at that time it was dangerous to travel across the atlantic.......so i doubt many monarchs would be allowed to risk their life on such a trip (even with a few offspring....many children did not always survive to adults). It would also disrupt the management of the empire having a king away for possibly a few months. Maybe a lesser royal could of been sent as a good will gesture......like harry and meghan !!! lol

[@martinadams8877]

wasn't king george III quite famously mad (as in the film; The madness of king george) at this time due to some illness? Also, as stated, the king was not in charge of any of this as it all originated from parliament and the vested interests there. It occurred to me that the British could have done more to convince the colonies to raise their own taxes to pay for security but perhaps the british were wary that the colonies would organise and pay for their own army and hence quickening independence? Ultimately, we see in politics today, people are unable to admit they are wrong and just want to keep forcing issues and tightening controls whether that does any good at all.

[@dr.debbiewilliams4263]

If he did, someone may have usurped the throne.

[@fromulus]

Let it never be forgotten that Massachusetts was the birthplace of the revolution. It will carry that spirit till the end of time.

[@MrCubFan415]

Fun fact: Fort Pitt is approximately where Pittsburgh is today.

[@nancychandler3673]

Ahh, thus how Pittsburgh got its name.

[@MrCubFan415]

@@nancychandler3673 Yep! And Fort Pitt was named after William Pitt the Elder en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Pitt,_1st_Earl_of_Chatham

[@nikhtose]

Tax policy wasn't the only problem for the colonists. Mercantilist policies forced colonial merchants, farmers and artisans to export raw goods exclusively to Britain, while importing finished goods and capital from there. This allowed London elites to set prices low while charging Americans dear for their loans and finished goods. The imposition of new taxes only deepened this across-the-board exploitation, fostering unity among different classes in America against the Crown.

[@mrmackey8776]

My family lives around the Alamance battleground

[@VernAfterReading]

I love your videos. This one included. But I would have liked to see much more on the severe colonial trade and monetary restrictions. Basically, Britain was trying to have it both ways: treating America as a subordinate colony when it came to their economy, but as "equals" when it came to taxes and parliamentary oversight. These same colonialist economic policies (exploitation of raw goods production, while keeping overall economic growth limited and dependent on the mother country) often continue in former colonies and drive resentments even today.

[@malachi-]

Human nature.

[@skpjoecoursegold366]

the Colonist seem like immature young adults.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

On the one hand, one can see why London would be confused why the colonies were so resolute against Parliament's authority. On the other hand, Britain's heavy-handed response to the Boston Tea Party--occupying redcoats and warships--only escalated the problem.

[@xaspirate8060]

No doubt a few were but they were probably necessary big picture.

[@andyburk4825]

What was the time lag for news to reach London and return orders /proclamations back to the Colonies ? Must have been months, by slow sailboats.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

About 6 weeks I believe. It depends on the winds, but about six weeks.

[@andyburk4825]

@@JeffreytheLibrarian So 3 weeks out to London, plus 3 weeks back to America ? Pretty good for the sail technology of the times.

[@g.l.5072]

In the summer is was faster

[@jimsantiago6017]

This video could sure use some “suspense” music…

[@bewilderedbrit8928]

No, no, no, do not listen to that man.

[@neilschristensen9143]

Taxes are the killer of us all.

[@williamhalejr.4289]

One thing about the British Debt, it was NOT arrived at for the benefit of the American colonies as this "history" nor British claims made it out to be. The war in N America was over by 1760, the remaining three years of war were for the benefit of England and George 3 specifically in his lands in Germany. During the final 3 years, Britain gained land in India, Germany and the Caribbean and it was NOT for the benefit of the American colonies, but for the benefit of Britain! Remember, at the time they used the mercantile system where the colonies supplied the raw materials and the markets for British products which were mandated to be produced in Britain. American would send raw materials at very low cost to Britain to be turned into goods that were needed by Americans and due to the Navigation Acts of Parliament could not be gotten from anyone but British ports at high costs. So, Britain gained in the mercantile trade a severe advantage against all of their colonies, forced the colonies to purchase high priced goods from Britain and then claimed that they should pay more in taxes for the gain of the British population and the insane King Georgie 3!

[@deplorablepatriot9628]

Every Citizen should be capable of passing an exam of our first 200 years. My family arrived here in 1634 as one of the founders of Watertown, on the river Charles of the Massachusetts Bay.

[@robertporch8895]

Where's the next lesson?

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

I have started the research for it. The Revolution is in the works.

[@Odonanmarg]

I think continued and earnest diplomacy could have won the day. However there were some “patriots” who didn’t want it that way.

[@mikeorclem]

When life gives you melons, you might be dyslexic.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

It actually took me a few minutes to get that. But once I realized "melons'' and "lemons" have the same letters just mixed up, it was quite funny. It's a curve ball though, because both are fruit.

[@theskycavedin9592]

The Sons of Liberty were not just a vigilante group but rather a political activist group that was very politically active in the governments/organizations of the colonies.

[@shariberry3123]

In California, the missions were all spaced a days travel on horseback, apart.

[@angloaust1575]

85 years later they were fighting each other in civil war!

[@philtreman9944]

The British Empire was in its infancy when it lost the American colonies. In fact, the loss was the catalyst to turn east and expand into Africa, Asia and Australasia.🌍🌏

[@thompersonal4621]

39:02 1st Continental Congress; Georgia, Florida and the Canadian colonies do not send delegates; Florida was a Spanish colony and Canada was a British colony not considered part of the original thirteen; why would they send delegates to the Continental Congress?

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Actually, Britain gained Florida from Spain following the French and Indian War. Florida was actually two British colonies at this time: West Florida and East Florida. Spain won Florida back after the Revolution. Canada was composed of multiple British colonies also gained for Britain during the French and Indian War. It was conceivable that those colonies could have become involved in the revolution, but they choose not to. There were multiple attempts by Congress and the Continental Army to win over Canada, but Canada remained loyalist.

[@davidfoster3427]

Fresh in the minds of these people was why left and now see that it has followed them here.

[@godfreyday6673]

I enjoyed that. Sadly the Hubris in our Country is still here among upper and middle classes. The could have had a much better outcome sadly it did not

[@jrt818]

So doxxing was a thing in August of 1765.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Putting names in the paper is definitely one way to get folks to follow the program. They meant business.

[@therealoldnosey8689]

Early gang

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Thank you, friend! You have the first comment!

[@michaelcook7334]

My favorite historian, Samuel Morison, in his book, The Oxford History of the American People (1965), made the conjecture that had George III hopped on a boat and gone fox hunting with the aristocrats in Virginia, the war might not have taken place. Kind of like John F. Kennedy touring Latin America and Europe with his wife Jackie and she delivering his speeches in French and Spanish.

[@AryanAleviZaza]

The real reason for the revolts in the colonies was not due to taxes (for all taxes were eventually repealed except that on tea) but to the royal proclamation of 1763 which prohibited colonists from settling beyond the Appalachian Mountains. Many monopolists who wanted to appropriate these Indian lands were very frustrated, including George Washington, who did not hesitate to assassinate the members of the French delegation who came to discuss. This deliberate act was intended to start a war. And that's what happened

[@malachi-]

"George Washington, who did not hesitate to assassinate the members of the French delegation who came to discuss" References?

[@AryanAleviZaza]

@@malachi- history he who seeks finds

[@malachi-]

@@AryanAleviZaza In the mid-1700’s, pre-revolutionary America was not indebted to a privately owned central bank but still relatively poor. There was a severe shortage of precious metals to trade for goods, so the early colonists were forced to experiment with printing their own paper money. Benjamin Franklin was a big supporter of the colonies doing this. Called colonial scrip, the endeavor was successful. It provided a reliable medium of exchange and it also helped provide a feeling of unity between the colonies. Remember, colonial scrip was just paper money. Debt free money printed in the public interest and not backed by gold or silver. It was a totally fiat currency. One day, Bank of England officials asked Franklin how he would account for the newfound prosperity of the colonies. Without hesitation he replied, That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called colonial scrip. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one. - Benjamin Franklin This was common sense to Franklin. But you can imagine the impact it had on the Bank of England. America had learned the secret of money and that genie had to be returned to its bottle as soon as possible. British parliament hurriedly passed the Currency Act of 1764. This prohibited colonial officials from issuing their own money and ordered them to pay all future taxes in gold or silver coins. It forced the colonies onto a gold and silver standard. For those who still believe a gold or silver standard is the answer for America’s current monetary problems, look what happened to America after that. In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the colonies were filled with unemployed. - Benjamin Franklin Franklin claims that this was even the cause for the American Revolution. *The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction. The inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the revolutionary war.* - Benjamin Franklin By the time the first shots were fired in on April 19th, 1775, the colonies had been drained of gold and silver by British taxation. As a result, the continental government had no choice but to print money to finance the war. At the start of the revolution the US money supply stood at 12 million dollars. By the end of the war, it was nearly 500 million. The currency was virtually worthless.

[@xaspirate8060]

There were not "many" monopolists back then so please fact check. Plus they did not know what or who - Indian lands were beyond the mountains so there's that too... guessing you had a Woke history teacher? What problem do you have with people who were sick of previous gov. or King, Church etc? Can't see the logic in that?

[@Blackdiamondprod.]

Why isn’t Wilkes-Barre on the map? They’d just fought 3 entire wars to establish the territory.

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

I have Wilkes-Barre and the greater Wyoming Valley in the "American Revolution, 1775-1761" video.

[@Blackdiamondprod.]

@@JeffreytheLibrarian I’ll definitely be checking that out! I’ve always been fascinated with the history of Northeastern Pennsylvania. The biggest metropolis nobody’s ever heard of. Hahaha. Thank you for helping to preserve history.

[@GirlSmotheredToDeath]

12:47

[@GirlSmotheredToDeath]

15:25

[@GirlSmotheredToDeath]

14:44 - 14:57

[@neilschristensen9143]

So stop drinking tea!

[@Odonanmarg]

What is Geo. Washington up to through all this❓ And the, so-called, “Fathers of the Constitution”⁉️

[@julsmathteacher415]

Geo was loyal to the crown he played the part of the colonist but look at the proff two constitutions two declaration of independence read the documents and look at the crown stamp most americans are a sleep about this

[@jakegarvin7634]

I believe Nova Scotia was a colony, actually

[@jasonpalacios1363]

Actually those taxes the British imposed on the 13 Colonies was to create money on how they were going to create these lands that the British won and took from the French from The French and Indian War and the Proclamation of 1763 was a temporary thing until the British gathers enough money from the taxes to create new lands on the frontier. Also many of the Founding Fathers were smugglers so the taxes interrupted their illegal business.

[@kenneth9874]

The Scotsirish were Protestants

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

And Presbyterian if I had to put a name to it.

[@JameaJimea1175]

Back in the days when ohio was the wild west 😂

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

Yes, Ohio was the wild West. Pittsburgh and Detroit were frontier posts.

[@jacksilver9935]

I find myself wondering how bad things were. Britain taxed the colonies. Britain spent money and British lives but ended up obtaining security for the colonies. The French withdrew to what is Canada and Louisiana. Native Americans withdrew to west of the Alleghenies. If you’re in the colonies you’re safer after 1763. Protest, sure. Revolution? Necessary? Colonists took, accepted British sacrifices for colonists’ safety and not pay any of Britains cost? Was Britain so unfair or were colonists so unappreciative?

[@JeffreytheLibrarian]

A metaphor that has been used is that the future US colonies were "ready to leave the house" like a young adult that wants to leave his or her parent's house and set out on their own life. You can see, though, how complicated it would be to live then, and how torn many individuals, families, and communities would have been. Ben Franklin had a falling out with his own son, and they did not speak for many years.

[@JameaJimea1175]

We might find ourselves in a similar situation with global governance in the future.

[@shorewall]

I feel like the East India Company botched it all up. The government could think about how to handle things, but once the Corporation's money, through the Boston Tea Party, was attacked, then it was personal. :D High ranking politicians who were invested in the company now had an axe to grind.

[@slimshady4life689]

Although Britain was protecting the colonies during the war. It was Britain that started the war with France in the first place. In the colonies viewpoint they were being taxed to support the cost of protection they shouldn’t have needed

[@nicholasdepaola3740]

The colonist were well aware how deleterious British tax policies were to its colonies. They watched as Scotland and Ireland were unfairly taxed and sucked dry of their wealth. They did not want the same to happen to them especially after decades of imperial neglect which gave them a taste of quasi self-governance.

[@joelcrow]

Dear King Charles, we are SUPER sorry for this whole 18th century nonsense... it was really just a bu.ch of apoiled British teenagers tire of yalls taxes. We were so close to not needing passports to visit one another.... if I could go back in time, wed already been hugging this out all the way until that whole Hiroshima thing sorry

[@craigkdillon]

Nice narrative. But, it is woefully incomplete. It does not tell about the importance of the Somerset case. Let me explain, from the book Slave Nation. Around 1763, a Virginian went to England with his personal slave, Somerset. Somerset fled. His owner sued to get him back. The English court ruled against him, and the slave Somerset was now free. OK. Why a big deal??? You must understand, the England was under English Common Law, which relies heavily on precedent. That precedent meant that ALL slaves in the colonies could be freed at any time. Maybe all they had to do was sue for their freedom, and the Somerset precedent would give it to them. Therefore, the colonies had to become independent to maintain the slave economy and slave society. In the book, Redcoats & Rebels, we find that King George pleaded with the Continental Congress for some kind of deal. No deal. How odd. Here were the Yankee traders that made deals around world, and even traded in slaves, not willing to deal. These guys would sell their mothers if the price was right, and they could not make a deal??? Something was afoot. The colonies NEEDED independence to maintain slavery. It does go against the normal narrative. But, it does explain the Boston/Virginia axis, and other things. I suggest you read the book.

[@homieslice1996]

Even if true, the British expanded their own colonial holdings with the lives of British-Americans to “defend against the French”; the British-Americans had little to no input into the political system of Britain that affected policy back in the Americas; the colonies were expensive for Britain to maintains. All of these colonial wars and related administration was expensive enough to need more tax revenue that Britain couldn’t get on its own, so it used its British-American vassals as a resource colony and a place of raw materials and taxes; not to mention, representative for governments naturally led to the Republican revolution called the American Revolution that sparked uprisings in Ireland for Irish Independence against their British colonizers, the French Revolution that had some proto-communists like Babeuf, and eventually the liberal revolutions of the 1840s. Further, the American Revolution abolished monarchy and many feudal elements that kept society economically and politically weak. Separation of church and state also had the effect of restricting the old Anglican churches that the Crown could use to reconquer the land. 1790. On the Mississippi Question. Thomas Jefferson, as hypocritical as he was at times with his ownership of slaves (shockingly the British had slavery until the early-to-mid 1800s), said that unlike the British, “conquest in not in our principles”. In a letter to William Short (I think that was the name) around 1790-1793, Jefferson states that some wealthy people in the American government were sympathetic towards the old monarchy. This is likely due to the economic strength that the wealthy aristocrats got from being tied to the Monarch, and the US struggled to trade against the interests of the imperial British Empire back then. Slavery had ties to Britain too, and they benefited from slave labor during the Cotton King era; the northern states economically benefited from the abomination of slavery in a similar way to the British. The British had slaves, too, and the Irish were treated as second class at best. The British were not much, if at all, better than the British Americans regarding slavery and colonization. Long and short: despite some hypocrisies that still affect the US (and Britain, for that matter), I’m glad we don’t have to praise the King like how Hong Kongers were forced to do until they joined China.

[@craigkdillon]

@@homieslice1996 The standard story is not wrong, it is just incomplete. The standard story about objecting to taxes is well documented. It is just incomplete.

[@homieslice1996]

@@craigkdillon I agree. But that story on taxes never stresses why those taxes were “Intolerable”: the taxes paid for a war that barely if at all benefited the British-Americans, they were done with no consultation of the British-Americans who like Washington fought in that war, and they had no seat in Parliament and thus no representation. People often forget about the “representation” part of the struggle.