History
Politics
Economics
Historical Analysis
Social Issues
Political Commentary
Commentary
Social Critique
economic commentary
My version of red-pilling is when I teach people the Boston Tea Party was triggered by England *LOWERING* the tea tax, and the Sons of Liberty were the wealthiest Boston businessmen who made their money smuggling and didn't want the competition.
Smuggled tea was cheaper than legal tea because it evaded the tea tax, see, and men like John Hancock and Samuel Adams got very, very rich smuggling tea and selling it cheap.
Reducing the tea tax made legal tea competitive, cutting into their business.
Reducing the tea tax made legal tea competitive, cutting into their business.
...so all these rich business owners staged a "protest" in which they (well, people they paid--they mostly didn't go themselves) threw their competitors' product into the ocean, and then told people it was about "Liberty" and "Freedom."
That's about as American as you get.
That's about as American as you get.
Basically all of the "Founding Fathers" were very wealthy men who would financially benefit from breaking with England.
And one of the very first things George Washington did as President was put down a rebellion by businessmen who didn't want to pay a new tax.
And one of the very first things George Washington did as President was put down a rebellion by businessmen who didn't want to pay a new tax.
Adding this not to call out the questioner in any way, but because it’s a good question and the answer is relevant to the thread.
I need to go to bed. This is getting some eyeballs, which means I’ll probably wake up to actual historians telling me which minor details I messed up. And that’s their right, they studied. But I promise you the important details of this are all true.
I wrote this a while back if you want more context for how the United States has always used rhetoric about “Liberty” to justify pursuit of profit and wealth.
The image is an ad *Alexander Hamilton* ran in his paper offering reward for an escaped slave.
christopherkeelty.medium.com
The image is an ad *Alexander Hamilton* ran in his paper offering reward for an escaped slave.
christopherkeelty.medium.com
Not his slave, mind you. Unless I’m mistaken, Hamilton was truly an abolitionist and never owned any slaves.
But he was happy to take money to run advertisements from slave owners trying to return escaped slaves into captivity.
But he was happy to take money to run advertisements from slave owners trying to return escaped slaves into captivity.
WAIT. Regarding the ad above, a correction: Alexander Hamilton did run ads like these in the New York Post, but this is not one of those, it is an example from another paper. I forgot, I couldn’t find any images of the ads from the Post.
And another correction regarding Hamilton, who did enslave people himself, according to this research. Thanks to Mollie.
I’m adding one last point and then I really need to sleep. This framing below is something you’ll encounter often from those who want to preserve the heroic framing without technically lying. Don’t buy it. Under the mercantilist system at the time, a “monopoly” was the norm.
…and clearly it was not “the colonists” squeezed out of the tea trade when lower taxes made British tea competitive with illegally smuggled Dutch tea. It was the wealthy few who smuggled and sold tea.
I’m awake and there are a ton of replies to this. First thing I want to point out is that the US history curriculum was all developed during the Cold War and the first priority was to raise American children as patriots who loved capitalism—which led to a lot of distortions.
…and we continue to teach those distortions because the adults who were raised during the Cold War get ***EXTREMELY UPSET*** if children aren’t taught exactly the same things they learned at that age.
If you want my opinion, there are definitely aspects of the American Revolution that should be celebrated. But I think we must discard mythology and measure history honestly--and especially recognize the ways history is distorted to manipulate us today.
Ok need to get off Twitter for a while but first, people, PLEASE stop equating this with Brexit!
The UK was NOT an EU colony, and modern global capitalism is nothing at all like 18th century mercantilism!!!
The UK was NOT an EU colony, and modern global capitalism is nothing at all like 18th century mercantilism!!!
You can argue they’re similar in that wealthy people were making disingenuous arguments out of self-interest, fine. But there were actual benefits to the colonies in independence.
Brexit was just a massive campaign for the UK to punch itself in the nuts over and over again.
Brexit was just a massive campaign for the UK to punch itself in the nuts over and over again.
Loading suggestions...