pogo inspired introspection

[ruffrecords]

Our founders were clearly inspired by the UK system (Magna Carta et al). It is worth note we revolted against British control.
JR

I have no idea how that part of history is taught in the US but back in Blighty we were taught it was because we Brits taxed you colonists but you had no voice in Parliament. No taxation without representation you cried. Not an unreasonable complaint IMHO. If only we had conceded the point how different history might have been - interesting jumping off point for an alternative history sc-fi novel.

Cheers

ian

 

[JohnRoberts]

I have no idea how that part of history is taught in the US but back in Blighty we were taught it was because we Brits taxed you colonists but you had no voice in Parliament. No taxation without representation you cried. Not an unreasonable complaint IMHO. If only we had conceded the point how different history might have been - interesting jumping off point for an alternative history sc-fi novel.

Cheers

ian

That was one memorable slogan from that era... of course there is a lot more. I hate to think how history of this is taught today. 

I have read several really good history books covering that and our early centuries. While I don't expect you to be very interested in US history, one good one I read was "1776" by David McCullough (he wrote several books that I haven't read but should). Another decent history about a different front in that same war was "Andrew Jackson" by Brian Kilmeade .  Jackson made his bones defending New Orleans against the British war effort  effectively protecting the Mississippi River access to what was then western America  :. Another history book by Kilmeade about the revolutionary War was "Washington's secret six" about the importance and value of a spy ring that George Washington ran during that war (mostly around NYC/LI that was British occupied).  One quick observation about our early history is that fortune and chance went our way more than once. Even weather was more friendly than not.   

I read a lot of history... at the moment I am reading a book about the history of fighter pilots and evolution of fighter aircraft... "Lords of the sky" by Hampton. It is kind of a flyboy/aircraft nerd book that my retired doctor lent to me (I think maybe her husband is/was a pilot). While the book's primary focus is aircraft and pilots, it gives an overview in passing of the ground war in WWI. I am just now getting up to WWII in the book while I have read several books already about WWII (not to mention lots of bad war history from hollywierd movies).  Even in passing the number of lives sacrificed in WWI is remarkable, then add the 1918 pandemic flu to kill another several tens of millions (over a century ago), truly dreadful.

JR 

   

 

[PRR]

> No taxation without representation you cried.

That's over-simplified, a 1768 tweet (echoing a cause of the English Civil War in American context).

Our Declaration Of Independence is a charges-list against King George. Note that this is not aimed at americans, english, or George, but at other nations who might help the Colonies (for their own reasons) but were frightened by the idea of subjects revolting against a  King (being most/all royals themselves). It paints George as a particularly bad King, overlooking the systemic grievances going back before his time.

Colonies are granted to make Kings rich. That's what Columbus promised; and while his didn't, others became pots of gold. Little gold on this coast so the UK kings took 'our' trees, food/beer, bunks, and took heavy taxes on essentials. Also ALL goods were supposed to go through London, even goods to adjacent colonies (see Australia). In return he was supposed to supply Governors and Judges but left posts vacant for long times.

In his defense, George had big troubles at home with money and people (not an unusual thing), and "had" to exploit his lesser subjects to keep his head above water. Losing the american colonies put an extra crimp in his purse for the next few decades. Aside from general revenue, Ship Masts became a real problem. This and other factors led the UK, in Napoleonic times, to impressing US merchant seamen, agitating "Red Indians", burning the Pink House, and other rude acts. We say War of 1812 but you see it in larger context. The north shore of then-Massachusetts was essentially UK-occupied for several years (leaving bitterness that ripened in 1820).

IHMO, the real cause of the 1776 revolt is limits on profits of Merchants. The Colonial Merchants became very good at both growing and converting stuff. But shipping everything through England paying taxes at each step... What if we bought sugar straight from the tropics, made rum, and sold direct to France and Spain? Packaged tobacco in Virginia and Connecticut, mast-logs from Maine, and sold globally direct? Carried anybody's cargoes there and back without London sticking a beak in? In innocence it sounds like fabulous wealth. So IMHO much of the actual push came from the large merchants and brokers. Would a more inclusionary policy from George allow him to tap a lesser percent of a much larger volume of trade, and benefited all? We can look to Canada. When Lizzie visits Hudson Bay Company she is still royally entitled to one dead beaver. (She asked the last one to be delivered live to a zoo.) However the parallel is tangent.

 

[PRR]

> Our Declaration Of Independence ...

I like this one:
"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."

These may cut closer to truth:
"For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
"For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
"For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
"For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province...." (Quebec)

 

[pucho812]

I heard an interesting story.

The Boston tea party was not about tea at all but was about rum.  That ultimately during the prohibition era it was changed over to tea.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Not to be too positive but something like 113 million voted in this midterm vote surely a recent record.

This is a good thing IMO...

JR

 

[midwayfair]

I heard an interesting story.

The Boston tea party was not about tea at all but was about rum.  That ultimately during the prohibition era it was changed over to tea.

Your BS-sense should be tingling.

 

[PRR]

> Your BS-sense should be tingling.

Screaming.

The economics of tea were at least as big as rum and tobacco. The riot specifically destroyed tea.

The upshot was the closing of Boston Harbor pending reparations, elimination of the Mass Legislature, limiting Town Meetings to once a year, and providing for crimes in america to be tried in england, a special hardship for witnesses--- the "Intolerable Acts". Whether over-reaction or not, it buoyed support from other colonies (who feared they would be next) and the idea of organized revolt. 

 

[JohnRoberts]

There were British taxes on tea and sugar(molasses). Since molasses was imported and used to make rum that was then exported (and consumed) there was an indirect connection to rum. This was classic government seeking revenue from successful commercial enterprise. (The whisky rebellion was years later after the revolution.)

The protests were mainly about taxes and heavy handed British government demands on the public to extract revenue and damp self governance (independence). It took a long time for the relationship to break down and many colonists still supported the crown at the time.

JR

 

[PRR]

> ...government seeking revenue from successful commercial enterprise. (The whisky rebellion was years later after the revolution.)

The tea racket was complicated. East India Tea Co was paying 25% tax to England. They were also going broke. England rebated the tax on EITCo tea transshipped to America, but taxed it there. Meanwhile the Dutch had low/no tax and Dutch tea was widely available in England and America.

The  whisky rebellion is totally internal. The US had a weak revenue system, almost entirely import excise. They supplemented it with a whiskey tax. Scots-Irish out in the hills felt whiskey was a god-given right, got few government services, declined to pay. Also whiskey had become a portable medium of exchange, so a whiskey tax acted like an income tax on westerners which easterners were not subject to. Hotheads in Wash DC and hotheads said "oh yeah?" "Oh YEAH!" at each other, anger about other economic grievances got stirred in, shots fired and a few men killed. Washington trouped 13,000 men into the area and the rebels shut-up, many fled. Two were convicted of treason and later pardoned.

This established the US's claim to be able to tax inside its borders and to put down armed revolt. However that whiskey tax faded because it was unenforceable.