RE: was the American revolutionary war really necessary?

Mr. Strakon,


In support of Mr. Henry Gallagher Fields' thesis that the War of Independence was really about a junta of "bewigged kleptocrats" seeking merely to replace George III as the milker of the American cash cow, I offer the note below from the website to which I just referred you.[WarStats]

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstats.htm#n.1

If simple power lust was the real reason for the Revolution, and that does seem probable, then we are led to this question: Can people actually be doing one thing while they believe they are doing something quite different? How is that possible? Do people actually believe their own propaganda?

I'll bet they do. And not only did the American revolutionaries believe it, so did (and does) everyone else. Recently I have encountered the notion that the Central Powers in W.W. I agreed to an armistice not because they were beaten and could not continue, but because they believed Woodrow Wilson would be able to broker a just peace. That is not what happened. Wilson did not deliver. But the American idea is a good one. Ho Chi Min, who fought for the Allies in W.W. II, thought so and he had translators labour to exactly translate The Declaration of Independence for him to read to the Vietnamese people after W.W. II. He didn't get what he was promised either: the Allies (a.k.a. the Americans) handed Vietnam back to the French, after they had put the Japanese P.O.W.s in charge!

There is a pattern here and it is not merely simple duplicity at work. Why would the American Revolution be any different from any other revolution? Because the American revolutionaries said it was different? Really?


- Morley Evan
s

 

Visit me on the Web
http://www.morleyevans.com
Accurate Solutions to Complex Problems