Judging History (branch off from election thread)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Was Toussaint Louverture a traitor to France? The guy just didn't want to be a slave, it's kinda hard to fault anyone for that. Loyalty is one thing, but it should not be mistaken for blind obedience.

The colonies were not exactly slaves. Parliament just wanted us to pay for the expenses of protecting us but without letting us have a voice. As I said before, many "revolutionaries" were pushed into the war because they could not get an agreement with the king.

So your example is weak imo.

[rvg]

The colonies were not exactly slaves. Parliament just wanted us to pay for the expenses of protecting us but without letting us have a voice. As I said before, many "revolutionaries" were pushed into the war because they could not get an agreement with the king.

Oh yeah, the were merely Untermenschen. How dare they yearn for equality...

[Greyblades]

Well, it's gratifying knowing I'm not the only one who has a habit of reading things that are not there.

[Tellos Athenaios]

@rvg: rose tinted glassses?

Re: George Washington look at his track record when he still lead British troops against the American Indians. Not particularly awe inspiring that one.
Re: equality: places such as Manchester paid more in taxes and had if possible even less representation for the ordinary folk. Parliament in those days didn't mean that because you paid taxes you were somehow able to influence an MP. The representatives of then would make the current crop of Congress critters blush.

American Independence was ostensibly about "no taxation without representation" but in the same manner the Dutch ostensibly fought for "religious freedom" in the 16th century. The difference being that American Independence was fought over in a time of newspapers and public sympathy rooting for the Americans.

[rvg]

@rvg: rose tinted glassses?
Re: George Washington look at his track record when he still lead British troops against the American Indians. Not particularly awe inspiring that one.

What's wrong with it?

Re: equality: places such as Manchester paid more in taxes and had if possible even less representation for the ordinary folk. Parliament in those days didn't mean that because you paid taxes you were somehow able to influence an MP. The representatives of then would make the current crop of Congress critters blush.

Doesn't matter. The point is that the colonists were treated like second class citizens and they didn't like it one bit.

American Independence was ostensibly about "no taxation without representation" but in the same manner the Dutch ostensibly fought for "religious freedom" in the 16th century. The difference being that American Independence was fought over in a time of newspapers and public sympathy rooting for the Americans.

We didn't fight for publicity. Publicity was the result of our struggle, not the cause of it.