The American Revolution: War Of Independence

The American Revolution is a historical event that provokes the true spirit of nationalism in many Americans. They honor the proactive fathers, shake their fists at oppressive England, and applaud at the legends of daring and headship. It has always been the curiosity among the people that how the Americans of the 18th century got along with the victory. How did the green, weakly equipped, roughly trained military of a newborn country consisted of 13 liberated and jointly jealous nations draw closer to crush one of the world’s utmost military powers? Was it unknown New World insurrectionary strategy, French support, British wrong steps, American marksmanship, or the intrusion of great luck that made the difference? The question went on until in the years of 1950s and 1960s, French and American observation in Indochina grasped the life out of the query.

There were evident and considerable distinction between the American revolutionary war and Vietnamese dispute. However, after Vietnam it no longer looked dubious that immense armed forces may possibly submerge in an effort with a minor but willful rival along with a resident population whose faithfulness may not be trusted, Above all, when the expenses of the warfare and ambiguity about its reasons damaged the big power’s national help. All those circumstances were present in Britain’s battle with its American colonies. Post-Vietnam Americans know personally why Britain eventually could prefer to remove its military- albeit it was not totally crushed -rather than to lengthen a devastating struggle.

Even so, the American Revolution is an unsuitable name for the reason that it was not really a revolution. Dr. George Grant (2003) define revolution as, the revolution occur when men goes for aggressive warfare not in favor of their command because they desire instantaneous alteration in or eradication of the previous command. (Grant, 2003, no. 20) These all things are found in the French Revolution, but not in the so-called American Revolution. Rather looking for essential reformation of society, the earlier fathers sought to defend traditional rights. (Woods, pp. 11). If it was not a revolution, then what was the American Revolution? Conceivably more appropriate terminology would be “the American War for Independence”. Longing to transform England’s rule as a result that the colonies would be regulated legitimately, the earlier fathers struggled no revolution, only a war for Independence “in which Americans threw off British authority in order to retain their liberties and self-government.” (Woods, year, pp. 14).

Their reflection formed by people like John Locke, John Calvin and Montesquieu, the first Americans had a conventional outlook of government that they assumed England had desecrated. Americans appealed to the King of England to reinstate their civil rights, but the king rejected. Hopeless of settlement, the colonists look forward to solve their problem by own self to reinstate the control, not to produce a new one. If the term revolution were applied, it would be more correct to declare that the revolutionaries were the English king and parliamentarians who rebuffed to go along with the printed agreements that they had handed over the colonies. (Grant, 2003, no. 20)

Even though many hated British rule but the colonists did not desire to be free because they concealed abhorrence for England. There were various basis of war and were greatest significance to the Americans, who just wanted to claim their constitutional rights as British subjects. Earlier than the war, according to Woods, they complained that their early-chartered rights were being debased. (Woods, pp. 13)

These all-primitive chartered rights were the mixture of the Magna Charta, the Arbroath Petition, and the English Bill of Rights. All these rights provided the same rights to the colonies as to the English cities. The Magna Charta granted stated “observances of which we have granted in our kingdom as far as pertains to us towards are men, shall be observed in our entire kingdom.” (Magna Charta) Nevertheless, King George III was not giving them their full rights that he was giving to English cities by imposing additional taxes and laws that were not there in England itself. Instead of hearing American’s plea peacefully, the Americans were charged ruthlessly by the British government to insure the price of the war.

As John Locke describes tyranny in his Second Treatise on Government as the application of power ahead of right and that right being in the purpose of government to safeguard all the mankind rather than harming anybody except it is for the purpose to do fairness on an wrongdoer. British breached the rights of the charters, liberty and natural law. What England was forcing on the colonies was also an infringement of the Magna Charta’s section 13. By all laws that mentioned above and by their own individual charters, the colonies were legally protected from England’s dishonest proceedings.

The primitive Americans were worried about their family; they intended to guard the freedom that they had navigated the ocean to safeguard and the colonists thought that their charters stood as promise. When their complaints were neglected, the colonists struggled tenaciously for freedom. (Grant, 2003, no. 18) The colonists were not struggling for a trouble-free living for themselves, but for liberty from oppression for their companions, kids, and generations to come. They wanted to defend the biblical commandment in spite of of England’s tyranny.

Because of salutary neglect – a term meaning that English government backed out of the colonies’ business for years – the Americans had efficiently governed themselves while England was busy fighting wars. The colonists had happy and peaceful livelihood when the British were busy in their wars and did not hoped to be bothered. However, at the wrapping up of their wars, Britain began taxing the colonies. As expected, the colonists objected, but the English branded them as extremists. After doing a number of efforts to resolution, the colonists left and go for the way out which was war.

In succeeding years, it has been feasible to evaluate further considerately than before the troubles Britain confronted in formulating a successful plan for terminating American confrontation and to point the variations in British notions of how to carry out a complex battle. At first, the British perceived conflict as “the discipline of the unruly”. According to the second President of the United States John Adams, the record of the American Revolution activated as early as 1620. The Revolution was provoked before the war started. The Revolution was in the hearts of the people. The values and enthusiasm that directed the Americans to rise up and to be located back for two hundred years and wanted in the past of the country from the first initiative in America.

More severe in its consequences was the new financial strategy of the British government, which required more funds to sustain the rising empire. Unless the taxpayer in England was to contribute it all, the colonies would have to supply as well. However, takings could be obtained from the colonies simply via a stronger central management, at the cost of colonial autonomy.

The foremost action in launching the new structure was the approval of the Sugar Act of 1764. This was planned to gather revenue exclusive of regulating trade. Actually, it substituted the Molasses Act of 1733, which had positioned an excessive import taxes from non-English regions. To impose it, customs representatives were prepared to demonstrate more power and strictness.

On the night of April 18, 1775, General Gage transmitted persuasive facts of his battalion to remove these weapons and to take Samuel Adams and John Hancock into custody, both of whom had been commanded to send to England for their trial. However, Paul Revere and two other messengers had warned the whole country.

After the quarrel on 18 April 1775 at Concord, the British thought they might finish civil disobedience by separating and reprimanding the insurgents at Boston via display of power. By squeezing the core of struggle, the British expected to get the remainder of the colonies into a row. On the contrary, this tactics did not last long. On 17 June 1775 at the Battle of Bunker Hill, the British instigated a wild frontal attack on the American positions on Breed’s Hill in an effort to show the indestructibility of trained armed forces against inexperienced troops. The exhibition was not a success. Despite of the excessive sufferings, the rejection of the Americans to surrender until they tire out their bullets forced the British to have another look at American power. It was no longer convinced that the revolts could be frightened. Moreover, the flood of assistance from further New England towns and the guarantee of abet from the other colonies damaged their certainty that the revolt centered in Boston only. With first suppositions about the rebellion failing, the British must call for a new plan.

On May 10, 1776, a declaration to “cut the Gordian knot” was approved. At that time only a official announcement was required. On June 7, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia presented a resolution announcing in support of independence, overseas coalitions, and American federation. Instantly, a team of five, supervised by Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, was appointed to dispose a formal statement “setting forth the causes which impelled us to this mighty resolution.”

On 4 July 1776, the day of Independence was declared. It was not only declaration of the newborn state but also lay down the example of philosophy of human freedom for upcoming generation. It lay not specific objections but upon a wide support of individual autonomy that could control common support all over America. The political philosophy behind the liberty was precise and clear:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That is to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed: that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government…” (Jefferson)

In the Declaration of Independence, the colonists legitimately declared their self-governance and make a list of injustices carried out against them. At that time, Jefferson made it apparent that in every step of these tyrannies they have formally requested for restoration but they have been disappointed every time. The Revolutionary War persisted for further six years, with combating in every colony. For several months once independence was confirmed, the Americans experienced harsh setbacks. The opening of these was in New York. From the moment the Declaration of Independence was signed, France had not been impartial. The government had been willing to take revenge with England from the time when France was crushed in 1763. In addition to that, eagerness for the American reason was great: the French logical world was itself in rebel against feudalism and its benefits. Yet, although France had appreciated Benjamin Franklin to the French court and had provided aid to the United States, it had been unwilling to jeopardize of direct intrusion and openly call for war with England.

After the war of years, British wishes to take legal action against the war. However, in the year of 1782, the House of Commons voted to discard this attempt. Lord North’s control knocked out, and the new ministry under Lord Rockingham initiated talks with the American peace representatives. Dialogues began in April in Paris and the initial articles of peace were signed on 30 November 1782. After approval by Britain and the U.S. Congress, the ultimate peace treaty was signed September 3, 1783.

The war has been refought numerous times in an effort to detect the vital British blunders. Perhaps no policy was identical to the task of soothing American struggle. Regardless of their greater numbers, the British carried out in an aggressive situation that again and again overwhelmed all attempts to stop rebellion. It is correct that as the war heaved on Americans were lethargic to join up, unwilling to pay for still more supplies, and extremely exhausted of the quarrel. However, in the final analysis it was the rebuff of the national population to surrender and the willpower of hundreds of inexperienced, badly supplied militia companies to annoy the opponent that weighed greatly in the crushing of the British forces in America.

The former Americans did build a new administration later than the American War for Independence and only in that manner; the earlier fathers can be believed as revolutionaries. Instead of a rebellion of horror and fear, nevertheless, the American Revolution was a diplomatically and fatalistic revolution. After all this, the real revolution started in America when England treated America as a self-regulating state.

Americans were looking to modify instead of completely changing the government. Since they were having biblical fundamentals in their society, earlier Americans realized that man is corrupt and on earth, there cannot be an ideal government. Nevertheless, they were having hope that it was achievable with God’s help. Therefore, with the intention of forming an ideal coalition, create justice, assure domestic harmony, present the general security, encourage the common wellbeing, and protected the blessings of independence to ourselves and salute to the former Fathers that initiated the American Reformation.

Work Cited

“The Constitution of the United States of America.” Law.emory.edu. 1787. Emory Law School. 1995.

DeMar, Gary. “Was it Right to Fight the War for Independence?” Biblical Worldview

Magazine July 2005

Grant, George C. American Culture. Lecture notes. Franklin, Tennessee; Gileskirk, 2003

Jefferson, Thomas “The Declaration of Independence.” U.S. History.org 1776. U.S. History.org. 1995.

Locke, John. “Second Treatise on Government.” libertyonline.hypermall.com .1690. Liberty Online. 1999 .

“The Magna Charta” Constitution.org 1215. Constitution Society.1995.

Woods, Thomas E., Jr., Ph.D. The Politically Correct Guide to American History. Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing Inc, 2004