From: johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu (Art Johnson)
Subject: What caused the Revolution? (was Re: How white America perceives African-Americans??!??
Organization: Physical Sciences Lab, UW-Madison
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 23:31:46 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.173114.12725@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp  
(Michael Friedman) writes:
> In article <1993Jan24.020945.7128@pslu1.psl.wisc.edu>  
johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu (Art Johnson) writes:
> >In article <1993Jan21.180129.13733@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp  
> >(Michael Friedman) writes:
>  
> >     Seeing as you and your family are only recent Americans (unlike  
the  
> >rest of us whose families have been here since _at least_ the early  
19th  
> >century), I can understand why you have not yet had the great American  
> >icons of the Boston Massacre, 
> 
> Under 10 dead.
> 
> >the Boston Tea Party,
> 
> I forget whether one American or none were killed.  Not a massacre.
> Perhaps you are the one who is remiss in historical knowlege?

     Mike, you've got to learn to lighten up. Didn't you see the smileys?  
Anyway, I didn't say that you've never read any history. I said that the  
Revolution icons have not yet been burned into your soul. If they were,  
you'd have understood what I was driving at. The point is that these  
events were an _integral_ part of creating the climate necessary to  
initiate the Revolution, i.e. the Founding Fathers needed these events to  
ratchet up the tension with the British, thereby driving moderate  
colonists into the Revolutionary camp. ("Look, we've tried to be  
reasonable with the King and his government, and what's the response?  
Higher taxes on tea, rum, and building materials, Admiralty courts to  
administer British "justice", and massacres of Americans in Boston and  
Lexington. The British give us no choice. What's that? The Redcoats are  
exercising enormous restraint to avoid violence? Go tell it to the family  
of Crispus Attucks!") When you say that "the Revolutionary War was not  
caused by the Brittish [sic] shooting rioters", you're taking this one  
aspect of the struggle against the British out-of-context. In context, it  
becomes clear that the British use-of-force policy, combined with a number  
of other things, _did_ necessitate the Revolution. It may not have been  
_the_ cause, but it certainly was _one_ important cause.
     
> 
> >the Massacre at  
> >Lexington, 
> 
> More often known as the Battle of Lexington.  I'm really not sure what
> you expect when two armed forces go head to head, but a battle is kind
> of normal.
>
     Hey, I'm just using some good ol'-fashioned inflammatory rhetoric.  
Long Live the Revolution! Down with the Tyrant King George III! Hear Us O  
Lord, and help us to crush the Confederate Slave Power, the Beast (Jeff  
Davis) crouched in his Lair (Richmond), together with the False Prophet  
(Robert E. Lee) and his blasphemous Army of Northern Virginia!
  
> Even in the Battle of Lexington, the British tried to act with
> restraint and it still is not known whether the first shot was fired
> by them or by us.

     Take a little time to read this sentence again, Mike. In 1775, the  
_only_ people who said things like this were Tories. :-) As for who fired  
the first shot, I don't know either, but I'll bet that it was one of us.  
But I don't think it much mattered, because we were spoiling for a fight  
anyway, and if the British were reluctant to provide one, then we were  
more than happy to provoke them. 
> -- 
>  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
-----
> I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one  
else.

Arthur Johnson
johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american