Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

whathehell

(29,167 posts)
33. No. The king's powers were limited by Parliament
Mon May 11, 2020, 03:48 PM
May 2020

and the colonists wanted to representation in Parliament, hence
the slogan "Taxation without representation is tyranny".

The idea that all, or even most, of those supporting and from fighting in the Revolution were "rich white people" is patently false..They were cross section of the population at the time and included free people of color.






Yes, but 245 years later it's no longer a new experiment. Turbineguy May 2020 #1
Actually, the figure was probably higher for loyalists in North America in the 1770's. NNadir May 2020 #2
I'm not so sure I would have supported the revolution. LuvNewcastle May 2020 #3
Your point is well taken. Slavery was definitely an issue. It's in the Declaration. NNadir May 2020 #6
You're certainly right about America's influence LuvNewcastle May 2020 #10
One of the worst replies I have ever seen on here. Celerity May 2020 #22
So you are saying that America was NOT the influence of many anti colonizational movements? SQUEE May 2020 #24
I am saying the reality on balance has been slathered in the blood of innocents, with the actual Celerity May 2020 #25
Whatever works for you. SQUEE May 2020 #27
So you'e okay with the concept of taxation without representation? whathehell May 2020 #11
We have taxation without representation here. LuvNewcastle May 2020 #13
Oh please. whathehell May 2020 #14
Their taxes weren't that bad. LuvNewcastle May 2020 #16
I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. whathehell May 2020 #19
Their taxes weren't that bad? shockey80 May 2020 #21
It was also a big deal when you did not, whathehell May 2020 #37
The King still had undemocratic authority in England edhopper May 2020 #23
Yes I know.. whathehell May 2020 #28
So the idea that paying taxes edhopper May 2020 #29
No. The king's powers were limited by Parliament whathehell May 2020 #33
The king didn't have complete authority -- Parliament held the purse strings. whathehell May 2020 #30
True edhopper May 2020 #31
The issue of whether GB could be called a "democracy' at the time whathehell May 2020 #34
And i am saying it wasn't really democratic representation in GB either. edhopper May 2020 #35
And again, I am saying that the colonists of that time were not whathehell May 2020 #36
Well edhopper May 2020 #38
Huh? whathehell May 2020 #39
Kind of condescending edhopper May 2020 #40
Sorry, whathehell May 2020 #41
Some of my relatives were loyalists. roamer65 May 2020 #4
"They should have stayed there" whathehell May 2020 #7
Nope. roamer65 May 2020 #17
Riiiiight whathehell May 2020 #18
That's where my Loyalist ancestors shanti May 2020 #32
I've always thought that Republicans would have been on the side of the British... somaticexperiencing May 2020 #5
Of course they would. Grins May 2020 #8
Not sure TheFarseer May 2020 #20
20% were patriots. 20% were loyalists Ex Lurker May 2020 #9
No, it was more like 35 to 40 percent were patriots. whathehell May 2020 #12
Revolution 2golddogs May 2020 #15
The American Revolution has been my favorite subject to read about. shockey80 May 2020 #26
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»20% of colonists supporte...»Reply #33