If I had a time machine I'd visit somewhere nicer than America circa 1776. Maybe Rome.
the obvious consideration is regarding where you lived, if you are somewhere where the British are firmly in power and subversive activity and thought would be easily squashed, then loyalist is the likely consideration, at least in so far as it most closely approaches neutrality, and neutrality and self-preservation are the most likely end goals
anything beyond that requires any number of specific experiences and individual perspectives that are not easily replicated in a modern hypothetical environment
certainly my background doesn't push me to either side since my ancestors were not British or early American but resided in other colonies further west or were here before European arrivals
hypothetically, I would have been too young to be involved in the Seven Years War, but I suppose I might've been kicked out of Acadia and not been too keen on the British, it would make every lick of sense for me to be against them
I would choose the British if it weren't for the stupid costumes :/
So I side with the Indians (excuse me, native Americans)
I think I would have been a loyalist personally as I don't think the Americans plight was anything extra special than anyone else's, but hard to be objective here. Was a very different world back then. Colonisation and Empires aren't exactly the nicest things by today's moral standards, but in those days it was pretty standard and if it wasn't the British it would have been the Spanish or French conquering the land. Given those 3 options I think most are quietly happy it was the British empire that succeeded. Perhaps if it had gone slightly further we could have avoided two world wars. Shame you can't run different scenarios into a computer and see what would have happened.
Even tho I'm American born if I were to go back to that time I'd be a loyalist. During that time I feel like a sense of betrayal of country would of been huge.
To be fair, the American Revolution was a very conservative one. Just 85 years or so previously England had had a revolution overthrowing a monarch because they considered them unjust, going against the principles of the nation and that the English people had a right to replace a corrupt leader with one they chose. They also initiated a Bill of Rights, to ensure no monarch could ever abuse the people again.
It was that basis that the colonists rebelled. They didn't rebel because they were "American," they rebelled because they thought as Englishman they had the same rights as at any other time and that GB as it was then had gone "wrong" with a corrupt leader who didn't respect their rights etc.
The American Revolution was ironically the most English of events.
In fact as far as I'm aware the UK is the only european nation that outright bans guns for civilians.This is why people ban guns. Gun supporters don't know what guns are.Shotguns I'll give you (provided you're allowed 12 and larger gauges... because I mean... come on...) but not .22s.
From the current perspective, the patriots for sure. However, I imagine I'd be a loyalist if I were actually living at that time. It would depend heavily on my social position, though.
Where did this song originate? I know it's a traditional American and British song (originally British?)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHA96clTq0k
British, though possibly based on a Dutch original.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_British_Grenadiers
No we weren't.
We were trying to do away with taxes without representation. It's the representation part we were pissed of about, or the lack thereof. Taxes are a necessary evil, a price to pay to live in a civilized world, unless one can discover a better way to fund a functional government. However, if we're all getting taxed, we all deserve fair representation to determine how to properly tax the populace.
---------- Post added 2013-03-07 at 09:31 PM ----------
It's easy to kill people when they're closer to you.
Putin khuliyo
I'm American, but I'm fairly sure I would have been a loyalist, at least if you imparted me with the same values and beliefs I have now. Sure, there were some injustices, but I ultimately just don't care near enough about representation to risk my life.
Really though, I probably would have just tried to see which way the wind was blowing. The important thing is being on the winning side.
Probably the British.
Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
The question is rather pointless to be honest. Most people truly don't know the real reason behind the war and therefore view the liberty or death opinion as the reasoning when it was not. America started a war it could not win, it asked England for help, England sent the help and then America got all bent out of shape after the war that England taxed them and asked them to pay their fair share.
Whether or not it WOULD have happened is irrelevant; Britain has given up its colonies so I feel America would have been no different but the way in which it was done and all the BS that follows how patriotic Americans were and how they fought this great tyrannical giant who taxed them without asking is absurd and one of the biggest historical falacies of all time.
---------- Post added 2013-03-07 at 10:19 PM ----------
What? They rebelled against a leader they felt "Corrupt" because he asked them to pay their fair share. They would have been up on arms if Britain HADN'T sent troops and then when they were asked to pay for them they whined and moaned.