Well, I had planned to use my Sunday to finish up the rest of my homework and do re-writes on Dr. K's stuff, but low and behold, somebody NEEDS ME TO WORK FOR THEM TODAY!!!
oh, well. at least i'm getting paid.
but on the down- side, i won't get to study as much for your test Mr. Chandler which sucks because them my grade will suck if i don't study on the job.
And also, I'll only have time to maybe finish Dr. K's re-writes, which also sucks because then i can't finish pulling up my grade. ::sigh::
It looks like I'm studying on the job today.
On the bright side, I'm getting my Mac laptop sometime this week!! yay!
I hope all of you guys keep a level head! Don't stress!! One step at a time!
pay-ce~
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
The American Revolution: Radical?
Lets look at this a little farther back.
The Colonists's argument: They were left in solitary neglect for a very long time and were not used to having a king tell them what to do. It was a huge shock to them when the king did take control after the French/Indian war due to war debt.There were a lot of taxes and the colonists never got a say whether they wanted to be taxed or not. Like I said, the colonies were used to being on their own, making their own rules, calling their own shots. To them, it felt like an injustice for the king to regain control over them after such a long period of time.
I understand the colonists arguement, and I do think they made the right descision about breaking away from Britian. I think America took a huge risk by rising against Britian, so the American Revolution was radical. However, it was the right thing to do.
I suppose it would be the similar to ask yourself, was it radical for the Senators of ancient Rome to kill Julius Ceaser if he had the aptitude to be a tyrant? Of course. But it was also the right thing to do.
Think about this; did they really want to find out? They wanted to de-root the source of uncertainty so they wouldn't have to deal with it later when the tyrant was too powerful for them to stop. However, in the colonists eyes, the king of England had already become a tyrant.
The Colonists's argument: They were left in solitary neglect for a very long time and were not used to having a king tell them what to do. It was a huge shock to them when the king did take control after the French/Indian war due to war debt.There were a lot of taxes and the colonists never got a say whether they wanted to be taxed or not. Like I said, the colonies were used to being on their own, making their own rules, calling their own shots. To them, it felt like an injustice for the king to regain control over them after such a long period of time.
I understand the colonists arguement, and I do think they made the right descision about breaking away from Britian. I think America took a huge risk by rising against Britian, so the American Revolution was radical. However, it was the right thing to do.
I suppose it would be the similar to ask yourself, was it radical for the Senators of ancient Rome to kill Julius Ceaser if he had the aptitude to be a tyrant? Of course. But it was also the right thing to do.
Think about this; did they really want to find out? They wanted to de-root the source of uncertainty so they wouldn't have to deal with it later when the tyrant was too powerful for them to stop. However, in the colonists eyes, the king of England had already become a tyrant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)