Were the Sons of Liberty Patriots or Terrorist
A patriot is a hero that fights for his country. This can be in a number of different ways, it doesn't just have to be in war. If you protest an unjust government or learn about the ways you can help your country, or stand up for those who do not have the opportunity you are a patriot as well.
A terrorist is someone who uses terror of violence, technology, or fear to accomplish their goals. Usually this takes place in the form of violence, but in today's day we will start to see the cyber world be terrorized through hacks and data leaks as this is already happening with Russia and China hacking our databases. Terror is usually used by the side who is the underdog. This is how a small force can seem much larger and more destructive. The side in power does not have to use these tactics because they can be extremely dangerous and unpredictable of what may happen next. The thing about terror is that most of the time the terrorist side does not win, most wars that feature terror bind a country together against their enemy. Our path to Revolution would be a different story however...
A terrorist is someone who uses terror of violence, technology, or fear to accomplish their goals. Usually this takes place in the form of violence, but in today's day we will start to see the cyber world be terrorized through hacks and data leaks as this is already happening with Russia and China hacking our databases. Terror is usually used by the side who is the underdog. This is how a small force can seem much larger and more destructive. The side in power does not have to use these tactics because they can be extremely dangerous and unpredictable of what may happen next. The thing about terror is that most of the time the terrorist side does not win, most wars that feature terror bind a country together against their enemy. Our path to Revolution would be a different story however...
We have been wronged by the King George III/Parliament
The case against the King and Parliament is pretty simple for the residents of Boston. Boston would be the biggest pain in King George's backside probably making him pee red if not blue for sure. It was a port city that shipped supplies from the Colonies back to Britain to be made in factories that were not allowed in the Colonies. The extra taxes on shipping affected the rich most of all who passed that cost onto the poor sailors of Boston, many of them lost their jobs as a result of those taxes. The Quartering act forced its residents to house Redcoats who smothered their city with their presence and made the citizens angry at every encounter with them. One in four residents of Boston was a Redcoat, it was impossible not to deal with them. The matter that made them the most mad was that they did not get their right as Englishmen to have a voice in Parliament, they didn't get a chance to decide how they were taxed since Parliament made the laws and the King enforced them. Every day the sailors and business owners in Boston had to watch their resources and products go across the pond to see them come back to be sold at 400% markup, something was bound to happen!
The actions of the Sons of Liberty, Sam Adams, and John Hancock
Sam Adams was your classic rich kid who had time on his hands to spread drama, get others all pumped up, and be all over modern day beer commercials. Now the Sons of Liberty were all over the Colonies, they were a group that were against the taxes and corruption of the British empire. They made protest posters, gave speeches against no taxation without representation, and were pretty much a boys club that didn't start that much drama. However the Boston chapter led by Sam Adams and John Hancock was a different story...
Before the ink had a chance to dry on the Stamp Act, an underground group, calling itself the Sons of Liberty, began forming to defend their rights as Englishmen. The leaders of the Sons were wealthy merchants and lawyers who had different motives for protesting the Stamp Act. Paying a few extra pennies wasn’t going to hurt their business, especially since many of them smuggled their goods into the colonies in the first place. For these guys, the Stamp Act was an abuse of power by Parliament, who up until now, had been letting the colonies tax themselves. Without warning Parliament just decided that it was now going to take control of taxes.
Protests and riots broke out across the colonies and angry mobs did what they do best: burning, looting, and making death threats. Tax collectors and customs agents became special targets because after all, you can’t collect taxes if there’s no one willing to take the job. Back in those days it was common to vent your anger in a passive-aggressive ritual called effigy burning. Colonists spent a lot of time and creative energy decorating straw dummies of their enemies to be hung in the town square while drunken crowds pelted it with rocks, beheaded the thing, and then burning it in a great bonfire. Just one way to send a message to the intended victim that, “you’re next”. As drunken mobs usually go, a peaceful protest often escalated into rioting and looting. The homes of the rich and powerful were ransacked and their fancy imported furniture was smashed up and turned into more bonfire fuel.
A special punishment was reserved for those stupid enough not to back down. Although tarring and feathering may sound cute, it’s actually a very painful and humiliating experience. The victim would have hot pine tar poured over his head while the mob “decorated” him with feathers. To show off, the crowd would then march the poor guy through the streets, giving the mess enough time to cool and harden. This experience was humiliating but the cleanup was even worse. Often layers of skin and hair came off during the process. The victim would be left with painful rashes and sores that covered his body. Many people called the Medieval practice barbaric. But Sam Adams, a leader of the Boston Sons of Liberty, fired back saying that if there had been no unconstitutional taxes, such things would never take place.
In the end, with no one willing to collect the taxes, Parliament was forced to admit defeat and repealed (took away) the Stamp Act. But it wasn’t about to lose face and threw in the Declaratory Acts telling the colonists that Parliament had the right to pass any taxes or laws on the colonies that it wanted. The riots died down, but the Sons of Liberty could see the writing on the wall and decided that it was time to unite the colonies by setting up a communications network known as the Committees of Correspondence. In this way, news of any new laws or government abuses would spread like wildfire and the Sons of Liberty could quickly take action to put Parliament back in its place. In some part you owe your freedom today to these men, but was it worth it? Is burning down the governors house an act of terror or tarring and feathering a tax collector? Or should they be considered Patriots fighting for their rights? It is all in how you look at the question and finally is terrorism ever the right thing to do?
Before the ink had a chance to dry on the Stamp Act, an underground group, calling itself the Sons of Liberty, began forming to defend their rights as Englishmen. The leaders of the Sons were wealthy merchants and lawyers who had different motives for protesting the Stamp Act. Paying a few extra pennies wasn’t going to hurt their business, especially since many of them smuggled their goods into the colonies in the first place. For these guys, the Stamp Act was an abuse of power by Parliament, who up until now, had been letting the colonies tax themselves. Without warning Parliament just decided that it was now going to take control of taxes.
Protests and riots broke out across the colonies and angry mobs did what they do best: burning, looting, and making death threats. Tax collectors and customs agents became special targets because after all, you can’t collect taxes if there’s no one willing to take the job. Back in those days it was common to vent your anger in a passive-aggressive ritual called effigy burning. Colonists spent a lot of time and creative energy decorating straw dummies of their enemies to be hung in the town square while drunken crowds pelted it with rocks, beheaded the thing, and then burning it in a great bonfire. Just one way to send a message to the intended victim that, “you’re next”. As drunken mobs usually go, a peaceful protest often escalated into rioting and looting. The homes of the rich and powerful were ransacked and their fancy imported furniture was smashed up and turned into more bonfire fuel.
A special punishment was reserved for those stupid enough not to back down. Although tarring and feathering may sound cute, it’s actually a very painful and humiliating experience. The victim would have hot pine tar poured over his head while the mob “decorated” him with feathers. To show off, the crowd would then march the poor guy through the streets, giving the mess enough time to cool and harden. This experience was humiliating but the cleanup was even worse. Often layers of skin and hair came off during the process. The victim would be left with painful rashes and sores that covered his body. Many people called the Medieval practice barbaric. But Sam Adams, a leader of the Boston Sons of Liberty, fired back saying that if there had been no unconstitutional taxes, such things would never take place.
In the end, with no one willing to collect the taxes, Parliament was forced to admit defeat and repealed (took away) the Stamp Act. But it wasn’t about to lose face and threw in the Declaratory Acts telling the colonists that Parliament had the right to pass any taxes or laws on the colonies that it wanted. The riots died down, but the Sons of Liberty could see the writing on the wall and decided that it was time to unite the colonies by setting up a communications network known as the Committees of Correspondence. In this way, news of any new laws or government abuses would spread like wildfire and the Sons of Liberty could quickly take action to put Parliament back in its place. In some part you owe your freedom today to these men, but was it worth it? Is burning down the governors house an act of terror or tarring and feathering a tax collector? Or should they be considered Patriots fighting for their rights? It is all in how you look at the question and finally is terrorism ever the right thing to do?
An image in the London Times mocking the ¨undignified and backward¨ Colonists use of the tar and feathering technique...Smack talking is as old as time itself!
Can terrorism ever lead to good?
What does terrorism do to people feelings of safety and security?
Even if used for good is it worth it?
Is terrorism the only way to fight back?
What does terrorism do to people feelings of safety and security?
Even if used for good is it worth it?
Is terrorism the only way to fight back?