Lord Liverpool Was In A Revolution

A revolution, by definition, is the overthrow of one government followed by replacement with another. The American Revolution against the British during 1775 to 1783 and the French Revolution pitting the French people against their own government during 1789 to 1799 were both very important political and social turnovers. This movement towards the establishment of a constitutional government influenced political thought throughout the world. By closely examining three of the main causes of these revolutions, it is clear that although the two revolutions have their differences, the basis of cause for the revolutions have, overall, much stronger similarities.

← Doyle, William. The French Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 2001

Revolution is a term meaning, a coercive overthrow of government or social order in favor of a new system. Carl N. Degler focuses on the events that occurred before the American Revolution. Before the American Revolution, colonial Americans were already evolving into their own system, without really knowing how great of a gap they were widening between themselves and Britain. America had already experienced multiple revolutions before achieving victory during the Revolutionary War. American colonists grew to be revolutionists that changed the norm for the time period.

4. What was the Revolutionary movement, at its core, really all about? Was it about the amount of taxation, the right of Parliament to tax, the political corruption of Britain and the virtue of America, the right of a king to govern America, or the colonies’ growing sense of national identity apart from Britain? Was the Revolution truly a radical overturning of government and society—the usual definition of a revolution—or something far more limited or even conservative in its defense of traditional rights?

Many revolutions have taken place throughout history, ranging from the unremarkable to the truly memorable, such as the French Revolution, the Bolshevik Revolution and the American Revolution. Through an examination of the social, cultural, economic and political causes of the American Revolution, an exploration of key arguments both for and against the American Revolution, and an analysis of the social, cultural, economic and political changes brought about by the American Revolution it can be demonstrated unequivocally that the American Revolution was indeed truly revolutionary.

Once again, the colonists were angry that they were being taxed on basic needs. This anger only grew through the Boston Massacre incident, where five colonists were killed, and the Boston Tea Party, where enraged colonists dumped tea into the Boston Harbor. The last straw for the colonists seemed to be the passing of the Coercive Acts, otherwise known as the Intolerable Acts. These acts were created to regulate and basically restrict the colonists to make them realize that Parliament was in control. Colonists did not agree with this act, specifically the Quartering Act which required them to house British soldiers, as well as feed and clothe them. These acts and taxations, along with the violent incidents that occurred in Boston, and a lack of colonial representation in the Parliament caused the colonists to

revolutionary attitudes in Britain due to the extremity of the events occurring in the nations

The familiar saying, “You can’t get something from nothing,” has a particularly significant meaning when it is used in context with the American Revolution. During the 1763-1776 period, many events occurred that led to the American Revolution. The Revolution however, was a mental rebellion before it turned physical and it should have been called the “British Revolution” because changes in Britain had more of an effect on the war than changes in America did. The reasons for the American Revolution elicits a variety of opinions, but there are many reasons that can justify why it was the British actions that made such a perennial change for America. The British started the Revolution through their salutary neglect, imposing new acts and laws onto

On the other hand, a British perspective is given by a letter of Captain Thomas Preston, who wrote it a week after the incident. He depicts his own version of the event on March 5th and tries to defend himself. Preston starts out by presenting his sad situation in which he needs help and has nothing to support himself. Then, he starts to describe the relationships between soldiers and citizens and the main reasons of the event on the night of March 5th. Contrary to the article of Boston Gazette, Thomas Preston states that Boston citizens were constantly provoking and abusing British soldiers. Thus, there were many disputes that happened between the Townspeople and the Soldiery in Boston before March 5th. Furthermore, the captain states that utter hatred of Boston citizens to British soldiers was increasing daily and they were privately planning for general attacks. According to Preston, one of these plans was realized on Monday night, when two soldiers were attacked by the party of inhabitants. In order to provoke other citizens of Boston to riot, this party broke into two

The Hyde Park riots of 1866 were another example of working-class radicalism in protest for reform. Similarly to the Bristol Riots, the rebels were destructive by force and although there was said to be ‘more mischief than malice’, a policeman was killed. Both the Bristol and Hyde Park riots were successful as they were each followed by a reform the next year. I believe that the main reason for the Hyde Park riots’ victory was the unification of the National Reform Union and the Reform League, two distinctively divided (in class) bodies. This demonstrated that people of different classes and backgrounds were able to unify in common aims in ways which the political parties could not. Furthermore, this alliance could be seen as a step towards democratic reform as it began to

Many philosophers and theorists have spoken on the value, or lack thereof, of revolution. In Second Treatise of Government, John Locke builds the concept of a “social contract,” which outlines responsibilities of the government and what can be done if the state fails to uphold its duties.  Edmund Burke views political rebellion in a different light. He writes in Reflections on the Revolution in France that upheaval does excessive harm to the state, and, by extension, the people. While both Locke and Burke agree that rebellion is useful to the growth of a state, they differ on a few main points. First, they disagree in terms of what circumstances warrant revolution. Second, they each believe it should take different forms and work to different extents. Finally, Locke and Burke believe revolution tends to have positive or negative effects, respectively. Their views on each of these points will be discussed in turn.

Chartism was a movement that emerged by the working class to achieve parliamentary democracy. They wanted a voice through democratic participation, and they wanted social and economic reform. The movement existed from 1838-1858 and they got their name from the People’s Charter of 1838. Chartism evolved for economic and political reasons, such as feeling betrayed by the middle class, and the Whig government adopting policies that the working class viewed as a betrayal. The fall of Chartism can be attributed to a divided in the groups interests, an improvement in economic conditions, and the violence that developed during the movement.

On February 23, a shot was fired from the crowd, and the soldiers responded. In the end, 16 people were killed.11 There was also street fighting in Paris after the dissolutions of National Workshops.12 In Germany, the industrial proletariat were still discontented. This led to revolts among weavers in the 1840s. This lead to a yearning for reform and national union, especially after news of the French Revolution reached the Germanies. Germany demanded a constitutional representative government and this led to uprisings in Baden, Wurttemburg, and Saxony and others.13 As a result, the

The French Revolution (1789-1814) was a period that affected the outcome of world history tremendously. This is considered a major turning point in European history which has led to dramatic changes in France and other regions of the world. Various social and political issues led to the start of the revolution. Politically, France suffered under the rule of Louis XVI, who ruled by absolute monarchy. Many people had their natural rights renounced and weren’t able to have a political voice. Socially, France had divided its population within 3 estates (classes). French citizens took it upon themselves to remodel their country 's’ political structure. The French Revolution had encountered both positive and negative effects. However, many Europeans viewed the Revolution as much more than just a bloody massacre. The French Revolution was used to demonstrate new ideology that would emphasize the principles of liberty and equality throughout Europe.

The Tolpuddle Martyrs were the leaders of the Friendly Society of Agricultural Labourers, a trade union formed in the 1830’s. This union was formed to protest the drop in wages and working conditions for agricultural labourers. The Tolpuddle martyrs were arrested and convicted for swearing a secret oath as members of the society. On the tail of the French revolution, the British establishment was wary of organised protests.