Parliamentary Protests Of The United States

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries colonial America experienced a number of rebellions by various groups for a variety of reasons. The protests took place in Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New York. Each protest began for a different reason, however, all involved the discontent that some groups underwent in the colonies. Some of the most notable rebellions include Bacon's Rebellion, The Regulator Uprising, Leislor's Rebellion, Culpepper's Rebellion, and the Paxton Boys Uprising.

The Peterloo Massacre is an example of active popular pressure in the movement for greater democracy in Britain. An estimated 18 people were trampled to death while 700 were injured during the battle in Manchester; this makes the event a significant act of popular pressure as deaths would result in the government responding quicker and more efficiently in considering the desires of the group. At the time Britain was under severe political tension, less than 2% of the population had the right to vote while hunger and poverty was rife as the Corn Laws made bread unaffordable. Source A shows a poster entitled ‘Manchester Heroes’ which was published in 1819; it highlights the mass of the crowd and the belligerence used by the Yeomanry that was sent by the government. The poster shows Henry Hunt, who led the protest, in the background saying “none but the brave deserve the fair”. This implies that the mind-set of the protesters was to stand up to the Yeomanry and put up a fight in order to achieve their goals of liberty and freedom. This makes the Peterloo massacre more significant in making greater democracy as the people were willing to do anything and will not back down until they achieve their goal of getting ordinary people the right to vote. This creates huge active popular pressure on the government to make change.

Open protest, conflicting interests, lives changed forever. This is a rebellion. You’re willing to fight the authorities to be heard. Armed rebellion is only justifiable if nothing else works. The Rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada, Red River Rebellion, and Northwest Rebellion are all part of Canadian history. They show us that people can go against the government which usually results in a large loss of life, but more importantly change.

The Tolpuddle Martyrs are a significant case in showing the increased involvement of the public in speaking against the justice system. In 1834, members of the Friendly Society of Agricultural Labourers were transported under an outdated law that prohibited the taking of oaths, when they protested for a better wage. Perhaps what brought the most sympathy for the case was the fact that their protest was peaceful, despite the history of violent protest among workers with riots and groups such as the Luddites. The authorities were equally unsympathetic to this case as they were to the other, more violent movements. Even after public interest attracted an 800,000 signature petition, protesters were oppressed at a demonstration in Oldham. The public was aware of the struggles of the poor worker, but the government still dismissed it; refusing to recognise the desperate circumstance of workers and citing greed as the motive of the Martyrs. Clearly the case had little impact on government opinions, with the treatment of the Chartists and the Rebecca Rioters later in the same decade being the same. But an important contribution of the Tolpuddle Martyrs case was the impact it had on public opinion, and the increased popularity of worker’s unions. This case might suggest that reform is unrelated to the attitudes of society at

The research in this proposal primarily focuses on the rebellions that took place in both upper and Lower Canada during 1838. The time line of this proposal will include events prior to the actual rebellions as they are significant to the understanding of the causes of these uprisings. In 1837 and 1838, insurrections against the British colonial government arose in Lower and Upper Canada. Moderates hoped to reform the political system, while radicals yearned for a restructuring of both administration and society (Read , 19-21). During this time period an economic crisis had swept both Upper and Lower Canada. In Lower Canada many French habitants were suffering from famine and the accumulation of huge debts due to poor harvests. In Upper

This was a time of working class discontent when workers and the movement as a whole were seeking answers to the social injustices they suffered. The speech was made at a time when Parliament and government were dominated by the aristocracy (O’Day et al., 2011, p96). Democracy was seen as a way of resolving the economic circumstances of the worker and political action was thought to be the mechanism to bring this about. Paragraphs 3 and 5 contain almost exclusively political rhetoric with the speaker seeking the audiences support. There are many references to support this,” the rich unnaturally elevated above the proper spheres of the mortal man” (Para2 Line 3) and “mustering your thousands to aid

26. Although the power of the national government increased during the early republic, this development often faced serious opposition. Compare the motives and effectiveness of those opposed to the growing power of the national government in TWO of the following.

In a time when the British won a war against the Native Americans and the French, to the first political parties, the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans, there were rebellions. It is in this context that changes can be found between the March of the Paxton Boys, Shays’ Rebellion, and the Whiskey Rebellion. Violent protest in America from 1763 to 1791 changed significantly in terms of reasons behind the desire for violent protest and the result that occurred because of the rebellion.

The United States wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for rebellion. A revolution is just a large-scale rebellion that is actually successful. After the American Revolution when our government was created, one of the main bases for our government was that there would be a series of checks and balances. That means that no one branch of the government would have to much control. The main part of these checks and balances though was the people. The people are ultimately in charge of the government, and if the government is oppressive it is the duty of the people, and the people of the United States are encouraged to rebel. The goal of a rebellion is to turn it into a revolution. So the main reasoning one should have is to join a rebellion is what the

Thomas Jefferson would most certainly reinforce the action of protest now in the modern day. To begin with, Thomas Jefferson would encourage protesting because of what is written in the Declaration of Independence, which he signed and wrote. For instance, this significant document states, “any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.” Jefferson would assist these protests because he considers that people should speak up if they don’t agree to it. The people of the states should fix a problem that would do harm to their state or country. Jefferson’s statement is that all people should speak their mind and that is why he would help out the protests. His

Protests riots in the United States has proven to an issue for both the country’s financial strength and the unity of the nation. With the presence of social injustices, combined with the increased impact of social media propaganda, protests riots are beginning to reach an all time high. Protest riots destroy individual communities and businesses, jeopardizes the safety of others and taints the protest’s cause by resorting to civil disobedience. Action must be done in order to prevent these random acts of violence from continuing after every social hot topic. The goal is not to prevent citizens from protesting; in fact, this should be encouraged. The goal is to change the way the protests are handled from both the citizens and authority perspectives, in order to prevent these protests from escalating into something dangerous.

A man watches a white crescent moon shining upon a Boston harbor. As he sat and watched the light reflect on the roaring sea, and hear the waves crash against the shore, he catches a peculiar site. Wild men they seem to be, throwing boxes of tea into the calm ocean waters from three British cargo vessels. The incident became The Boston Tea Party, which occurred in the year 1773 three years before the Declaration of Independence was issued to King George lll. Through these actions and many more acts of civil disobedience the citizens exercised their individual rights to a peaceful protest to hopefully help present the idea that what the monarchy was doing for instance, taxation without representation, trade barriers, and many more acts were

The movement and specifically the event I would have liked to take part, is what some have labeled “The Original American Protest.” The event I speak of, being the Boston Tea Party, and the movement itself was the start on the American Revolution. The American Revolution may be the most significant yet, overlooked movement in history. One reason I would have wanted to be present at the Tea Party, was because it was one of the first calculated protest against Great Britain, by the American people. By throwing the tea into the harbor the American people stated they were not going to accept the British taxing items they needed to import. Furthermore, it told the British they were not going to surrender to the British’s reign any longer. This

This photo is from June 2, 1948 during protests of the Mundt-Nixon Communist bill which requires all members of the Communist Party of America register with the Attorney General or that any Federal employee cannot join the Communist Party of America. This photo was taken at the Union Station in Washington D.C. The Photographer is unknown because this photo was sold at an auction. This photo was taken to show the protests of the Mundt-Nixon Communist Registration Bill. This bill provides many things like the Efforts to establish a totalitarian dictatorship under control of a foreign government would be punished with maximum 10-year jail sentences, fines of $10,000 and loss of citizenship. Passports and nonelective federal jobs would be denied

Sources 1 and 2 suggest the bourgeois were involved in the Peterloo backlash and that they were being listened to as the newspapers that were in circulation with the middle and upper classes were agreeing to publish their articles. Source 1 bravely describes the numbers that were ‘cut down’ whilst Source 2 chronicles Henry Hunt’s (an esteemed politician and radical at the time) fight for equality despite his differing social standings. These sources suggest that Peterloo may have helped to unite the educated and upper classes with the working-class reformers, thus, insinuating that a stronger, more democratic and united, political opinion was on the horizon. The fact that these were articles would also suggest that the newspapers would only have printed them had they thought that people would have been interested in reading them. John Edward’s report was published in The Times, which at that period was in circulation amongst the middle class, and would suggest that the middle class’s political opinions would have been altered by the Peterloo Massacre. However, Source 4, an extract from the Times, is not one of many newspaper articles concerning Peterloo to have been in circulation as the government started to crack down on any seditious articles and shut down the newspapers that were printing them. Contemporary Historian