Stuyvesant Leadership Analysis

The King in his right mind has total control and power of the colonies and can do whatever he deems necessary to control them. With that said, The king of that time, not thinking about the peoples feelings went ahead and instead of making the people happy did whatever he could to make the government better. Which in the long run was to make money. Well every time the king mad a law to make up for another law that the people didn’t like, it

While the colonists had many grievances surrounding King George III the strongest grievance was his plan “To force colonist to buy English products” he had Parliament place high taxes on goods from other countries. The key word

2. One attempt at British Control was James I’s hostility toward the House of Burgesses. He hated tobacco and did not trust the House of Burgesses and in turn he revoked the Virginia Company’s Charter and made Virginia a royal colony directly under his control. The success of this attempt was

He tries to convince the colonists that the king is not a good man or ruler. As a matter of fact, he uses the situation to divide the right from the wrong. This shows that his goal is to display to the

A true leader is a person who takes initiative and does what is needed to lead a group of people. If they need to, they will make any sacrifices, take the ability to take control and charge of a group. Ralph displays initiative and leadership in the book, “Lord of the Flies”, by William Golding, by leading the innocent group of kids to survival.

The colonial economy, geography, and politics had all been subjected to unfair consequences. The acts that were passed served as a way for England to push the responsibility its debt and issues on the colonists. If the colonists’ grievances were appealed, the colonists may have never rebelled against their mother

Most of it was settled along the New Amsterdam was purchased from the Native Americans and governed by Peter Stuyvesant. This area was given to the Duke of York by King Charles II, and an English soldier unit forced New Netherlands to become New York. New York never got to experience self rule after the English took over. The colonists had no local representative government. Thomas Dongan only temporarily ruled New York through a general assembly before New York became directly controlled by England. The colonists had no local representative

However the king still had power or authority over the colonists because the king still gave commands in the New World like the colonists had to send money back to England and the colonists in return would receive goods like food. The king protected the colonists from getting killed by Indians by making a law that the Indians stay west of the Appalachian Mountains and the colonists don’t need to go west. The king was,totally grateful,and protected the colonists from getting killed or badly

During the 1700s era, King George III constantly persecuted the colonist. He distributed many unjust rulings, taxation without representation, sending soldiers to invade colonial homes and territory, and taking away their basic rights while giving them less freedom than that of the people who live in Great Britain. Many colonists did not agree with the way he was ruling, however, many of them stood by and let it happen. The ones that did not stand by had more forceful tactics of taking care of a problem. The main issue with being inclined to violent thoughts, or nothing at all, is not actually executing a problem to the solution. Patrick Henry, being one of the many leaders of change, delivered a speech towards a solution. Patrick Henry delivered his speech to the 122 delegates and the President on March 23, 1775. This speech took place about 1 month before the American Revolutionary War and about 1 year before the Declaration of Independence. Henry’s speech became the start of a new America. His speech uses allusions, metaphors, and rhetorical questions to emphasize the need to go to war with England.

After Powhatan passed away, his brother was in charge. Opitchapam, price mentioned he was chosen in name, shortly he was displaced from power. His brother Opechancanough was a larger, and muscular man, as Powhatan he was chosen to be the leader in fact. 1620’s, the king James suggested who he wanted to be the governor of the colony. George Thorpe was officially chosen by the king. Thorpe thought that the colony traded the natives with less respect than they deserved, so he ordered to show the natives love, and care; moreover, they wanted to send natives to England for high education. College was built for the natives to learn how to read, and write. The colony traded the natives well, and the natives liked all the good care, some of them wanted

Firstly, the King’s absolute power was a reasonable grievance of the colonists. King George prosecuted the making of laws that were to bind the colonists despite any circumstances. Although, the colonists believed that his power was too unlimited to apply defeat on. This meant that Americans would lose everything if they were to oppose him. Moreover, the Quartering Act portrayed how people’s own homes were resided by militants under the king’s orders. This was a violation to their rights of property. Similarly, the people demanding their laws of nature are in no way for the King’s personal benefit. As a matter of fact, the King should be considered the servant of the people, as his purpose is to serve their injustices. Moreover, the colonists’ rights by nature averse to King George’s beliefs. As expected, his beliefs only respond to the

Second, the king had a right to be mad at the colonists! When the New York Assembly met in 1766, they REFUSED to follow the Quartering Act the king out in place. It was as if you were directly insulting the king. And yet the colonist still got mad about the Declaratory Act. The king is tired of the colonist disregarding his authority.

The American colonies eventually experienced difficulties settling conflicts concerning relations with the English monarchy, but in the beginning, the English settlements were relatively free from too much control from the king. Due to the use of charters granted by the monarchy in the establishment of these settlements, it can be inferred that they enjoyed the tacit approval of the king or at least his grudging acceptance.

In the Leadership Challenge, 4th edition, it is Kouzes & Posner (2007) intention to present a road map for individuals to follow on their leadership journey. The authors stress that “leadership is not a gene and it’s not an inheritance.” Leadership they assert is “an identifiable set of skills and abilities that are available to all of us” (p. 23). They make clear that the “great person” theory of leadership is “plain wrong.” Leaders are our everyday heroes who do extraordinary things on a regular basis (p. 23).

To support this claim, we have Peter Stuyvesant’s testimony to the Dutch States General on why he lost the Dutch’s only colony in North America. Stuyvesant does not place the blame on himself and instead offers up the same reasons given to prove he was a good leader. Stuyvesant blames the lack of a defense force stating that it was incredibly difficult to raise a force of more than 250 men capable of baring arms as well as claiming that the fort of New Amsterdam looked like more of a “molehill” than a fortress. He blames the loss of the colony on the “impossibility to defend the fort, much less the city of New Amsterdam, and still less the country.” He also blames the citizenry due to their apathy and complete unwillingness to help Stuyvesant in almost any way.