348. The Boston Tea Party (Part 2)

Рет қаралды 11,782

Жыл бұрын

“Last night three cargos of tea were emptied into the sea. This morning a man of war sails. This is the most magnificent movement of all. There is a dignity, a majesty, a sublimity, in this last effort of the patriots, that I greatly admire.”The Boston Tea Party occurs amid the growing disagreements between the British parliament and the people of colonial America, as New Englanders, and Bostonians in particular, fight British attempts to regulate imperial trade. In the second episode of this series, Tom, Dominic and Professor Adam Smith examine the Tea Act and how it accelerated the American Revolution. They also chart George Washington’s rise to commander-in-chief of the American patriot forces, and ask to what extent slavery was an issue in the war.
*The Rest Is History Live Tour 2023*:
Tom and Dominic are back on tour this autumn! See them live in London, New Zealand, and Australia!Buy your tickets here: restishistorypod.com
Twitter: @TheRestHistory
@holland_tom
@dcsandbrook

Пікірлер: 38

@ted356 4 ай бұрын

An American here. Enjoying hearing the “British side” in the history of our revolution (or rebellion as you would call it.) 😊

@zachferreira 11 күн бұрын

same, it's pretty wild hearing their perspective. Making some good points

@Haufpunk 10 ай бұрын

That impression cracks me up lol

@allancarey2604 3 ай бұрын

It’s fun listening to what Adam Smith (the other one) wrote in “The Wealth of Nations” about the practicalities of representation & all but saying the Americans are freeloaders for not accepting taxes when it was for their own defence :)

@lenoxmarcantel 7 ай бұрын

Great video. Brought this New Englander from Massachusetts a lot of entertainment. Made my work day much better.

@ianmedford4855 Жыл бұрын

To the "Roman Strategy" aspect... In reprisal for The Battle of Lexington/Concord, the Royal Navy sent a squadron of gunships under a man named Captain Mowatt to burn my home town, Portland Maine, to the ground. (It was called Falmouth at the time) They were quite successful in this endeavor. The flag ship was called "The Canceaux"; and now we have a local hot sauce named after it.

@ComedyJakob Жыл бұрын

I completely disagree with the idea that an action taken in response to rebellion in the southern colonies could have been a cause of that rebellion retroactively. Dunmore's half-hearted emancipation doubtless converted many southern colonists into rebels, but it seems most likely that its main impact was to further radicalize those who were already drawn to the patriot side. For protection of slavery to have been the prime or even one of few primary causes of a revolution within an empire which permitted slavery and would not move against it for many many years afterwards, seems to me a stretch based upon wishful thinking. Considering that the British Empire was not against slavery, and that the revolution was a primarily New England generated issue, it seems inconceivable that Dunmore would have issued his proclamation unless the southern colonies were already against him. Otherwise the British would have done anything in their power to maintain southern loyalty.

@ComedyJakob Жыл бұрын

Furthermore, it seems hypocritical that Englishmen in the 18th century would deride their American brothers for speaking of liberty whilst owning slaves when the English presumably felt they possessed liberty within the Empire while themselves profiting off of slavery and, in fact, using the royal navy to guarantee its continuation.

@ben.mitchell.theater 4 ай бұрын

I think that's largely true and the whole this was misguided. The proclamation was months in the making, as Dunmore was in a vulnerable position. Rebels filled the Virginia capital of Williamsburg, prompting the loyalist governor to depart for Norfolk. Worse still many of his forces had deserted him, leaving him with only about 300 troops. Given Dunmore’s dire predicament, six months before he issued the proclamation, rumors spread that he was considering it, and a group of slaves approached him about joining forces with the British. Although he ignored them the colony’s plantation owners feared that he would act on his plan to grant freedom to the enslaved. It was his last throw of the dice.

@JC-KeepSmiling Жыл бұрын

Oh I do love your accents and impressions! Like a less sweary Pete and Dud 😄

@PDGray 10 ай бұрын

Fascinating; having recently joined, I have a lot of previous episodes to catch up on! Thank you for your insights and expertise, delivered in such a listenable format.

@mfenaughty Жыл бұрын

Love the accent for Adams. And the pronunciation of "imbroglio" ! 😊

@d.c.8828 3 ай бұрын

The British were the first to refer to the Natives as "savages".

@ben.mitchell.theater 4 ай бұрын

It sounds to me like most of the problem here was a breakdown of communication, which isn't surprising considering the distances involved, and the length of time the societies had been separated. When it comes to allocating blame for what happened, Britain can only be blamed for poor tactics and some insensitivity in its' handling of the colonies. The Americans however can be blamed for wanting their cake and eating it. If they'd been given de facto Independence under the Crown they'd have expected to pay no tax to the Crown, but if they ever needed defending they'd have expected Britain to pay with money and lives to defend them. We still get this sort of thing nowadays. Independence movements in Scotland and Wales in the UK, think they can become Independent, whilst despite having been over represented in the Parliament which has borrowed it all, refusing to take their share of the UK National Debt with them, and even continue to receive state pensions from the English taxpayer and have their banks and bank deposits underwritten by the Bank of England. Needless to say they'd expect to be defended, whilst spending nothing on their own on defence. Even now the UK spends FAR more in Wales and Scotland (in the case of Wales double) the amount it collects from them in tax, but the nationalists still complain they're not getting even more. There's also controversy going on at the moment about the Wales and Scottish Government's disastrous handling of Covid. Despite the fact that they have total devolved responsibility for public health, their excuse is that they didn't receive 'leadership' from the UK. In this respect the Scottish Nationalists even sometimes refer to England 'as the lead nation'. This is exactly what was happening in the Colonies, but much more so. There'd have bound to be fracture eventually. The best thing to have done would have given them total Independence under the Crown, and if they ever needed defending tell them we want cash up front. On the other hand there was a happy outcome for Great Britain from the War of Independence. France's meddling in it bankrupted them and largely caused the French Revolution, which ruined France. Britain retained all our valuable trading links with the USA whilst France gained nothing and soon ended up with no possessions at all in North America.

@JJ_GoBlue 5 ай бұрын

Washington is Vercingetorix if the Gauls won

@x0rn312 6 ай бұрын

He said "The Redcoats are Coming"

@Ozgipsy 11 ай бұрын

Sounded like Pam Eyre not John Adams

@x0rn312 6 ай бұрын

And don't forget Samuel Jackson

@jimbopumbapigsticks 11 ай бұрын

The thing about the "No taxation without representation" slogan is that it cuts both ways. One could argue the colonists would have been perfectly happy to accept no representation in Westminster if they weren't taxed. So the democracy argument flies out the window and in its place we can see that the USA is in essence the most elaborate tax avoidance scheme in history.

@salex5412 4 ай бұрын

The colonists tried. As early as 1763, James Otis wrote, "That every part has a right to be represented in the supreme or some subordinate legislature: That the refusal of this, would seem to be a contradiction in practice to the theory of the constitution: That the colonies are subordinate dominions, and are now in such a state, as to make it best for the good of the whole, that they should not only be continued in the enjoyment of subordinate legislation, but be also represented in some proportion to their number and estates, in the grand legislature of the nation: That this would firmly unite all parts of the British empire, in the greatest peace and prosperity; and render it invulnerable and perpetual." The problem was that Parliament never agreed until it was too late. To the colonists, having representatives way across the ocean ultimately didn't make sense for a continent faced with the belligerent Indians, the ever warring French and those damned Catholics (we're actually not so bad). It wasn't so much about taxation at all. John Adams later wrote that the low-tax colonies after the war cranked up the taxes. Ultimately one could argue that the colonists before 1776 simply wanted the system that Great Britain herself would adopt with the Commonwealth in 1931. How much do Canada and Australia pay in taxes to Great Britain? And how many representatives in the House of Commons do they have?

@user-jl8mp6lg4i 4 ай бұрын

45min…

@Secretname951 Жыл бұрын

I can’t wait to find out why the Americans were wrong about this!

@ben.mitchell.theater 4 ай бұрын

There's no 'right' or 'wrong' in this sort of political dispute. This habit of thinking some community thinks this or some community 'thinks this or that' is misplaced, We don't all have one collective brain. Most Americans (or 'British' as they would have called themselves at the time) them did to various degrees favour the rebels complaints, but a sizeable minority disagreed, and most of them migrated to Canada following the USA being set up. When it comes to allocating blame for what happened, Britain can only be blamed for poor tactics and some insensitivity in its' handling of the colonies. The British colonists however can be blamed for wanting their cake and eating it. If they'd been given de facto Independence under the Crown they'd have expected to pay no tax to the Crown, but if they ever needed defending they'd have expected Britain to pay with money and lives to defend them. There'd have bound to be fracture eventually. The best thing to have done would have given them total Independence under the Crown which is the most they'd have wanted, and if they ever needed defending tell them we want cash up front.

@LooseTheremin Жыл бұрын

Why was Paul Revered ? He was just trying to use the situation to make a name for himself, the fellow was an opportunist and a scoundrel ! Also it's a bit rich for the Colonists to say it was all about " No taxation without representation " when they weren't paying any tax in the first place ! Moi loife ! Edit: On doing further deep research ( Wiki ) I found that Paul Revere was a Froggy whose real name was Rivoire, until he cunningly changed it. And he was later to join the Freemasons as well. So not a self promoter but a French Mole gnawing away at the English Root without a doubt ! Still I suppose he was a Patriot, in his way. C'est la vie.

@lesblakeman Жыл бұрын

So the rebellion was more about retaining their slaves than it was about freedom from the English , they don't talk much about that at the July the 4th BBQs

@chickenfishhybrid44 Жыл бұрын

Yeah sure bud, since the British Empire was free of slavery and all.. oh wait the Brits didn't outlaw slavery for another 50 years after the Revolution.

@detpistons4l401 11 ай бұрын

No the British weren’t anti slavery. And The southern colonies actually wanted to stay under British rule for the most part. Now at that time they all had slaves but the south was more fertile and had more plantations and sht

@chadparsons50 8 ай бұрын

I don't think that was what they were saying. The British Empire, along with every other Empire on earth , and every Empire in ALL of history were slave owning.

@ben.mitchell.theater 4 ай бұрын

It wasn't about retaining slaves. The localities driving the rebellion were the places which had the fewest slaves. There was threat to slavery from Britain at the time. It was all to do with not paying any tax whilst expecting the British to carry in paying in lives and money to defend them.

@Joker-no1uh Жыл бұрын

The only weird thing hearing is how these brits act like they were moral to the Natives lol. No one people destroyed other than the british. India, Africa, Pakistan, China, North/South America, Caribbean. Not trying to sound better but lets be real

@chadparsons50 8 ай бұрын

Mongols? Romans? Various Caliphates? The British empire had maybe lightest touch of any in history. To say otherwise is to deny the historical record.

@ben.mitchell.theater 4 ай бұрын

Compared with all the rest of the empires in history (including very recent ones like the German Empire acquired by Hitler, the Japanese one, and the even more recent Soviet and Chinese Empires), the British Empire was a paragon of enlightenment and morality. Governance within it was more lenient than many comparable states at the time applied towards their own citizens, It was like that largely because the whole thing was acquired piecemeal, and sometimes by accident, as a response to securing trading opportunities, rather than for acquisition of land to expand into and extermination and enslavement of 'natives'. It's the reason why our withdrawal has been so peaceful compared with the fall of all the the empires and close relations maintained with nearly all concerned. Even the post war withdrawal of France from most of its' empire has been characterised by much violence. The Vietnam War was a consequence of France imperial domination there and the Soviets trying to benefit from withdrawal.

@philrees1779 3 ай бұрын

You are trying to sound better but failing.

@throwback19841 3 ай бұрын

my view on imperialism is roughly "look everyone else was doing it at the time, we just wanted to be popular" with a hint of "well if they didn't want to be colonized they'd have built better navies" I. e yes it was bad, it happened, we don't do it anymore and if we hadn't done it someone else would have. I'm not apologizing but I'm not proud of it either. now would anyone like a slice of cake?