Sorry, I studied American history beyond high school “King George was literally Hitler” propaganda.
Don’t forget that a major factor motivating the “Patriots” was the fact that England was going to create an Indian reserve (land speculators doing shit like “buying” all of Kentucky for a handful of beads was pretty problematic for peace), and that they were letting the Canadians be Catholic. But sure, we can pretend that expecting the colonists to contribute to the costs of defending them against the Indians they were genociding was horrific oppression.
Notice how nothing you said had anything to do with your prior justification of state violence? I never compared anyone to Hitler. That was you. What a weird reply. It sounds like you’re having a conversation with yourself.
Gonna guess your the same person today that defends the murder of Renee Good.
Notice how you couldn’t be arsed to provide a historical argument or evidence that you know anything about the time period?
Fuck you. No, the murder of Renee Good is not comparable to soldiers getting confused about an order to fire when they were literally getting pelted with rocks.
Christ. Obviously Adam’s should haven’t of defended them, they should have just been executed on sight. Makes perfect sense.
Maybe read some primary sources from the time period, instead of trying to argue about a topic you haven’t looked into since high school.
It’s always so silly when people make arguments in random internet comments trying to appeal to their own authority on a topic. Like, you literally know nothing about my knowledge of the subject. You don’t know if I’m in high school now or literally have a history PHD. What is the point of this?
You know nothing about my knowledge outside of (1) I know that Adams defended the soldiers in the Boston Massacre. (2) I think you are not applying any class based historical perspective. It’s why I called you a bootlicker for King George.
Adams was a part of the rich white land owning class. It was beneficial for him at the time to defend his class position and it’s why he did so. He didn’t do it for some “moral” reason of justice. There was clearly no justice served for the people slaughtered in the massacre.
So maybe stop larping as a historian. If you can’t view history from the lense of class struggle then what is the point in knowing a lot of facts if you can’t apply them? You sound much more like a high school history teacher than a historian. But I won’t make assumptions about you like you are to me.
An analysis based on class struggle would recognize that the Revolution was driven by and primarily benefited land speculators, as I alluded to earlier with my reference to the Henderson purchase. Pure Marxist historians are more creatures of the 70’s than the modern day. Historiography continues on.
You sound much more like a high school history teacher than a historian.
I hold a Bachelors in American History and am in fact certified to teach high school history.
Do you have anything other than personal attacks? Going to provide any sources of your own?
Sorry, I studied American history beyond high school “King George was literally Hitler” propaganda.
Don’t forget that a major factor motivating the “Patriots” was the fact that England was going to create an Indian reserve (land speculators doing shit like “buying” all of Kentucky for a handful of beads was pretty problematic for peace), and that they were letting the Canadians be Catholic. But sure, we can pretend that expecting the colonists to contribute to the costs of defending them against the Indians they were genociding was horrific oppression.
Notice how nothing you said had anything to do with your prior justification of state violence? I never compared anyone to Hitler. That was you. What a weird reply. It sounds like you’re having a conversation with yourself.
Gonna guess your the same person today that defends the murder of Renee Good.
Notice how you couldn’t be arsed to provide a historical argument or evidence that you know anything about the time period?
Fuck you. No, the murder of Renee Good is not comparable to soldiers getting confused about an order to fire when they were literally getting pelted with rocks.
Christ. Obviously Adam’s should haven’t of defended them, they should have just been executed on sight. Makes perfect sense.
Maybe read some primary sources from the time period, instead of trying to argue about a topic you haven’t looked into since high school.
It’s always so silly when people make arguments in random internet comments trying to appeal to their own authority on a topic. Like, you literally know nothing about my knowledge of the subject. You don’t know if I’m in high school now or literally have a history PHD. What is the point of this?
You know nothing about my knowledge outside of (1) I know that Adams defended the soldiers in the Boston Massacre. (2) I think you are not applying any class based historical perspective. It’s why I called you a bootlicker for King George.
Adams was a part of the rich white land owning class. It was beneficial for him at the time to defend his class position and it’s why he did so. He didn’t do it for some “moral” reason of justice. There was clearly no justice served for the people slaughtered in the massacre.
So maybe stop larping as a historian. If you can’t view history from the lense of class struggle then what is the point in knowing a lot of facts if you can’t apply them? You sound much more like a high school history teacher than a historian. But I won’t make assumptions about you like you are to me.
An analysis based on class struggle would recognize that the Revolution was driven by and primarily benefited land speculators, as I alluded to earlier with my reference to the Henderson purchase. Pure Marxist historians are more creatures of the 70’s than the modern day. Historiography continues on.
I hold a Bachelors in American History and am in fact certified to teach high school history.
Do you have anything other than personal attacks? Going to provide any sources of your own?