Social Media Brings Us Together and Pulls Us Apart

Full Answer Section

• Colonial Unity and Resistance: The Intolerable Acts, ironically, achieved what years of lesser grievances could not: they galvanized colonial unity. The First Continental Congress met in September 1774, bringing together delegates from twelve colonies (Georgia was absent). While some delegates, like Joseph Galloway, still proposed plans for union, the prevailing sentiment was one of resistance. The Congress adopted the Continental Association, an agreement to boycott British goods and cease exports, a powerful economic weapon. This collective action demonstrated a unified resolve that Britain likely underestimated.
• Escalating Violence and Mistrust: The events leading up to 1774, such as the Boston Massacre (1770) and the Boston Tea Party (1773), had poisoned the well of trust. The British viewed colonial actions as lawless rebellion, while colonists saw British responses as tyrannical oppression. The tarring and feathering of customs officials, for example, highlighted the breakdown of civil order and respect for British authority.
• Ideological Divide: The "no taxation without representation" argument had evolved. By 1774, many colonists were no longer simply demanding representation; they were questioning Parliament's authority over them entirely, arguing that only their own colonial assemblies had the right to levy taxes. This represented a fundamental disagreement over constitutional principles.

Why a slim possibility still existed (though it dwindled rapidly):

• Some Moderate Voices: There were still influential figures in both Britain (like William Pitt the Elder and Edmund Burke) and the colonies (like Joseph Galloway) who argued for reconciliation and compromise, fearing the consequences of war. Galloway's Plan of Union, though ultimately rejected, indicates that not all delegates to the First Continental Congress were set on independence.
• Desire for Peace: Many colonists, including many Loyalists, genuinely wished to remain part of the British Empire for economic stability, military protection, and cultural ties. They feared the chaos and uncertainty of war and independence.

However, the British government's inflexible stance and the rapidly escalating organized colonial resistance, particularly through the Continental Association and the de facto revolutionary government forming in Massachusetts, made true reconciliation a highly improbable outcome by the end of 1774. The Olive Branch Petition in 1775, the colonies' final attempt at peace, was rejected by King George III, effectively closing the door on reconciliation.

Examine the painting that opened Chapter 5: The Bostonian Paying the Excise – man, or Tarring and Feathering (Figure 5.1). How does this painting represent the relationship between Great Britain and the American Colonies in the years from 1763 – 1774?

"The Bostonian Paying the Excise – man, or Tarring and Feathering" (Figure 5.1) is a powerful political cartoon, likely British, that vividly illustrates the deteriorating and increasingly violent relationship between Great Britain and the American Colonies in the years from 1763 to 1774. It specifically depicts the incident of John Malcolm, a British customs official, being tarred and feathered in Boston in 1774.

Here's how it represents the relationship:

• Colonial Outrage and Retaliation: The central image of the tarred and feathered customs official, with a noose hanging from the "Liberty Tree" and colonists forcing him to drink tea, clearly demonstrates the extreme anger and willingness of some colonists to resort to violence against British authority. This wasn't merely peaceful protest; it was outright rebellion and vigilante justice in response to British tax policies (like the excise tax on tea) and perceived oppression.
• British Authority Under Attack: The customs official, a symbol of British administration and tax collection, is depicted as helpless, humiliated, and physically assaulted. This visually communicates the breakdown of British control and the colonists' defiance of Parliament's laws.
• Symbolism of "Liberty Tree" and Tea: The "Liberty Tree" (often a real tree where Sons of Liberty met) with the noose signifies the colonists' invocation of liberty and their readiness for drastic action, even death, for their cause. The forced tea-drinking is a direct, mocking reference to the Boston Tea Party, emphasizing colonial rejection of British taxation and their control over commerce. The upside-down Stamp Act poster on the tree further reminds the viewer of past grievances.
• Escalation of Conflict: The painting captures a moment of intense, physical conflict that had escalated beyond legal arguments or economic boycotts. It signifies that the relationship had moved past political debate into a dangerous phase of direct confrontation and violence. The British would view this as anarchy and treason, solidifying their resolve to use force.
• British Perspective (Likely): While depicting colonial actions, the sensational nature of the image, showing colonists as brutal and lawless, likely served to garner British public support for harsher measures against the colonies. It framed the colonists as violent instigators, justifying a forceful response from the Crown.

In essence, the painting portrays a relationship characterized by mutual resentment, escalating defiance, and a complete breakdown of legitimate governance, where colonists were taking matters into their own hands in a highly aggressive manner, pushing the colonies further down the path toward revolution.

How did the condition of certain groups, such as women, blacks, and Indians, reveal a contradiction in the Declaration of Independence?

The Declaration of Independence, with its famous assertion "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," contained a profound contradiction when compared to the actual conditions and legal status of women, blacks, and Native Americans in 1776.

• Women:

  • Contradiction: The Declaration's promise of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" did not extend to most women. They were largely excluded from political life, unable to vote, hold office, or serve on juries. Their legal identity was often subsumed under that of their husband or father (coverture). They had limited property rights, especially married women, and restricted access to education and most professions. Their "happiness" was largely defined by their domestic roles within the patriarchal structure, not by individual autonomy or public participation.
  • Reality: While Abigail Adams famously urged John Adams to "remember the ladies" in the new code of laws, her pleas were largely ignored. The revolutionaries saw women's role as supporting the cause through domestic patriotism, not through equal political rights.

• Blacks (Enslaved and Free):

  • Contradiction: The phrase "all men are created equal" directly contradicted the institution of chattel slavery, where millions of African Americans were denied all forms of liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. They were considered property, not citizens, and their lives were entirely subject to the will of their enslavers. Even free blacks faced severe legal restrictions, discrimination, and lacked full citizenship rights.
  • Reality: Thomas Jefferson, the primary author of the Declaration, himself owned enslaved people. While he initially included a condemnation of slavery in a draft (blaming King George III for it), this clause was removed to ensure the support of Southern colonies. The economic reliance on slavery in the South, despite the Enlightenment ideals of liberty, meant that the "unalienable rights" were selectively applied to white men, primarily property owners.

• Indians (Native Americans):

  • Contradiction: The Declaration spoke of universal rights, yet Native Americans were largely viewed as separate nations, often as enemies, and certainly not as equals within the nascent American society. The Declaration itself even refers to Native Americans as "merciless Indian Savages" in one of its grievances against King George III, accusing him of inciting them against the colonists. This language clearly dehumanized and excluded them from the concept of "all men."
  • Reality: The pursuit of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" by white American colonists often directly conflicted with the "life, liberty, and lands" of Native American peoples. The desire for westward expansion meant that Native American sovereignty and claims to territory were consistently undermined, leading to displacement, conflict, and a denial of their fundamental rights and existence as independent nations.

In sum, the Declaration of Independence articulated lofty ideals of universal human rights, but the practical application of these ideals in 1776 was profoundly limited and exclusionary, revealing a stark hypocrisy at the nation's founding that would take centuries to partially address.

How did the Revolutionary War provide both new opportunities and new challenges for slaves and free blacks in America?

The Revolutionary War was a period of immense upheaval that presented a complex mix of both new opportunities and significant challenges for enslaved and free blacks in America.

New Opportunities:

• Opportunity for Freedom (primarily via the British):
  • Lord Dunmore's Proclamation (1775): The British offered the most significant opportunity for freedom. Lord Dunmore, the Royal Governor of Virginia, famously promised freedom to enslaved people who would leave their rebel masters and fight for the British Crown. This proclamation, and similar British promises, inspired thousands of enslaved people to escape plantations and seek refuge behind British lines, creating a direct path to liberty.
  • British Evacuations: At the end of the war, the British honored many of their promises, evacuating thousands of formerly enslaved people (known as Black Loyalists) to British Canada, the Caribbean, or even back to England.
• Opportunity for Freedom (via the Americans/States):
  • Military Service: While initially hesitant, the Continental Army and various state militias eventually allowed both free and enslaved blacks to serve, especially as manpower became scarce. Some states, particularly in the North (like Rhode Island), offered freedom in exchange for military service. Estimates suggest 5,000 to 8,000 African Americans served the American cause.
  • Enlightenment Ideals: The rhetoric of liberty and equality embedded in the Revolution sparked some anti-slavery sentiment, particularly in the North. This led to gradual emancipation laws in several Northern states after the war, creating a growing free black population there.
• Increased Agency: The chaos of war provided opportunities for enslaved individuals to disrupt the plantation system, escape, or negotiate better terms with their owners, even if full freedom wasn't achieved.
• Emergence of Black Communities: In areas under British control or in Northern states where gradual emancipation occurred, nascent free black communities began to form, offering spaces for self-organization and cultural development.

New Challenges:

• Recapture and Retribution: For those who attempted to escape to British lines, the journey was perilous, with constant risk of recapture by slave patrols or Patriot forces. If caught, they faced severe punishment.
• Hardship in British Camps: While the British offered freedom, conditions in their camps were often harsh, with rampant disease and limited supplies. Many who escaped to the British died from smallpox or other illnesses.
• Uncertainty of Freedom: Even for those evacuated by the British, life in new lands like Canada was often difficult, marked by discrimination, poverty, and struggles to establish themselves.
• Reinforced Slavery in the South: The rhetoric of liberty actually strengthened slavery in the South, as slaveholders fought for their "property rights" against British interference. The economic importance of slavery to the Southern states became even more entrenched, making widespread emancipation impossible after the war.
• Continued Discrimination for Free Blacks: Even for those who gained freedom, either through service or gradual emancipation, widespread racial discrimination persisted. They faced legal restrictions, social prejudice, limited economic opportunities, and the constant threat of being re-enslaved in the South.
• Violence and Exploitation: The war, while offering opportunities, also meant increased exposure to violence, destruction, and exploitation for all, including blacks.

In essence, the Revolutionary War was a paradox for African Americans: it held out the promise of liberty through military service for both sides, leading to the emancipation of thousands, yet it also reinforced the institution of slavery in the South and solidified racial discrimination, setting the stage for future struggles for civil rights.

Sample Solution

By 1774, reconciliation between the American colonies and Great Britain was highly unlikely, though not entirely impossible. While some voices on both sides still advocated for a peaceful resolution, the actions and hardened positions of both the British government and significant colonial factions had created an almost insurmountable divide.

Why it was unlikely:

• British Stubbornness and Perceived Sovereignty: King George III and his ministry, particularly Lord North, were determined to assert Parliament's absolute sovereignty over the colonies. The series of punitive measures known as the Intolerable Acts (or Coercive Acts), passed in response to the Boston Tea Party, demonstrated a clear intent to punish Massachusetts and make an example of it. These acts closed Boston Harbor, curtailed self-governance in Massachusetts, and allowed British officials accused of crimes to be tried in Britain, effectively stripping colonists of fundamental rights. This approach signaled that Britain was unwilling to negotiate on the principle of parliamentary supremacy.