vinniethepoo: Meet Us at the Stick: Weaver95: well, from the perspective of the British - yes, it probably WAS an act of 'terrorism'.Reminds me of a US History class I took as an undergrad where the prof explained things from the British point of viewHow the British fronted most of the cost of the French and Indian War. Where there Brits were paying more in taxes to pay for that war than the Americans. And how the British Parliament felt that the Americans should start to pay for their fair share since they were the primary beneficiaries from said war.Made the colonies sound like a bunch of spoiled ingrates.Food for thoughtI recall reading that the American colonists were taxed at a higher rate than people in England, supposedly because the war most directly benefitted them. Also, no colony was allowed to trade with any other colony, only with English merchants (who jacked up their prices while offering less than the free-market value for American goods.)The worst thing was, the colonists had no representation in Parliament at all, so they had no legal means of protesting these policies. They were treated as second-class citizens with all of the responsibilities of British subjects but none of the rights.Basically, the mother country was milking the colonies for as much as they could get and not giving a whole lot in return. (They did help defend the colonists from the French, so there is that.) These policies were set by King George himself (who, it was later discovered, was certifiably insane.)
Relatively Obscure: What would people call it if a gang of Muslims ransacked an American ship in port and destroyed all of the cargo?
Lionel Mandrake: I guess we'd all have to come to an agreement on the definition of "terrorism," but I think that under most reasonable definitions, it was terrorism.And the American Revolution was treason.duh
jigger: What the goal of the BTP to create fear (terror) or to destroy merchandise? If the sole purpose was to destroy merchandise then it was sabotage, not terrorism.But yes, the War of American Secession was treason, of course.
SilentStrider: You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of viewCan't believe I'm the first to say that.
Kittypie070: There will be a United States, and Texas will be part of it when the Sun burns out.
Meet Us at the Stick: Made the colonies sound like a bunch of spoiled ingrates.
TyrantII: Lionel Mandrake: I guess we'd all have to come to an agreement on the definition of "terrorism," but I think that under most reasonable definitions, it was terrorism.And the American Revolution was treason.duhIt's only terrorism if you lose.Also, for goddamned sake, the Boston Tea Party was not about taxation, it was solely about representation in British Parliament. The damn colonials wanted to actually have the ability to block tariff reductions on East India Tea CO which were removed against their wishes, and started flooding Colonial ports. THAT's why they threw the stuff into the hahbah'Yup. American was founded on protectionism, against free trade, and on wanting proper representation. Taxes? Not so much.
Need_MindBleach: You could also probably point to the diverging economic interests of the American colonies and Great Britain
mrshowrules: Guidette Frankentits: Better add The Boston Tea Party to the List Of People Conspiring Against The G.O.P. And Therefore America. (LOPCATGOPATA)Thanks to some diligent Farkers we now have it with linky goodness:\
jaytkay: Kittypie070: There will be a United States, and Texas will be part of it when the Sun burns out.Ewwwww. No. Please.I signed the Texas secession petition and offered every possible assistance. We need to shed the neo-confederates and join the 1st World.
that they themselves so gleefully endorsed using on overseas brownfolk
jaytkay: Need_MindBleach: You could also probably point to the diverging economic interests of the American colonies and Great BritainAre their figures for the the importance of the colonies to Great Britain as a percentage of GDP or some vital portion of the economy?Did they really NEED us? Or was it a matter the need to impose authority.\ Also likes history
ignacio: When the French created the word "terrorist", they intended it to be a complement. "Those heroic terrorists, fighting against the monarchy", and what not. But this isn't terrorism, this is just a protest.
JerkyMeat: I would like to create a ride similar to "It's a small world". It will show every language in the world, saying:Fark Texas
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Feb 19 2017 10:51:43
Runtime: 0.397 sec (396 ms)