Mupainurpleasure -> RE: April 29, 1992 (4/30/2012 7:54:44 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote:
your first post was kinda offensive. thank you for explaining the answer of why it was different. no one at the boston tea party savagely beat innocent people, and then used social injustice to justify their crimes against the very society they claimed to be demanding justice for. a total bunch of absurd ridiculous avoiding responsibility bull fucking shit; more victim da man's holding me down mentality that self perpetuates itself via piss poor victim attitudes. I did answer my own question... no sort of about it. Offensive? Perhaps... a thick skin can be required around here. But, I made no mistake. The principles that this country were founded upon went away a long time ago, starting even before the Tea Party. It simmers for a while, then boils over.... we have had many boiling points, I only mentioned a few. And each are escalating. And, you know, its easy to spout the "victim mentality" when you aren't one yourself. Were they all victims? Nope.. some were. Were they all ignored? yes, for the most part they were. Did things change afterwards? Some... probably not enough. Shall I also remind you that this country was built upon a citizen revolt? One where the citizens got tired of their government misrepresenting them, abusing them and ignoring them? Do you not also recall that happened again during the Civil War here? Instead of berating these people, why not berate your government for ignoring its constituents and betraying their trust? I dont have to like the fact that there are victims... but I will be damned if I will look people in the eyes who lived there and tell them they were wrong. Actually it wasnt as just or grand but we won !! quote:
Tea Act of 1773 was designed to prop up the East India Company which was floundering financially and burdened with eighteen million pounds of unsold tea. This tea was to be shipped directly to the colonies, and sold at a bargain price. The direct sale of tea via British agents would undercut the business of local North American merchants. Profits now went into the East India Company, not American hands People think it was expensive tea that was the issue. It was american business interests being undercut by cheap tea. http://users.humboldt.edu/ogayle/hist110/unit2/revolution.html In the end they forced us but it's hardly fair to say a goverment that was taxing it's colonies at a lower rate than the motherland is hardly oppressive. We have always hated taxes
|
|
|
|