american revolution thesis

Home — Essay Samples — History — History of the United States — American Revolution

Essays on American Revolution

How and why the american revolution started, overview of the events of the american revolution, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

The Effects of The American Revolution

The history of american revolution - timeline, facts & causes, the major aspects and key achievements during the american revolution, coming of the american revolution: boston tea party, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

American Revolution and Relationship Between Americans and British

How did the war between britain and america benefit others, the american revolutionary war: the battles of lexington and concord, the role of women during the american revolution, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Revolutionary Mothers by Carol Berkin: The Role of Founding Mothers During The American Revolution

Differences between british and american soldiers in the american revolution, american revolution's negative impact on native american history, the role of boston tea party in the american revolution, establishment of american ideals during american revolution, the spies of the american revolution: nathan hale, the revolution of 1800, role and concequences of the articles of confederation, the second american revolution: its impact and legacy, the impact of valley forge on the american revolution , analysis of the main causes of the american revolution, war on the colonies: french, indian war and american revolution, a history of the enlightenment inspired revolutions, a study of major revolution events in america, the american revolution: how women and wives influenced husbands and friends, main minuses of the articles of confederation, insurgency and asymmetric warfare in the american revolutionary war  , joseph plumb martin and his role in the revolutionary war, comparative analysis of revolutions in mexico and the united states, revolutionary mothers: women’s role in the american revolution.

22 March 1765 – 14 January 1784

Thirteen Colonies (United States)

Dutch Republic, France, Loyalist, Spain, United Kingdom, United States, American colonies

The Boston Tea Party (1773), The Battles of Lexington and Concord (1775), The Declaration of Independence (1776), The Battle of Saratoga (1777), The Siege of Yorktown (1781)

George Washington: As the commander-in-chief of the Continental Army, George Washington emerged as a central figure in the revolution. His strategic brilliance, perseverance, and moral character helped inspire and lead the troops through challenging times, ultimately leading to victory. Thomas Jefferson: Known for his eloquence and intellect, Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence. His ideas and ideals, including the belief in natural rights and self-governance, greatly influenced the revolutionary cause. Benjamin Franklin: A polymath and influential statesman, Benjamin Franklin played a vital role in rallying support for the revolution. He traveled to Europe as a diplomat, securing crucial aid from France and other countries, and his scientific discoveries further enhanced his reputation. John Adams: A passionate advocate for independence, John Adams was instrumental in driving the revolutionary movement forward. He served as a diplomat, including as a representative to France and as the second President of the United States, and his contributions to shaping the nation were significant. Abigail Adams: Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, was an influential figure in her own right. Her letters to her husband and other prominent figures provided valuable insights and perspectives on the revolution, and she became an early advocate for women's rights and equality.

In the 18th century, the thirteen American colonies were under British rule. Over time, tensions began to rise as the colonists developed a distinct identity and desired greater autonomy. Several key factors contributed to the buildup of resentment and ultimately led to the revolution. One crucial prerequisite was the concept of colonial self-government. The colonists enjoyed a degree of self-rule, which allowed them to develop their own institutions and local governments. However, as British policies, such as the Stamp Act and Townshend Acts, imposed new taxes and regulations on the colonies, the sense of self-government and individual liberties were threatened. Another significant factor was the Enlightenment era, which spread ideas of natural rights, individual freedoms, and representative government. Influential thinkers like John Locke and Thomas Paine advocated for the rights of the people and challenged the legitimacy of monarchy. The causes of the American Revolution were diverse and multifaceted. The colonists' grievances included taxation without representation, restrictions on trade, and the presence of British troops in the colonies. The Boston Massacre in 1770 and the Boston Tea Party in 1773 further heightened tensions and solidified the resolve for independence. Ultimately, the outbreak of armed conflict in 1775 at Lexington and Concord marked the beginning of the Revolutionary War. The Declaration of Independence, adopted on July 4, 1776, served as a powerful statement of the colonists' grievances and their determination to establish a free and sovereign nation. The historical context of the American Revolution reflects the culmination of colonial aspirations for self-government, Enlightenment ideas of individual rights, and a series of grievances against British rule.

Establishment of the United States as a sovereign nation; the creation of a new form of government based on democratic principles; adoption of the United States Constitution; redefinition of citizenship; abolition of feudalism; expansion of territorial boundaries, etc.

One of the major effects of the American Revolution was the establishment of a new form of government based on the principles of democracy and individual rights. The United States Constitution, born out of the revolution, served as a model for constitutional governments around the world. The idea of a government by the people and for the people spread, inspiring future revolutions and movements for independence. The revolution also challenged the existing colonial powers, particularly the British Empire, and set in motion a wave of decolonization throughout the world. The success of the American colonies in breaking free from British rule demonstrated that colonies could successfully achieve independence, fueling nationalist movements in other parts of the world and ultimately leading to the dissolution of empires. The American Revolution also had significant economic effects. It established the United States as a new economic power and opened up opportunities for trade and commerce. The revolution encouraged the development of industry and innovation, setting the stage for the industrial revolution that would follow. Furthermore, the American Revolution had a profound impact on the institution of slavery. While the revolution did not immediately abolish slavery, it planted the seeds of abolitionism and sparked debates on the issue of human rights and equality. Lastly, the American Revolution inspired and influenced subsequent revolutions and movements for independence, such as the French Revolution, which drew inspiration from the ideals of liberty, equality, and popular sovereignty championed by the American colonists.

Public opinion on the American Revolution varied greatly during the time period and continues to be interpreted differently today. In the 18th century, support for the revolution was not unanimous. Some colonists were loyal to the British Crown and opposed the revolutionary movement, while others actively supported the cause of independence. Public opinion shifted over time as events unfolded and more people became aware of the grievances and aspirations of the revolutionaries. Many colonists, especially those who felt oppressed by British policies, embraced the ideals of liberty, self-determination, and representation. They saw the revolution as a necessary step towards achieving these principles and securing their rights as free individuals. Others were motivated by economic factors, such as trade restrictions and taxation without representation, which fueled their support for independence. However, there were also segments of the population that remained loyal to Britain. Some believed in the benefits of British rule, such as protection and stability, while others feared the potential chaos and uncertainty that could result from a revolution. In modern times, public opinion on the American Revolution tends to be positive, with many viewing it as a pivotal moment in history that laid the foundation for democratic governance and individual freedoms. The ideals and principles that emerged from the revolution continue to shape American identity and influence public discourse on issues of liberty, equality, and self-governance.

1. The American Revolution lasted for eight years, from 1775 to 1783, making it one of the longest and most significant conflicts in American history. 2. The American Revolution had a profound impact on the world stage. It inspired other countries and movements seeking independence and democracy, such as the French Revolution that followed in 1789. 3. While often overlooked, women made significant contributions to the American Revolution. They served as spies, messengers, nurses, and even soldiers. Some notable examples include Deborah Sampson, who disguised herself as a man to join the Continental Army, and Abigail Adams, who advocated for women's rights.

The topic of the American Revolution holds immense importance for academic exploration and essay writing due to its profound impact on the world and the enduring legacy it left behind. Firstly, the American Revolution marked a pivotal moment in history where thirteen colonies fought for their independence from British rule, leading to the formation of the United States of America. It represents a significant event in the development of democracy and self-governance, serving as an inspiration for subsequent revolutions worldwide. Studying the American Revolution allows us to understand the principles and ideals that shaped the nation's foundation, such as liberty, equality, and the pursuit of happiness. It sheds light on the struggles and sacrifices made by individuals who fought for their rights and paved the way for the establishment of a democratic government. Furthermore, exploring this topic provides insights into the complexities of colonial society, the causes of the revolution, the role of key figures, and the social, economic, and political consequences of the conflict.

1. Bailyn, B. (1992). The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Belknap Press. 2. Ellis, J. J. (2013). American Creation: Triumphs and Tragedies at the Founding of the Republic. Vintage. 3. Ferling, J. E. (2015). Whirlwind: The American Revolution and the War That Won It. Bloomsbury Publishing. 4. Fischer, D. H. (2006). Washington's Crossing. Oxford University Press. 5. Maier, P. (1997). American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence. Vintage. 6. Middlekauff, R. (2005). The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789. Oxford University Press. 7. Middlekauff, R. (2007). The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789. Oxford University Press. 8. Nash, G. B. (2006). The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth of Democracy and the Struggle to Create America. Penguin Books. 9. Tuchman, B. W. (1989). The First Salute: A View of the American Revolution. Random House. 10. Wood, G. S. (1992). The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Vintage.

Relevant topics

• Manifest Destiny
• Westward Expansion
• Pearl Harbor
• Civil Rights Movement
• Industrial Revolution
• Great Depression
• Imperialism
• Frederick Douglass

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Thesis Statements

What is a thesis statement.

Your thesis statement is one of the most important parts of your paper.  It expresses your main argument succinctly and explains why your argument is historically significant.  Think of your thesis as a promise you make to your reader about what your paper will argue.  Then, spend the rest of your paper–each body paragraph–fulfilling that promise.

Your thesis should be between one and three sentences long and is placed at the end of your introduction.  Just because the thesis comes towards the beginning of your paper does not mean you can write it first and then forget about it.  View your thesis as a work in progress while you write your paper.  Once you are satisfied with the overall argument your paper makes, go back to your thesis and see if it captures what you have argued.  If it does not, then revise it.  Crafting a good thesis is one of the most challenging parts of the writing process, so do not expect to perfect it on the first few tries.  Successful writers revise their thesis statements again and again.

A successful thesis statement:

• makes an historical argument
• takes a position that requires defending
• is historically specific
• is focused and precise
• answers the question, “so what?”

How to write a thesis statement:

Suppose you are taking an early American history class and your professor has distributed the following essay prompt:

“Historians have debated the American Revolution’s effect on women.  Some argue that the Revolution had a positive effect because it increased women’s authority in the family.  Others argue that it had a negative effect because it excluded women from politics.  Still others argue that the Revolution changed very little for women, as they remained ensconced in the home.  Write a paper in which you pose your own answer to the question of whether the American Revolution had a positive, negative, or limited effect on women.”

Using this prompt, we will look at both weak and strong thesis statements to see how successful thesis statements work.

While this thesis does take a position, it is problematic because it simply restates the prompt.  It needs to be more specific about how  the Revolution had a limited effect on women and  why it mattered that women remained in the home.

Revised Thesis:  The Revolution wrought little political change in the lives of women because they did not gain the right to vote or run for office.  Instead, women remained firmly in the home, just as they had before the war, making their day-to-day lives look much the same.

This revision is an improvement over the first attempt because it states what standards the writer is using to measure change (the right to vote and run for office) and it shows why women remaining in the home serves as evidence of limited change (because their day-to-day lives looked the same before and after the war).  However, it still relies too heavily on the information given in the prompt, simply saying that women remained in the home.  It needs to make an argument about some element of the war’s limited effect on women.  This thesis requires further revision.

Strong Thesis: While the Revolution presented women unprecedented opportunities to participate in protest movements and manage their family’s farms and businesses, it ultimately did not offer lasting political change, excluding women from the right to vote and serve in office.

Few would argue with the idea that war brings upheaval.  Your thesis needs to be debatable:  it needs to make a claim against which someone could argue.  Your job throughout the paper is to provide evidence in support of your own case.  Here is a revised version:

Strong Thesis: The Revolution caused particular upheaval in the lives of women.  With men away at war, women took on full responsibility for running households, farms, and businesses.  As a result of their increased involvement during the war, many women were reluctant to give up their new-found responsibilities after the fighting ended.

Sexism is a vague word that can mean different things in different times and places.  In order to answer the question and make a compelling argument, this thesis needs to explain exactly what  attitudes toward women were in early America, and  how those attitudes negatively affected women in the Revolutionary period.

Strong Thesis: The Revolution had a negative impact on women because of the belief that women lacked the rational faculties of men. In a nation that was to be guided by reasonable republican citizens, women were imagined to have no place in politics and were thus firmly relegated to the home.

This thesis addresses too large of a topic for an undergraduate paper.  The terms “social,” “political,” and “economic” are too broad and vague for the writer to analyze them thoroughly in a limited number of pages.  The thesis might focus on one of those concepts, or it might narrow the emphasis to some specific features of social, political, and economic change.

Strong Thesis: The Revolution paved the way for important political changes for women.  As “Republican Mothers,” women contributed to the polity by raising future citizens and nurturing virtuous husbands.  Consequently, women played a far more important role in the new nation’s politics than they had under British rule.

This thesis is off to a strong start, but it needs to go one step further by telling the reader why changes in these three areas mattered.  How did the lives of women improve because of developments in education, law, and economics?  What were women able to do with these advantages?  Obviously the rest of the paper will answer these questions, but the thesis statement needs to give some indication of why these particular changes mattered.

Strong Thesis: The Revolution had a positive impact on women because it ushered in improvements in female education, legal standing, and economic opportunity.  Progress in these three areas gave women the tools they needed to carve out lives beyond the home, laying the foundation for the cohesive feminist movement that would emerge in the mid-nineteenth century.

Thesis Checklist

When revising your thesis, check it against the following guidelines:

• Does my thesis make an historical argument?
• Does my thesis take a position that requires defending?
• Is my thesis historically specific?
• Is my thesis focused and precise?
• Does my thesis answer the question, “so what?”

Download as PDF

6265 Bunche Hall Box 951473 University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095-1473 Phone: (310) 825-4601

Other Resources

• UCLA Library
• Faculty Intranet
• Department Forms
• Office 365 Email
• Remote Help

Campus Resources

• Maps, Directions, Parking
• Academic Calendar
• University of California
• Terms of Use

Social Sciences Division Departments

• Aerospace Studies
• African American Studies
• American Indian Studies
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Asian American Studies
• César E. Chávez Department of Chicana & Chicano Studies
• Communication
• Conservation
• Gender Studies
• Military Science
• Naval Science
• Political Science

American Revolution - List of Essay Samples And Topic Ideas

The American Revolution, a pivotal period from 1765 to 1783, led to the thirteen American colonies’ independence from British rule. Essays could delve into the various factors that contributed to the revolution, the key battles, and notable figures who played significant roles. They might also explore the ideological underpinnings of the revolutionaries, the impact of Enlightenment thought, and the subsequent formulation of a new governmental system. Discussions might further extend to the revolution’s global repercussions, its effect on American society, and the enduring legacy of the values and institutions established during this period. A vast selection of complimentary essay illustrations pertaining to American Revolution you can find in Papersowl database. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Women after the American Revolution

Although the Revolutionary War provided a new perspective of women’s roles in politics and the household, there was not lasting change after the end of the war. Coverture is the status that a woman is essentially property of her husband, and is to remain under his command. During the post-revolutionary era, ideas of coverture still existed in America, even if new rights given to women began to spark their want for equality. Before the American Revolution, women had a very […]

Was the American Revolution Really Revolutionary?

During the Age of Revolution (1774-1849), many revolutionary movements occurred in Europe and the Americas. One of the most revolutionary revolutions was the French Revolution, a period of social and political upheaval in France that resulted in an upswing of nationalism, as well as the decline of monarchies and the rise of Democracy. The entire political and social structure of France was overthrown as a result of The French Revolution, making it one of the most radical revolutions of its […]

Was the Revolutionary War Actually Revolutionary?

The Revolutionary War could perhaps be called the greatest thing to ever happen to us. But, was it really? Just how revolutionary was the Revolutionary War? Some may say it was extremely revolutionary but, was it even revolutionary at all? This subject is very contradictory to various groups of people . To some it was very revolutionary but to others at just a glance it was revolutionary but, once you take a deeper look you'd find it was not very […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Why was the American Revolution a Conservative Movement?

The American Revolution is often analyzed by historians as a conservative movement to maintain the status quo. However, the American Revolution was partially conservative and partially liberal, contributing to the nuance of the issue. Politically, the revolution was revolutionary because the governmental institutions that resulted from it were radically different than the inherited governmental systems of Great Britain. These governmental establishments amplified Enlightenment ideas and divided sovereignty (federalism), notably different from Britain’s political system. Additionally, the Bill of Rights was […]

Role of Women in the American Revolutionary War

The achievements of men usually overshadow the role of women in the history of America. However, women have been very important in establishing liberal America that people live in today. The accomplishments of women in the American revolutionary war is hardly reported in historical books. During the American Revolution (1775-1783), women played a role in a variety of ways, including the creation of organizations, becoming camp followers, and by gathering intelligence for the Patriot cause. One of the roles of […]

Nation-state Building in the United States

Nation-state Building in the United States from the American Revolution to the Civil War Era A major component of Nation-state building in the U.S included and started with westward expansion. There was a collective belief that God had foreordained the United States to cover the entire continent, thus began the territorial expansion of the U.S.; which was pursued under the doctrine of manifest destiny. The initial westward expansion conquest, beyond the original thirteen colonies, was the Ohio River Valley, but […]

Three Phases of American Revolution

What were the three phases of American revolution? What were the developments in the three phases of American revolution during the seventeenth century? How did the three phases of American revolution evolve? In 1754, war erupted on the North American continent which was known as the French and Indian War. The fighting lasted until 1763, when Britain and its colonists emerged victorious and seized nearly all French land in North America. The victory, however, only led to growing tensions between […]

Is the American Revolution Radical?

Radical is a word that means change. If something is radical it means a change has occurred. The American Revolution was a war that broke that began in 1775. There was conflict between the colonies and Great Britain. War broke out when the 13 colonies revolted against the Britain rulers. There were many events that made up the revolution. There was chaos all over the 13 colonies. The American revolution brought a lot of change and shaped a new nation. […]

A War of the Thirteen Colonies against Great Britain

Parliament's passage of the Intolerable Acts in 1774 intensified the conflict between the colonies and Great Britain. Americans came to the conclusion that the only solution to their dilemma with the British government was to sever all ties with it. The American Revolution was the radical breakthrough in which the thirteen colonies fought a war against Great Britain in order to become independent. The initiation that caused the American Revolution was the Lexington and Concord in which British troops and […]

The Major Trigger for the American Revolution

The French-Indian War was the major trigger for the American Revolution for independence also referred to as the Seven Years War', the conflict was between France and Great Britain with both countries believing they were the inhibitors of Ohio River Valley. Subsequent to the seven years of disputes and fights over the ownership, Britain won and took victory over the land (Thompson, 2017). Over the next 15 years, the French government yearned for revenge and recovery of its former colonies. […]

How the American Revolution had Influenced on France

The American Revolution had surfaced from the adversary between the British and the American colonists in the New World who were fighting desperately for their independence. The French and Indian War contributed greatly to this fight for independence, as the cost of the war was abundant and prompted the British to initiate harsh taxes on the American colonists, such as the Sugar Act. Along with the high costs, what additionally resulted from the French and Indian War was the French […]

MYP Individuals in Society

The American Revolution was a war that took place between 1775-1783. During this period of time, the British and the 13 colonies fought. Many soldiers and militiamen died either because of diseases, lack of supplies, natural disasters, or battles. The battle of Lexington and Concord was the battle that started the American Revolution. It all started on April 18 when British troops arrived at Boston. They proceeded to take the militia's goods. Luckily, Paul Revere, a patriot, warned the colonists […]

The American Revolution and the United States of America

The American Revolution was the true beginning of the United States of America. The colonists fought the British long and hard for seven years and gained their independence. Many people doubted the colonists, but they persevered and defeated one of the greatest armies in the world. This allowed the colonists to build a nation based off of four main principles: religious tolerance, economic opportunity, self-government, and individual liberty. In the early 1600's, many people began to migrate to the Americas […]

What Lead to the American Revolution

The American Revolution is a major part of our history today. Without the revolution, we would not be where we are today. The reason our country is what it is today is because of the American Revolution. America is its own country because of the revolution. The first settlers came over here in the name of England, but years after, we were fighting against them to become a separate nation. But it all had to start somewhere. What lead up […]

About Women in American Revolution

In our well-developed, better-than-ever society, we are still fighting for women's rights and equality between genders. Waiting for a police officer or a neurologist to arrive, we are usually surprised when we see a woman approaching. While reading an article about the death toll in the Syrian Civil War, we easily assume all late soldiers were males. Does this approach differ from the one that was two hundred and fifty years ago? The role of women was crucial during the […]

American Revolution in United States History

A profound turning point in United States history between the period of 1754-1800 was the American Revolution. It elevated recognition of social inequality, which drove some people and groups to call for the abolition of slavery and greater political democracy in the new state and national governments. This war can be understood in the historical context of Britain's threats to assert stricter authority over the North American colonies, through the imposition of taxes without representation in the British Parliament. This […]

An Eventful Time in American History

An eventful time in American History, full of pride, bloodshed, self-realization, and building of an independent nation. A nation was fought for and built, created things, the very things that make America the great country it is today. A rebellion would change the world, in a matter of nearly a decade of unrest and hostility. The rejection of the British Parliament's authority due to taxation, rising prices of many things needed to sustain life under British rule. Brought about a […]

The American People and the American Revolution

This essay will talk about the main point and details of the American Revolution and American People. Which is where the Americans get Independence from the British. The main topics that it will inform in this essay is the Second Continental Army, the Declaration of Independence, and the Surrender of Yorktown which were important events that lead to Independence of the Americans. Also what the British did to the Americans like taxation with the products they used a lot back […]

American Revolution: Series of Crisis

American Revolution was brought about by a series of crisis between the British colonizers and the Americans. The crisis was caused by various acts made by the colonizers to get taxes from the colonies. This was after the British government was involved in a war between French and Indians which took seven years. The war caused the government to be in a debt because of the soldiers who were employed to fight together with the British government. Imposition of sugar […]

The American Revolution

Role of slaves and Native Americans in the RevolutionThousands of African slaves and the Native American involvement in the fight for independence against the British colonial masters. Most of them were actively involved in the forefront of the war. They refused to stand aside and took the side of the war that they felt had an upper arm in winning and of course the one that offered better terms of their freedom when the war is won. The war was […]

The American Revolution and a Political and Social Partition

It would be agreed that for the British Colonists, the year of 1763 was seen as a great watershed in American History. On that note, throughout the years of 1756-1763, was a time period of salutary neglect that lead to the French and Indian war, in which the British called it the Seven Years War. At first it began as a local war in North America battled by the Colonists against the coalition of the French and Indians, however it […]

Western Constitutionalism and his Influence in the USA

One of the short stories of the West (the American one) appears before us as an exemplary, intense and exalting adventure. In an area of about nine and a half million square kilometers, a handful of men of disparate origins could make their new homeland, the first economic and political power of the planet by dint of determination, heroism and strength. The year 1607 was the year in which the first expeditions were made in Virginia, which did not find […]

About American Revolutionary War

More than two million people lived in the new thirteen original American colonies during the mid-1700s. Some were born naturally in the New World, while others moved to America to create a new home. Many immigrants left Great Britain to come to America. People left for various reasons like religious persecution, war, disease, famine, and some just wanted a fresh start. Many less than fortunate people sold themselves as indentured servants to the wealthy and in return they would receive […]

Many Reasons for the American Revolution

The American Revolution was a very interesting event in American History. It caused many great changes to the way we live. In my opinion, this topic is one of the most fascinating topics in American history because of the many complex pieces that come together to form the story of the revolution and the way that it has affected the way we live our lives today. Although there were many reasons for the American Revolution, a few of the major […]

The American Revolution and Society History

The American Revolution was the thirteen colonies fight for independence from Great Britain that began in 1775 in Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts. It is considered a revolution because it was the first successful economic and political reformation in a society that served to inspire worldwide revolutions. It occured after the French and Indian War (1745-1763) when a profound feeling of disunity and betrayal was felt among the colonies. During this time the British empire's expansion and large financial debt caused […]

How the American Revolution Led to the French Revolution

In the American Revolution, the thirteen colonies were able to gain independence from Great Britain and an important cause of the victory was the help of the French who made a major impact on the war and were allies of the colonists. They fought together closely and exchanged several ideas, which included thinking that led to the start of the American Revolution. After the war of almost eight years, there were many parts of French culture that had been affected […]

The American and the French Revolutions

The right of revolution was an idea proposed by Enlightenment Philosopher John Locke, which inspired and challenged the colonies in America and the people of France to revolt. Displeased with their current positions with their governments, they mustered up the courage and strength to challenge authority. Through their battles and hardships, both revolutions sought a government that mirrored the Enlightenment beliefs of natural rights, power of the people, and equality. With those goals in mind, they demonstrated the idea that […]

The American Patriots and the American Revolution

Throughout history, many revolutions have occurred and the reasonings behind them are many. Some of these revolutions occur because people want freedom. An example of this type of revolution would be the American Revolution. The American Revolution was a colonial revolt that took place in 1775 through 1783. The American Patriots in the Thirteen Colonies won independence from Great Britain, becoming the United States of America. They defeated the British in the American Revolutionary War which took place between 1775-1783 […]

American Revolution and Nathanael Greene

Nathanael Greene - Nathanael Greene was a Patriot Major General who had extreme military potential from a young age. He was born into a very faithful and determind Quaker family in Rhode Island. Nathanael Greene's family did not believe or agree with military goals. However he ended up choosing the milatary before his family's beliefs. He became the youngest Patriot brigadier general at the age of 34 and reached that rank in one year. Greene was in command of Boston […]

The Effect that the Enlightenment had on the American Revolution

The Declaration of independence, document declaring the US to be independent of the British Crown, signed by the congressional representatives of the Thirteen Colonies, including Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams, and ratified on July 4, 1776. This was just one of the first set of foundation to the united states. Second came the constitution. The Constitution of the United States is a document that embodies the fundamental laws and principles by which the United States is governed. It […]

Additional Example Essays

• Enlightenment and The French Revolution
• Was the French Revolution Successful
• Compare And Contrast In WW1 And WW2
• Why College Should Not Be Free
• Shakespeare's Hamlet Character Analysis
• A Raisin in the Sun Theme
• Logical Fallacies in Letter From Birmingham Jail
• How the Roles of Women and Men Were Portrayed in "A Doll's House"
• Martin Luther King Speech Evaluation
• A Rose for Emily Setting
• Abraham Lincoln and the Gettysburg Address
• Greek and Roman affects on Western Civilization

How To Write an Essay About American Revolution

Understanding the american revolution.

Before writing an essay about the American Revolution, it is crucial to understand its historical context and significance. The American Revolution, occurring from 1765 to 1783, was a pivotal event in which the Thirteen Colonies in North America won independence from Great Britain and formed the United States. Start by outlining the key events that led to the revolution, including the French and Indian War, the Stamp Act, the Boston Tea Party, and the Battles of Lexington and Concord. Familiarize yourself with the major figures involved, such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and King George III, and understand the ideological underpinnings of the revolution, including concepts of liberty, democracy, and taxation without representation. This foundational knowledge will provide a solid basis for your essay.

Developing a Focused Thesis Statement

A strong essay on the American Revolution should be centered around a clear, concise thesis statement. This statement should present a specific viewpoint or argument about the revolution. For example, you might argue that the American Revolution was primarily a political and ideological revolution rather than just a military conflict, or analyze the impact of the revolution on the development of American political thought. Your thesis will guide the direction of your essay and ensure a structured and coherent analysis.

Gathering Historical Evidence

To support your thesis, gather historical evidence from credible sources. This might include primary sources like letters, speeches, and contemporary accounts, as well as secondary sources like scholarly articles and history books. Analyze this evidence critically, considering the reliability and perspective of each source. Use this evidence to build your argument and provide depth to your analysis of the American Revolution.

Analyzing Key Events and Figures

Dedicate a section of your essay to analyzing key events and figures of the American Revolution. Discuss how these events were pivotal in the progress of the revolution and examine the roles and contributions of significant figures. For example, explore how the Declaration of Independence encapsulated the revolutionary ideals or how diplomatic efforts with foreign nations were crucial to the colonial victory. This analysis will help readers understand the complexities and nuances of the revolution.

Concluding the Essay

Conclude your essay by summarizing the main points of your discussion and restating your thesis in light of the evidence presented. Your conclusion should tie together your analysis and emphasize the significance of the American Revolution in shaping American history and identity. You might also want to reflect on the broader implications of the revolution, such as its impact on global politics or its legacy in contemporary America.

Reviewing and Refining Your Essay

After completing your essay, review and edit it for clarity and coherence. Ensure that your arguments are well-structured and supported by historical evidence. Check for grammatical accuracy and ensure that your essay flows logically from one point to the next. Consider seeking feedback from peers or instructors to further refine your essay. A well-crafted essay on the American Revolution will not only demonstrate your understanding of this pivotal event in history but also your ability to engage critically with historical narratives.

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.

• Essays on the American Revolution

In this Book

• Stephen G. Kurtz
• Published by: The University of North Carolina Press
• Series: Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia
• View Citation

Table of Contents

• Title page, Copyright
• pp. vii-viii
• Introduction
• 1. The Central Themes of the American Revolution: An Interpretation
• BERNARD BAILYN
• 2. An Uneasy Connection: An Analysis of the Preconditions of the American Revolution
• JACK P. GREENE
• 3. Violence and the American Revolution
• RICHARD MAXWELL BROWN
• 4. The American Revolution: The Military Conflict Considered as a Revolutionary War
• pp. 121-156
• 5. The Structure of Politics in the Continental Congress
• H. JAMES HENDERSON
• pp. 157-196
• 6. The Role of Religion in the Revolution: Liberty of Conscience and Cultural Cohesion in the New Nation
• WILLIAM G. McLOUGHLIN
• pp. 197-255
• 7. Feudalism, Communalism, and the Yeoman Freeholder: The American Revolution Considered as a Social Accident
• ROWLAND BERTHOFF AND JOHN M. MURRIN
• pp. 256-288
• 8. Conflict and Consensus in the American Revolution
• EDMUND S. MORGAN
• pp. 289-310
• pp. 311-318
• Notes on the Contributors
• pp. 319-320

Additional Information

Project MUSE Mission

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

©2024 Project MUSE. Produced by Johns Hopkins University Press in collaboration with The Sheridan Libraries.

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

Ask the publishers to restore access to 500,000+ books.

Send me an email reminder

By submitting, you agree to receive donor-related emails from the Internet Archive. Your privacy is important to us. We do not sell or trade your information with anyone.

Internet Archive Audio

• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

The American Revolution, 1774-1783

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

7 Favorites

Better World Books

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by station54.cebu on September 25, 2021

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

The Revolution

The foundations of the constitution: the american revolution begins, introduction.

Defining the American Revolution within its historical context is crucial to understanding its significance in the course of American history.

The American Revolution was a pivotal event that transformed the thirteen American colonies from subjects of the British Empire into an independent nation. This treatise aims to explore the multifaceted aspects of this revolution, from its causes and progression to its profound impact on American society and its enduring ideological legacy.

The thesis of this treatise is that the American Revolution was not merely a war for independence, but a complex and transformative movement driven by a combination of factors, including British colonial policies, Enlightenment ideas, socioeconomic tensions, and pivotal events that culminated in the Declaration of Independence . Its consequences reshaped the course of history, both domestically and internationally, leaving a lasting legacy of freedom and democracy.

Causes of the American Revolution

British colonial policy.

The American Revolution was shaped significantly by British colonial policies that engendered growing discontent among the colonists. Among these policies, taxation was a focal point of contention. The Stamp Act of 1765, which imposed taxes on various printed materials, and the Townshend Acts of 1767, which levied duties on imported goods, were met with vehement opposition.

In addition to taxation, the Navigation Acts imposed restrictions on colonial trade, compelling colonists to trade primarily with Britain and its territories. These policies not only stifled economic growth but also bred resentment among those who sought more economic autonomy.

Enlightenment Ideas and Philosophical Influences

The Enlightenment, a period marked by intellectual flourishing and the spread of rationalist ideas, played a pivotal role in fomenting revolutionary sentiments. Influential thinkers like John Locke, whose ideas on natural rights and government’s obligation to protect them, and Montesquieu, whose theories on the separation of powers, deeply influenced American colonists.

These Enlightenment ideals not only provided intellectual underpinnings for the American Revolution but also ignited the belief that self-governance and liberty were inalienable rights that the British government was infringing upon.

Socioeconomic Factors

The American colonies were characterized by economic disparities and class tensions. The elites of colonial society were discontented with British economic policies, which they saw as detrimental to their prosperity. At the same time, the colonial economy was intricately tied to trade and commerce, further fueling resentment when British regulations interfered with these economic activities.

The tensions between the colonial elite and the common people, many of whom were struggling economically, contributed to the revolutionary fervor. The quest for greater economic independence and opportunities played a significant role in the growing unrest.

Events Leading to Conflict

While tensions simmered over time, several events served as catalysts for the outbreak of open conflict. The Boston Massacre of 1770, in which British soldiers killed five colonists during a confrontation, intensified anti-British sentiment.

Further escalation occurred with the Boston Tea Party in 1773 when colonists, disguised as Mohawk Indians, boarded British ships and dumped chests of tea into Boston Harbor in protest of the Tea Act. These events marked a turning point, as they demonstrated the readiness of some colonists to use force to resist British authority.

American Revolution: From Rebellion to Independence

Initial responses to british policies.

The initial responses to British policies were marked by protests and resistance. Colonists organized themselves, forming Committees of Correspondence to exchange information and coordinate actions against British authorities. The First Continental Congress convened in 1774, bringing together representatives from twelve of the thirteen colonies to discuss grievances and strategies for collective action.

Outbreak of Armed Conflict

The armed conflict that would become the American Revolution began in earnest with the Battles of Lexington and Concord in April 1775. These skirmishes between colonial militia and British forces marked the first military engagements of the revolution. Paul Revere’s midnight ride and the contributions of figures like Sam Adams played crucial roles in alerting and rallying the colonial forces.

Declaration of Independence

The pivotal moment in the American Revolution arrived with the drafting and adoption of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Crafted primarily by Thomas Jefferson, the Declaration proclaimed the colonies’ intent to sever ties with Britain and outlined the philosophical foundations for their decision. It asserted the self-evident truths of equality and unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Military Campaigns and Key Figures

The subsequent years of the revolution were marked by a series of battles and campaigns, with George Washington emerging as a central figure. Key conflicts, such as the Battle of Saratoga and the Siege of Yorktown, significantly influenced the course of the war. The support of international allies, particularly the French, played a crucial role in securing American victory.

Impact of the American Revolution

Domestic changes.

The American Revolution ushered in significant changes within the newly independent nation. The colonies transitioned into states, each drafting its own constitution and establishing governments. The Articles of Confederation served as the first attempt at a national government but proved ineffective, eventually leading to the drafting of the United States Constitution in 1787.

International Consequences

The American Revolution had far-reaching consequences on the international stage. It served as an inspiration for other independence movements, most notably the French Revolution. The successful American bid for independence also reshaped global politics, altering alliances and diplomatic relationships.

Ideological Legacy

The revolution’s ideological legacy left an indelible mark on American society. The principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, including the belief in individual rights and limited government, influenced the framing of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The American Revolution set a precedent for democratic governance and the protection of citizens’ rights that continues to shape American political and social life.

Challenges and Controversies

Loyalists and divided loyalties.

While the American Revolution garnered support from many colonists, it also created significant divisions and challenges. Loyalists, those who remained loyal to the British Crown, faced hostility and persecution from patriots. The experiences of Loyalists during and after the revolution shed light on the complex nature of divided loyalties within colonial society.

Native Americans and African Americans

The American Revolution had varying impacts on different groups, including Native Americans and African Americans. Native American tribes faced choices regarding alliances and territorial disputes. Some tribes sided with the British, while others aligned with the American colonists.

The question of slavery also loomed large during the revolution. Despite the rhetoric of liberty and equality, slavery persisted in many parts of the newly formed United States, revealing a stark contrast between the revolutionary ideals and the realities of racial inequality.

Women’s Contributions

Women played significant but often overlooked roles during the American Revolution. Figures like Abigail Adams, who corresponded with her husband John Adams about women’s rights and the need for legal protections, made important contributions to the revolutionary discourse. Women also supported the war effort as nurses, spies, and in various other roles, demonstrating their commitment to the cause of independence.

In conclusion, the American Revolution was a transformative and multifaceted movement that reshaped the course of history. It emerged as a response to a combination of factors, including oppressive British colonial policies, the influence of Enlightenment ideas, socioeconomic tensions, and pivotal events that culminated in the Declaration of Independence.

The consequences of the revolution were profound. Domestically, it led to the formation of a new nation with a unique system of government. The United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights reflected the revolutionary principles of individual rights and limited government, setting a precedent for democratic governance.

Internationally, the American Revolution inspired other independence movements and shifted the geopolitical landscape. It contributed to the emergence of the United States as a global player.

However, the revolution also brought forth challenges and controversies, such as the treatment of Loyalists, the complex relationships with Native Americans, the persistence of slavery, and the struggle for women’s rights.

Ultimately, the American Revolution’s legacy endures. It serves as a testament to the enduring power of ideas and the capacity of a determined people to shape their own destiny. The principles of liberty, equality, and self-determination continue to be central to the American identity and its role on the global stage.

Frequently Asked Questions about the American Revolution?

The American Revolution was driven by a complex interplay of factors. One of the primary causes was British colonial policies that imposed heavy taxation, such as the Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts, and restricted colonial trade through the Navigation Acts. These policies angered the colonists, who believed they were being unfairly taxed without representation in the British Parliament.

Enlightenment ideas also played a significant role. The works of thinkers like John Locke and Montesquieu, which emphasized individual rights and the separation of powers, influenced American colonists and fueled their desire for self-determination.

Socioeconomic factors cannot be overlooked. Economic disparities and tensions between the colonial elite and common people contributed to revolutionary sentiments. Many colonists sought greater economic autonomy and opportunities for growth.

The outbreak of armed conflict, triggered by events like the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party, further escalated tensions, pushing the colonists towards rebellion.

The American Revolution saw the emergence of several key figures who played pivotal roles in shaping its course.

George Washington: George Washington is often regarded as the father of the nation. He served as the commander-in-chief of the Continental Army and played a crucial role in leading the colonists to victory.

Thomas Jefferson: Thomas Jefferson is best known for drafting the Declaration of Independence, which articulated the colonists’ desire for independence and their belief in fundamental human rights.

Benjamin Franklin: Franklin was a polymath who made significant diplomatic contributions to the revolutionary cause. He helped secure French support, which proved vital to the American victory.

John Adams: John Adams was a key advocate for independence and played a critical role in the Continental Congress. He later became the second President of the United States.

Abigail Adams: While not a political leader, Abigail Adams deserves mention for her letters to her husband John Adams. Her correspondence highlighted the importance of women’s rights and their contributions to the revolution.

These figures, among others, shaped the American Revolution and the subsequent founding of the United States.

The American Revolution had profound and lasting impacts on American society. One of the most significant changes was the transition from colonies to states. Each state drafted its own constitution and established its government. However, the initial attempt at a national government under the Articles of Confederation proved ineffective, leading to the adoption of the United States Constitution in 1787.

The revolution also brought about a heightened sense of national identity among Americans, as they now saw themselves as citizens of a single nation rather than subjects of a distant monarchy.

Ideologically, the principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, such as individual rights and limited government, influenced the framing of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This set the stage for the development of American democracy and the protection of citizens’ rights.

Economically, the revolution disrupted trade relationships with Britain but opened new possibilities for commerce and expansion within the United States.

While women’s roles in the American Revolution are often overlooked, they made significant contributions to the revolutionary cause. Women were actively involved in various capacities:

Spies: Some women acted as spies, gathering intelligence and passing on crucial information to the Continental Army. One notable spy was Lydia Darragh, who provided valuable information to George Washington.

Nurses and Medics: Women worked as nurses and medics, tending to wounded soldiers on the battlefield and in military hospitals.

Suppliers and Supporters: Women contributed by sewing uniforms, knitting socks, and preparing supplies for the troops. They also ran households and farms in the absence of male family members who were away fighting.

Ideological Contributions: Women like Abigail Adams wrote letters and engaged in intellectual discourse, advocating for women’s rights and highlighting the revolutionary ideals of liberty and equality.

Despite the limitations placed on their roles in society at the time, women played an integral part in supporting the American Revolution, and their contributions paved the way for discussions about gender equality in the years that followed.

Loyalists, those who remained loyal to the British Crown during the American Revolution, faced significant challenges and hardships. They were often subjected to persecution, harassment, and even violence by Patriots who viewed them as traitors. Loyalists had their properties confiscated, and some were forced to flee to British-controlled territories. After the war, many Loyalists faced difficulties reintegrating into American society, and some chose to emigrate to other British colonies, such as Canada.

The American Revolution had varied effects on Native American tribes. Some tribes supported the British, hoping that a British victory would prevent American expansion into their lands. Others, like the Oneida and Tuscarora, allied with the American colonists. The revolution ultimately led to territorial disputes, loss of land, and disruptions to Native American communities. The Treaty of Paris in 1783, which ended the war, did not protect Native American interests, and many tribes faced significant challenges in the post-revolutionary period.

Yes, slavery played a complex role in the American Revolution. While the revolution was motivated by ideals of liberty and equality, slavery continued to exist in many parts of the newly formed United States. Some enslaved individuals sought freedom by joining the British or Continental Army, where they were promised emancipation in exchange for their service. However, the institution of slavery persisted in many states, and the issue of slavery remained a contentious and divisive one in the years following the revolution. The contradiction between the revolutionary ideals of freedom and the reality of slavery would eventually lead to the abolitionist movement and the Civil War.

The American Revolution served as a source of inspiration for other independence movements globally. The successful rebellion against a colonial power demonstrated that it was possible to achieve independence and self-determination. Perhaps the most notable example is the French Revolution, which was heavily influenced by American revolutionary ideals and the Enlightenment. The French Revolution, in turn, inspired independence movements in Latin America, Haiti, and other regions. The American Revolution’s impact on the world stage extended beyond its own borders, contributing to a wave of movements seeking freedom and self-governance in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

International allies played a significant role in the American Revolution. The most notable ally was France, which provided critical military and financial support to the American colonists. The French Navy and troops, under General Rochambeau, played pivotal roles in the Siege of Yorktown, a decisive battle in the American Revolution. Additionally, Spain and the Netherlands offered support at various stages of the conflict. These international alliances helped tip the balance in favor of the American colonists and contributed significantly to their victory.

The American Revolution fundamentally altered the relationship between the United States and Britain. Prior to the revolution, the American colonies were British subjects. However, after gaining independence, the United States became a sovereign nation. The Treaty of Paris in 1783 formally recognized the independence of the United States and established the boundaries of the new nation. While the two countries eventually developed diplomatic relations, the legacy of the revolution left a lasting impact on their relationship, shaping their interactions on political, economic, and cultural fronts for years to come.

The American Revolution had profound and long-term consequences for American democracy. The revolutionary ideals of liberty, equality, and self-determination were enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and later reflected in the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These documents laid the foundation for American democracy, emphasizing individual rights, the rule of law, and limited government. The revolution set a precedent for democratic governance and became a touchstone for discussions on citizenship, civil liberties, and political participation. It continues to influence American political and social life, shaping debates and policies to this day.

The enduring legacy of the American Revolution in contemporary America is vast and multifaceted. It includes the establishment of a democratic republic with a system of checks and balances, a commitment to individual rights and freedoms, and the protection of civil liberties through the Bill of Rights. The revolution’s ideals continue to inspire political discourse, activism, and advocacy for social justice. Additionally, the American Revolution’s impact on international politics is seen in its influence on global movements for independence and self-determination. The revolution remains a source of national pride and identity, celebrated through holidays like Independence Day. Its legacy serves as a reminder of the enduring power of revolutionary ideas and the capacity of a determined people to shape their own destiny.

American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

The American Revolution was the war between the British Crown and American colonies, which led to the formation of the independent United States. The American Revolution was an attempt to rewrite the norms of a daily life and to break away from monarchial system that guided both personal and political behavior. The beginning of the American Revolution can be traced back to the 1763 when the British Government began to reassert control over its American colonies. During this period, the British government was fighting to protect its colonies from its French and Native enemies.

As a result, British Government Pursued policies of the kind embodied in the proclamation of the 1763 and the Quebec act that gave Quebec the right to many Indian lands claimed by the American colonists to ensure future domestic tranquility (Sidney 54). Besides the Quebec act, The British Government also began to institute new taxes and enforce old ones in order to pay for its wartime expenses.

Many colonists opposed the new policies implemented by the British government as they felt that the British government was taking away their right and powers. This paper seeks to discuss the key rights and powers that the American believed were being taken way by the British Crown. The paper will also provide the evidences the colonist had to support their beliefs.

The key rights and powers that Americans believed were being taken away by the British government

While reasserting control over its American colonies in 1763, British government came up with various policies. Many Americans felt that these policies were taking way their rights and powers. The key rights and powers that the Americans believed were being taken away include the rights and powers to own land, and the right to pay taxes.

The right and power to own land

When the British government came up with the proclamation of 1763, many colonists felt that the British government was violating their fundamental rights. In regards to the proclamation of the 1763, the British government forbade settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains in an attempt to secure peace with powerful Native Americans neighbors. However, Colonists reacted to this policy in different ways. In their views, the proclamation of 1763 was the first of many imperial insults.

Many colonists believed that the Britsh Crown was taking away their key rights and powers to own land. As a matter of fact, when the British Crown came up with the proclamation of 1763, many eastern and western farmers were frustrated. Colonists felt that such actions cut off opportunities for land speculators and western farmers, many of whom were already coveting or squatting on these lands. From the vantage point of the colonialists, the British government seemed to be sacrificing the ambitions of the colonialist in favor of the Indians.

The colonialist, therefore, felt that the Crown was taking away their right to possess lands and giving them to Indians. As a result, colonists responded to the proclamation of 1763 and other new policies of the British crown through the written word. Sidney (89) reveals that the colonists wrote petitions, public letters, broadsides, and sermons. According to Sidney (90), the colonist sang songs, wrote poetries, and otherwise voiced their displeasures with the British crown and their growing desire of independence. The struggles over lands predated the revolution by more than a century, and they shaped the participation of white settlers and Native Americans during the war.

The Burden Taxes

Besides, the proclamation of 1763, the colonists also disputed the new tax policies that the British government implemented. When the crown implemented the new taxes, Americans took to the streets to protest them, and for more than a decade, they signed petitions to claim their liberties as loyal English citizens. For instance, the colonial response to the stamp act and sugar act demonstrated the power of the masses.

Many Bostonians took to the street in august 1765 to protest the new tax on stamps used for legal documents. The angry protestors destroyed the personal property of the stamp distributor for the colony and then hanged and beheaded him in effigy. The outrage spread throughout the colonies, as indebted colonists were now facing greater fees after they were taken to court.

Colonists were expressing their dissatisfaction with the tax policies because they felt that the stamp act and the sugar act violated the rights of levying taxes conferred by charter solely upon the state legislature. Tandem to this, the colonist had no direct representation in the British parliament, thus, they felt that it was unfair for them to be subject taxation without representation (Sidney 130).

In fact, Americans believed that the new tax policies demonstrated that the British government was not acting precipitately. Colonists saw that the government had no intentions to subvert colonial liberties but merely to raise revenue in the most expeditious and least burdensome manner possible.

Colonist’s dissatisfaction with the new tax system could also be witnessed four months later after the Boston riot. Many frustrated colonists engaged in similar public protest in all of the other colonies. Protestors from Carolina also demonstrated their opposition to the tax policy as well as their solidarity with protestors from Boston.

Small farmers and herders in the colonial backcountry similarly voiced their frustrations through various act of civil unrest. Because of the protests, many stamp distributors resigned forcing the British Crown to repeal the tax act (Goldfield, et al. 80). This protest had apparently made the Colonists intention clear. Obviously, they believed that the Crown was taking away their legal rights by implementing new tax laws.

The general warrants

Besides the burden tax, the British Crown had also issued a general warrant that allowed the British to search homes and seize property without specific search warrants. Many colonists felt that the British government was violating their personal rights. Therefore, they decided to oppose this act by demonstrating on the streets.

Tandem to this, the quartering of the British troops in personal homes, without the consent of the owners, was also a source of dislike towards the British Crown. From these three perspectives, one can justify that the American Revolution was fundamentally conservative as many colonists were fighting to protect the rights and powers they had.

Conclusively, According to Sidney (234), the dispute was waged over the nature of the British constitution and the rights of subject; the goals of the colonist were to reform the British Empire, not to withdraw from it. In fact, the colonists did not see themselves as revolutionaries; they saw themselves as English citizens who were only defending their rights to own properties. Therefore, in response to British action, the colonist established a continental congress in 1774 to organize their resistance effort and coordinate their policies towards the crown (Goldfield, et al. 89).

Works Cited

Goldfield, David, et al . American Journey: A History of The United States. 2nd Ed. Vol. 2 Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Publishers, 2011. Print.

Sidney, Barclay. American Revolution . Charleston, SC: BiblioLife Publishers, 2009. Print.

• Gilded Age and Progressive Era Freedom Challenges
• American History From Reconstruction to World War I
• Literature Analysis of Faulkner Journeys
• Cancellation and Termination of Contract
• Feminist Contributions to Understanding Women’s Lives
• Women Status after the American Revolution
• Slavery and the Abolition of Slave Trade
• the Principle of Term Limits for Members of Congress
• The Movie "GLORY 1989" by Edward Zwick Analysis
• The Grave Injustices of the Salem Witchcraft Trials
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, May 2). American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-american-revolution-essay/

"American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers." IvyPanda , 2 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/the-american-revolution-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers'. 2 May.

IvyPanda . 2020. "American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers." May 2, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-american-revolution-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers." May 2, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-american-revolution-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "American Revolution: Reclaiming Rights and Powers." May 2, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-american-revolution-essay/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Top of page

Presentation U.S. History Primary Source Timeline

Until the end of the Seven Years' War in 1763, few colonists in British North America objected to their place in the British Empire. Colonists in British America reaped many benefits from the British imperial system and bore few costs for those benefits. Indeed, until the early 1760s, the British mostly left their American colonies alone. The Seven Years' War (known in the United States as the French and Indian War) changed everything. Although Britain eventually achieved victory over France and its allies, victory had come at great cost. A staggering war debt influenced many British policies over the next decade. Attempts to raise money by reforming colonial administration, enforcing tax laws, and placing troops in America led directly to conflict with colonists. By the mid-1770s, relations between Americans and the British administration had become strained and acrimonious.

The first shots of what would become the war for American independence were fired in April 1775. For some months before that clash at Lexington and Concord, patriots had been gathering arms and powder and had been training to fight the British if that became necessary. General Thomas Gage, commander of British forces around Boston, had been cautious; he did not wish to provoke the Americans. In April, however, Gage received orders to arrest several patriot leaders, rumored to be around Lexington. Gage sent his troops out on the night of April 18, hoping to catch the colonists by surprise and thus to avoid bloodshed. When the British arrived in Lexington, however, colonial militia awaited them. A fire fight soon ensued. Even so, it was not obvious that this clash would lead to war. American opinion was split. Some wanted to declare independence immediately; others hoped for a quick reconciliation. The majority of Americans remained undecided but watching and waiting.

In June 1775, the Continental Congress created, on paper, a Continental Army and appointed George Washington as Commander. Washington's first task, when he arrived in Boston to take charge of the ragtag militia assembled there, was to create an army in fact. It was a daunting task with no end of problems: recruitment, retention, training and discipline, supply, and payment for soldiers' services were among those problems. Nevertheless, Washington realized that keeping an army in the field was his single most important objective.

During the first two years of the Revolutionary War, most of the fighting between the patriots and British took place in the north. At first, the British generally had their way because of their far superior sea power. Despite Washington's daring victories at Trenton and Princeton, New Jersey, in late 1776 and early 1777, the British still retained the initiative. Indeed, had British efforts been better coordinated, they probably could have put down the rebellion in 1777. But such was not to be. Patriot forces, commanded by General Horatio Gates, achieved a significant victory at Saratoga, New York, in October 1777. Within months, this victory induced France to sign treaties of alliance and commerce with the United States. In retrospect, French involvement was the turning point of the war, although that was not obvious at the time.

Between 1778 and 1781, British military operations focused on the south because the British assumed a large percentage of Southerners were loyalists who could help them subdue the patriots. The British were successful in most conventional battles fought in that region, especially in areas close to their points of supply on the Atlantic coast. Even so, American generals Nathanael Greene and Daniel Morgan turned to guerrilla and hit-and-run warfare that eventually stymied the British. By 1781, British General Lord Charles Cornwallis was ordered to march into Virginia to await resupply near Chesapeake Bay. The Americans and their French allies pounced on Cornwallis and forced his surrender.

Yorktown was a signal victory for the patriots, but two years of sporadic warfare, continued military preparations, and diplomatic negotiations still lay ahead. The Americans and British signed a preliminary peace treaty on November 30, 1782; they signed the final treaty, known as the Peace of Paris, on September 10, 1783. The treaty was generally quite favorable to the United States in terms of national boundaries and other concessions. Even so, British violations of the agreement would become an almost constant source of irritation between the two nations far into the future.

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

Setting the stage: The two armies

• Conflict begins in Massachusetts
• Paul Revere’s ride and the Battles of Lexington and Concord
• The Siege of Boston and the Battle of Bunker Hill
• Washington takes command
• The battle for New York
• A British general surrenders, and the French prepare for war
• After a hungry winter at Valley Forge
• Setbacks in the North
• Final campaigns in the South and the surrender of Cornwallis
• Early engagements and privateers
• French intervention and the decisive action at Virginia Capes
• The end of the war and the terms of the Peace of Paris (1783)
• How did the American colonies win the war?

What was the American Revolution?

How did the american revolution begin, what were the major causes of the american revolution, which countries fought on the side of the colonies during the american revolution, how was the american revolution a civil war.

American Revolution

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Econlib - Benefits of the American Revolution: An Exploration of Positive Externalities
• Boston Tea Party Ships and Museum - American Revolution
• American Battlefield Trust - American Revolution Timeline
• Humanities LibreTexts - American Revolution
• University of Oxford - Faculty of History - American Revolutions
• American Revolution - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• American Revolution - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

The American Revolution —also called the U.S. War of Independence—was the insurrection fought between 1775 and 1783 through which 13 of Great Britain ’s North American colonies threw off British rule to establish the sovereign United States of America, founded with the Declaration of Independence in 1776. British attempts to assert greater control over colonial affairs after a long period of salutary neglect , including the imposition of unpopular taxes, had contributed to growing estrangement between the crown and a large and influential segment of colonists who ultimately saw armed rebellion as their only recourse.

On the ground, fighting in the American Revolution began with the skirmishes between British regulars and American provincials on April 19, 1775 , first at Lexington , where a British force of 700 faced 77 local minutemen , and then at Concord , where an American counterforce of 320 to 400 sent the British scurrying. The British had come to Concord to seize the military stores of the colonists, who had been forewarned of the raid through efficient lines of communication—including the ride of Paul Revere , which is celebrated with poetic license in Longfellow ’s “Paul Revere’s Ride” (1861).  

The American Revolution was principally caused by colonial opposition to British attempts to impose greater control over the colonies and to make them repay the crown for its defense of them during the French and Indian War (1754–63). Britain did this primarily by imposing a series of deeply unpopular laws and taxes, including the Sugar Act (1764), the Stamp Act (1765), and the so-called Intolerable Acts (1774).

Until early in 1778, the American Revolution was a civil war within the British Empire , but it became an international war as France (in 1778) and Spain (in 1779) joined the colonies against Britain. The Netherlands , which was engaged in its own war with Britain, provided financial support for the Americans as well as official recognition of their independence. The French navy in particular played a key role in bringing about the British surrender at Yorktown , which effectively ended the war.

In the early stages of the rebellion by the American colonists, most of them still saw themselves as English subjects who were being denied their rights as such. “Taxation without representation is tyranny,” James Otis reportedly said in protest of the lack of colonial representation in Parliament . What made the American Revolution look most like a civil war , though, was the reality that about one-third of the colonists, known as loyalists (or Tories), continued to support and fought on the side of the crown.

The American Revolution was an insurrection carried out by 13 of Great Britain ’s North American colonies that began in 1775 and ended with a peace treaty in 1783. The colonies won political independence and went on to form the United States of America . The war followed more than a decade of growing estrangement between the British crown and a large and influential segment of its North American colonies that was caused by British attempts to assert greater control over colonial affairs after having long adhered to a policy of salutary neglect .

Until early in 1778 the conflict was a civil war within the British Empire , but afterward it became an international war as France (in 1778) and Spain (in 1779) joined the colonies against Britain . Meanwhile, the Netherlands , which provided both official recognition of the United States and financial support for it, was engaged in its own war against Britain ( see Anglo-Dutch Wars ). From the beginning, sea power was vital in determining the course of the war, lending to British strategy a flexibility that helped compensate for the comparatively small numbers of troops sent to America and ultimately enabling the French to help bring about the final British surrender at Yorktown in 1781.

The American colonies fought the war on land with essentially two types of organization: the Continental (national) Army and the state militias . The total number of the former provided by quotas from the states throughout the conflict was 231,771 soldiers, and the militias totaled 164,087. At any given time, however, the American forces seldom numbered over 20,000; in 1781 there were only about 29,000 insurgents under arms throughout the country. The war was therefore one fought by small field armies. Militias, poorly disciplined and with elected officers, were summoned for periods usually not exceeding three months. The terms of Continental Army service were only gradually increased from one to three years, and not even bounties and the offer of land kept the army up to strength. Reasons for the difficulty in maintaining an adequate Continental force included the colonists’ traditional antipathy toward regular armies, the objections of farmers to being away from their fields, the competition of the states with the Continental Congress to keep men in the militia , and the wretched and uncertain pay in a period of inflation .

By contrast, the British army was a reliable steady force of professionals. Since it numbered only about 42,000, heavy recruiting programs were introduced. Many of the enlisted men were farm boys, as were most of the Americans, while others came from cities where they had been unable to find work. Still others joined the army to escape fines or imprisonment. The great majority became efficient soldiers as a result of sound training and ferocious discipline . The officers were drawn largely from the gentry and the aristocracy and obtained their commissions and promotions by purchase. Though they received no formal training, they were not so dependent on a book knowledge of military tactics as were many of the Americans. British generals, however, tended toward a lack of imagination and initiative , while those who demonstrated such qualities often were rash.

Because troops were few and conscription unknown, the British government, following a traditional policy, purchased about 30,000 troops from various German princes. The Lensgreve (landgrave) of Hesse furnished approximately three-fifths of that total. Few acts by the crown roused so much antagonism in America as that use of foreign mercenaries .

THE AMERICAN YAWP

5. the american revolution.

Paul Revere, Landing of the Troops, c. 1770. Courtesy American Antiquarian Society . Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.

*The American Yawp is an evolving, collaborative text. Please click  here  to improve this chapter.*

I. Introduction

Ii. the origins of the american revolution, iii. the causes of the american revolution, iv. independence, v. the war for independence, vi. the consequences of the american revolution, vii. conclusion, viii. primary sources, ix. reference material.

In the 1760s, Benjamin Rush, a native of Philadelphia, recounted a visit to Parliament. Upon seeing the king’s throne in the House of Lords, Rush said he “felt as if he walked on sacred ground” with “emotions that I cannot describe.” 1 Throughout the eighteenth century, colonists had developed significant emotional ties with both the British monarchy and the British constitution. The British North American colonists had just helped to win a world war and most, like Rush, had never been more proud to be British. And yet, in a little over a decade, those same colonists would declare their independence and break away from the British Empire. Seen from 1763, nothing would have seemed as improbable as the American Revolution.

The Revolution built institutions and codified the language and ideas that still define Americans’ image of themselves. Moreover, revolutionaries justified their new nation with radical new ideals that changed the course of history and sparked a global “age of revolution.” But the Revolution was as paradoxical as it was unpredictable. A revolution fought in the name of liberty allowed slavery to persist. Resistance to centralized authority tied disparate colonies ever closer together under new governments. The revolution created politicians eager to foster republican selflessness and protect the public good but also encouraged individual self-interest and personal gain. The “founding fathers” instigated and fought a revolution to secure independence from Britain, but they did not fight that revolution to create a “democracy.” To successfully rebel against Britain, however, required more than a few dozen “founding fathers.” Common colonists joined the fight, unleashing popular forces that shaped the Revolution itself, often in ways not welcomed by elite leaders. But once unleashed, these popular forces continued to shape the new nation and indeed the rest of American history.

The American Revolution had both long-term origins and short-term causes. In this section, we will look broadly at some of the long-term political, intellectual, cultural, and economic developments in the eighteenth century that set the context for the crisis of the 1760s and 1770s.

Between the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the middle of the eighteenth century, Britain had largely failed to define the colonies’ relationship to the empire and institute a coherent program of imperial reform. Two factors contributed to these failures. First, Britain was at war from the War of the Spanish Succession at the start of the century through the Seven Years’ War in 1763. Constant war was politically consuming and economically expensive. Second, competing visions of empire divided British officials. Old Whigs and their Tory supporters envisioned an authoritarian empire, based on conquering territory and extracting resources. They sought to eliminate Britain’s growing national debt by raising taxes and cutting spending on the colonies. The radical (or patriot) Whigs based their imperial vision on trade and manufacturing instead of land and resources. They argued that economic growth, not raising taxes, would solve the national debt. Instead of an authoritarian empire, “patriot Whigs” argued that the colonies should have equal status with the mother country. There were occasional attempts to reform the administration of the colonies, but debate between the two sides prevented coherent reform. 2

Colonists developed their own understanding of how they fit into the empire. They saw themselves as British subjects “entitled to all the natural, essential, inherent, and inseparable rights of our fellow subjects in Great-Britain.” The eighteenth century brought significant economic and demographic growth in the colonies. This success, they believed, resulted partly from Britain’s hands-off approach to the colonies, an approach that has been called salutary neglect. By midcentury, colonists believed that they held a special place in the empire, which justified Britain’s hands-off policy. In 1764, James Otis Jr. wrote, “The colonists are entitled to as ample rights, liberties, and privileges as the subjects of the mother country are, and in some respects to more .” 3

In this same period, the colonies developed their own local political institutions. Samuel Adams, in the Boston Gazette , described the colonies as each being a “separate body politic” from Britain. Almost immediately upon each colony’s settlement, they created a colonial assembly. These assemblies assumed many of the same duties as the Commons exercised in Britain, including taxing residents, managing the spending of the colonies’ revenue, and granting salaries to royal officials. In the early 1700s, colonial leaders unsuccessfully lobbied the British government to define their assemblies’ legal prerogatives, but Britain was too occupied with European wars. In the first half of the eighteenth century, royal governors tasked by the Board of Trade attempted to limit the power of the assemblies, but the assemblies’ power only grew. Many colonists came to see their assemblies as having the same jurisdiction over them that Parliament exercised over those in England. They interpreted British inaction as justifying their tradition of local governance. The Crown and Parliament, however, disagreed. 4

Political culture in the colonies also developed differently than that of the mother country. In both Britain and the colonies, land was the key to political participation, but because land was more easily obtained in the colonies, a higher proportion of male colonists participated in politics. Colonial political culture drew inspiration from the “country” party in Britain. These ideas—generally referred to as the ideology of republicanism—stressed the corrupting nature of power and the need for those involved in self-governing to be virtuous (i.e., putting the “public good” over their own self-interest). Patriots would need to be ever vigilant against the rise of conspiracies, centralized control, and tyranny. Only a small fringe in Britain held these ideas, but in the colonies, they were widely accepted. 5

In the 1740s, two seemingly conflicting bodies of thought—the Enlightenment and the Great Awakening—began to combine in the colonies and challenge older ideas about authority. Perhaps no single philosopher had a greater impact on colonial thinking than John Locke. In his Essay Concerning Human Understanding , Locke argued that the mind was originally a tabula rasa (or blank slate) and that individuals were formed primarily by their environment. The aristocracy then were wealthy or successful because they had greater access to wealth, education, and patronage and not because they were innately superior. Locke followed this essay with Some Thoughts Concerning Education , which introduced radical new ideas about the importance of education. Education would produce rational human beings capable of thinking for themselves and questioning authority rather than tacitly accepting tradition. These ideas slowly came to have far-reaching effects in the colonies and, later, the new nation.

At the same time that Locke’s ideas about knowledge and education spread in North America, the colonies also experienced an unprecedented wave of evangelical Protestant revivalism. Between 1739 and 1740, the Rev. George Whitefield, an enigmatic, itinerant preacher, traveled the colonies preaching Calvinist sermons to huge crowds. Unlike the rationalism of Locke, his sermons were designed to appeal to his listeners’ emotions. Whitefield told his listeners that salvation could only be found by taking personal responsibility for one’s own unmediated relationship with God, a process that came to be known as a “conversion” experience. He also argued that the current Church hierarchies populated by “unconverted” ministers only stood as a barrier between the individual and God. In his wake, new traveling preachers picked up his message and many congregations split. Both Locke and Whitefield had empowered individuals to question authority and to take their lives into their own hands.

In other ways, eighteenth-century colonists were becoming more culturally similar to Britons, a process often referred to as Anglicization. As colonial economies grew, they quickly became an important market for British manufacturing exports. Colonists with disposable income and access to British markets attempted to mimic British culture. By the middle of the eighteenth century, middling-class colonists could also afford items previously thought of as luxuries like British fashions, dining wares, and more. The desire to purchase British goods meshed with the desire to enjoy British liberties. 6 These political, intellectual, cultural, and economic developments built tensions that rose to the surface when, after the Seven Years’ War, Britain finally began to implement a program of imperial reform that conflicted with colonists’ understanding of the empire and their place in it.

Most immediately, the American Revolution resulted directly from attempts to reform the British Empire after the Seven Years’ War. The Seven Years’ War culminated nearly a half century of war between Europe’s imperial powers. It was truly a world war, fought between multiple empires on multiple continents. At its conclusion, the British Empire had never been larger. Britain now controlled the North American continent east of the Mississippi River, including French Canada. It had also consolidated its control over India. But the realities and responsibilities of the postwar empire were daunting. War (let alone victory) on such a scale was costly. Britain doubled the national debt to 13.5 times its annual revenue. Britain faced significant new costs required to secure and defend its far-flung empire, especially the western frontiers of the North American colonies. These factors led Britain in the 1760s to attempt to consolidate control over its North American colonies, which, in turn, led to resistance.

King George III took the crown in 1760 and brought Tories into his government after three decades of Whig rule. They represented an authoritarian vision of empire in which colonies would be subordinate. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was Britain’s first major postwar imperial action targeting North America. The king forbade settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains in an attempt to limit costly wars with Native Americans. Colonists, however, protested and demanded access to the territory for which they had fought alongside the British.

In 1764, Parliament passed two more reforms. The Sugar Act sought to combat widespread smuggling of molasses in New England by cutting the duty in half but increasing enforcement. Also, smugglers would be tried by vice-admiralty courts and not juries. Parliament also passed the Currency Act, which restricted colonies from producing paper money. Hard money, such as gold and silver coins, was scarce in the colonies. The lack of currency impeded the colonies’ increasingly sophisticated transatlantic economies, but it was especially damaging in 1764 because a postwar recession had already begun. Between the restrictions of the Proclamation of 1763, the Currency Act, and the Sugar Act’s canceling of trials-by-jury for smugglers, some colonists began to fear a pattern of increased taxation and restricted liberties.

In March 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act. The act required that many documents be printed on paper that had been stamped to show the duty had been paid, including newspapers, pamphlets, diplomas, legal documents, and even playing cards. The Sugar Act of 1764 was an attempt to get merchants to pay an already existing duty, but the Stamp Act created a new, direct (or “internal”) tax. Parliament had never before directly taxed the colonists. Instead, colonies contributed to the empire through the payment of indirect, “external” taxes, such as customs duties. In 1765, Daniel Dulany of Maryland wrote, “A right to impose an internal tax on the colonies, without their consent for the single purpose of revenue, is denied, a right to regulate their trade without their consent is, admitted.” 7 Also, unlike the Sugar Act, which primarily affected merchants, the Stamp Act directly affected numerous groups throughout colonial society, including printers, lawyers, college graduates, and even sailors who played cards. This led, in part, to broader, more popular resistance.

Resistance to the Stamp Act took three forms, distinguished largely by class: legislative resistance by elites, economic resistance by merchants, and popular protest by common colonists. Colonial elites responded by passing resolutions in their assemblies. The most famous of the anti-Stamp Act resolutions were the Virginia Resolves, passed by the House of Burgesses on May 30, 1765, which declared that the colonists were entitled to “all the liberties, privileges, franchises, and immunities . . . possessed by the people of Great Britain.” When the Virginia Resolves were printed throughout the colonies, however, they often included a few extra, far more radical resolutions not passed by the Virginia House of Burgesses, the last of which asserted that only “the general assembly of this colony have any right or power to impose or lay any taxation” and that anyone who argued differently “shall be deemed an enemy to this his majesty’s colony.” 8 These additional items spread throughout the colonies and helped radicalize subsequent responses in other colonial assemblies. These responses eventually led to the calling of the Stamp Act Congress in New York City in October 1765. Nine colonies sent delegates, who included Benjamin Franklin, John Dickinson, Thomas Hutchinson, Philip Livingston, and James Otis. 9

Men and women politicized the domestic sphere by buying and displaying items that conspicuously revealed their position for or against parliamentary actions. This witty teapot, which celebrates the end of taxation on goods like tea itself, makes clear the owner’s perspective on the egregious taxation. Teapot, Stamp Act Repeal’d, 1786, in Peabody Essex Museum. Salem State University .

The Stamp Act Congress issued a “Declaration of Rights and Grievances,” which, like the Virginia Resolves, declared allegiance to the king and “all due subordination” to Parliament but also reasserted the idea that colonists were entitled to the same rights as Britons. Those rights included trial by jury, which had been abridged by the Sugar Act, and the right to be taxed only by their own elected representatives. As Daniel Dulany wrote in 1765, “It is an essential principle of the English constitution, that the subject shall not be taxed without his consent.” 10 Benjamin Franklin called it the “prime Maxim of all free Government.” 11 Because the colonies did not elect members to Parliament, they believed that they were not represented and could not be taxed by that body. In response, Parliament and the Crown argued that the colonists were “virtually represented,” just like the residents of those boroughs or counties in England that did not elect members to Parliament. However, the colonists rejected the notion of virtual representation, with one pamphleteer calling it a “monstrous idea.” 12

The second type of resistance to the Stamp Act was economic. While the Stamp Act Congress deliberated, merchants in major port cities were preparing nonimportation agreements, hoping that their refusal to import British goods would lead British merchants to lobby for the repeal of the Stamp Act. In New York City, “upwards of two hundred principal merchants” agreed not to import, sell, or buy “any goods, wares, or merchandises” from Great Britain. 13 In Philadelphia, merchants gathered at “a general meeting” to agree that “they would not Import any Goods from Great-Britain until the Stamp-Act was Repealed.” 14 The plan worked. By January 1766, London merchants sent a letter to Parliament arguing that they had been “reduced to the necessity of pending ruin” by the Stamp Act and the subsequent boycotts. 15

The third, and perhaps, most crucial type of resistance was popular protest. Riots broke out in Boston. Crowds burned the appointed stamp distributor for Massachusetts, Andrew Oliver, in effigy and pulled a building he owned “down to the Ground in five minutes.” 16 Oliver resigned the position the next day. The following week, a crowd also set upon the home of his brother-in-law, Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson, who had publicly argued for submission to the stamp tax. Before the evening was over, much of Hutchinson’s home and belongings had been destroyed. 17

Popular violence and intimidation spread quickly throughout the colonies. In New York City, posted notices read:

PRO PATRIA, The first Man that either distributes or makes use of Stampt Paper, let him take care of his House, Person, & Effects. Vox Populi; We dare.” 18

By November 16, all of the original twelve stamp distributors had resigned, and by 1766, groups calling themselves the Sons of Liberty were formed in most colonies to direct and organize further resistance. These tactics had the dual effect of sending a message to Parliament and discouraging colonists from accepting appointments as stamp collectors. With no one to distribute the stamps, the act became unenforceable.

Violent protest by groups like the Sons of Liberty created quite a stir both in the colonies and in England itself. While extreme acts like the tarring and feathering of Boston’s Commissioner of Customs in 1774 propagated more protest against symbols of Parliament’s tyranny throughout the colonies, violent demonstrations were regarded as acts of terrorism by British officials. This print of the 1774 event was from the British perspective, picturing the Sons as brutal instigators with almost demonic smiles on their faces as they enacted this excruciating punishment on the Custom Commissioner. Philip Dawe (attributed), “The Bostonians Paying the Excise-man, or Tarring and Feathering,”  Wikimedia .

Pressure on Parliament grew until, in February 1766, it repealed the Stamp Act. But to save face and to try to avoid this kind of problem in the future, Parliament also passed the Declaratory Act, asserting that Parliament had the “full power and authority to make laws . . . to bind the colonies and people of America . . . in all cases whatsoever.” However, colonists were too busy celebrating the repeal of the Stamp Act to take much notice of the Declaratory Act. In New York City, the inhabitants raised a huge lead statue of King George III in honor of the Stamp Act’s repeal. It could be argued that there was no moment at which colonists felt more proud to be members of the free British Empire than 1766. But Britain still needed revenue from the colonies. 19

The colonies had resisted the implementation of direct taxes, but the Declaratory Act reserved Parliament’s right to impose them. And, in the colonists’ dispatches to Parliament and in numerous pamphlets, they had explicitly acknowledged the right of Parliament to regulate colonial trade. So Britain’s next attempt to draw revenues from the colonies, the Townshend Acts, were passed in June 1767, creating new customs duties on common items, like lead, glass, paint, and tea, instead of direct taxes. The acts also created and strengthened formal mechanisms to enforce compliance, including a new American Board of Customs Commissioners and more vice-admiralty courts to try smugglers. Revenues from customs seizures would be used to pay customs officers and other royal officials, including the governors, thereby incentivizing them to convict offenders. These acts increased the presence of the British government in the colonies and circumscribed the authority of the colonial assemblies, since paying the governor’s salary had long given the assemblies significant power over them. Unsurprisingly, colonists, once again, resisted.

Even though these were duties, many colonial resistance authors still referred to them as “taxes,” because they were designed primarily to extract revenues from the colonies not to regulate trade. John Dickinson, in his “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania,” wrote, “That we may legally be bound to pay any general duties on these commodities, relative to the regulation of trade, is granted; but we being obliged by her laws to take them from Great Britain, any special duties imposed on their exportation to us only, with intention to raise a revenue from us only, are as much taxes upon us, as those imposed by the Stamp Act.” Hence, many authors asked: once the colonists assented to a tax in any form , what would stop the British from imposing ever more and greater taxes on the colonists? 20

New forms of resistance emerged in which elite, middling, and working-class colonists participated together. Merchants reinstituted nonimportation agreements, and common colonists agreed not to consume these same products. Lists were circulated with signatories promising not to buy any British goods. These lists were often published in newspapers, bestowing recognition on those who had signed and led to pressure on those who had not.

Women, too, became involved to an unprecedented degree in resistance to the Townshend Acts. They circulated subscription lists and gathered signatures. The first political commentaries in newspapers written by women appeared. 21 Also, without new imports of British clothes, colonists took to wearing simple, homespun clothing. Spinning clubs were formed, in which local women would gather at one of their homes and spin cloth for homespun clothing for their families and even for the community. 22

Homespun clothing quickly became a marker of one’s virtue and patriotism, and women were an important part of this cultural shift. At the same time, British goods and luxuries previously desired now became symbols of tyranny. Nonimportation and, especially, nonconsumption agreements changed colonists’ cultural relationship with the mother country. Committees of Inspection monitored merchants and residents to make sure that no one broke the agreements. Offenders could expect to be shamed by having their names and offenses published in the newspaper and in broadsides.

Nonimportation and nonconsumption helped forge colonial unity. Colonies formed Committees of Correspondence to keep each other informed of the resistance efforts throughout the colonies. Newspapers reprinted exploits of resistance, giving colonists a sense that they were part of a broader political community. The best example of this new “continental conversation” came in the wake of the Boston Massacre. Britain sent regiments to Boston in 1768 to help enforce the new acts and quell the resistance. On the evening of March 5, 1770, a crowd gathered outside the Custom House and began hurling insults, snowballs, and perhaps more at the young sentry. When a small number of soldiers came to the sentry’s aid, the crowd grew increasingly hostile until the soldiers fired. After the smoke cleared, five Bostonians were dead, including one of the ringleaders, Crispus Attucks, a formerly enslaved man turned free dockworker. The soldiers were tried in Boston and won acquittal, thanks, in part, to their defense attorney, John Adams. News of the Boston Massacre spread quickly through the new resistance communication networks, aided by a famous engraving initially circulated by Paul Revere, which depicted bloodthirsty British soldiers with grins on their faces firing into a peaceful crowd. The engraving was quickly circulated and reprinted throughout the colonies, generating sympathy for Boston and anger with Britain.

This iconic image of the Boston Massacre by Paul Revere sparked fury in both Americans and the British by portraying the redcoats as brutal slaughterers and the onlookers as helpless victims. The events of March 5, 1770 did not actually play out as Revere pictured them, yet his intention was not simply to recount the affair. Revere created an effective propaganda piece that lent credence to those demanding that the British authoritarian rule be stopped. Paul Revere (engraver), “The bloody massacre perpetrated in King Street Boston on March 5th 1770 by a party of the 29th Regt.,” 1770.  Library of Congress .

Resistance again led to repeal. In March 1770, Parliament repealed all of the new duties except the one on tea, which, like the Declaratory Act, was left, in part, to save face and assert that Parliament still retained the right to tax the colonies. The character of colonial resistance had changed between 1765 and 1770. During the Stamp Act resistance, elites wrote resolves and held congresses while violent, popular mobs burned effigies and tore down houses, with minimal coordination between colonies. But methods of resistance against the Townshend Acts became more inclusive and more coordinated. Colonists previously excluded from meaningful political participation now gathered signatures, and colonists of all ranks participated in the resistance by not buying British goods and monitoring and enforcing the boycotts.

Britain’s failed attempts at imperial reform in the 1760s created an increasingly vigilant and resistant colonial population and, most importantly, an enlarged political sphere—both on the colonial and continental levels—far beyond anything anyone could have imagined a few years earlier. A new sense of shared grievances began to join the colonists in a shared American political identity.

Tensions between the colonies and England eased for a time after the Boston Massacre. The colonial economy improved as the postwar recession receded. The Sons of Liberty in some colonies sought to continue nonimportation even after the repeal of the Townshend Acts. But in New York, a door-to-door poll of the population revealed that the majority wanted to end nonimportation. 23 Yet Britain’s desire and need to reform imperial administration remained.

In April 1773, Parliament passed two acts to aid the failing East India Company, which had fallen behind in the annual payments it owed Britain. But the company was not only drowning in debt; it was also drowning in tea, with almost fifteen million pounds of it stored in warehouses from India to England. In 1773, Parliament passed the Regulating Act, which effectively put the troubled company under government control. It then passed the Tea Act, which would allow the company to sell its tea in the colonies directly and without the company having to pay the usual export tax in London. Even though this would greatly lower the cost of tea for colonists, they resisted.

Merchants resisted the Tea Act because they resented the East India Company’s monopoly. But like the Sugar Act, the Tea Act affected only a small, specific group of people. The widespread support for resisting the Tea Act had more to do with principles. By buying tea, even though it was cheaper, colonists would be paying the duty and thereby implicitly acknowledging Parliament’s right to tax them. According to the Pennsylvania Chronicle , Prime Minister Lord North was a “great schemer” who sought “to out wit us, and to effectually establish that Act, which will forever after be pleaded as a precedent for every imposition the Parliament of Great-Britain shall think proper to saddle us with.” 24

The Tea Act stipulated that the duty had to be paid when the ship unloaded. Newspaper essays and letters throughout the summer of 1773 in the major port cities debated what to do upon the ships’ arrival. In November, the Boston Sons of Liberty, led by Samuel Adams and John Hancock, resolved to “prevent the landing and sale of the [tea], and the payment of any duty thereon” and to do so “at the risk of their lives and property.” 25 The meeting appointed men to guard the wharfs and make sure the tea remained on the ships until they returned to London. This worked and the tea did not reach the shore, but by December 16, the ships were still there. Hence, another town meeting was held at the Old South Meeting House, at the end of which dozens of men disguised as Mohawks made their way to the wharf. The Boston Gazette reported what happened next:

But, behold what followed! A number of brave & resolute men, determined to do all in their power to save their country from the ruin which their enemies had plotted, in less than four hours, emptied every chest of tea on board the three ships . . . amounting to 342 chests, into the sea ! ! without the least damage done to the ships or any other property . 26

As word spread throughout the colonies, patriots were emboldened to do the same to the tea sitting in their harbors. Tea was either dumped or seized in Charleston, Philadelphia, and New York, with numerous other smaller “tea parties” taking place throughout 1774.

Popular protest spread across the continent and down through all levels of colonial society. Fifty-one women in Edenton, North Carolina, for example, signed an agreement—published in numerous newspapers—in which they promised “to do every Thing as far as lies in our Power” to support the boycotts. 27 The ladies of Edenton were not alone in their desire to support the war effort by what means they could. Women across the thirteen colonies could most readily express their political sentiments as consumers and producers. Because women often made decisions regarding household purchases, their participation in consumer boycotts held particular weight. 28 Some women also took to the streets as part of more unruly mob actions, participating in grain riots, raids on the offices of royal officials, and demonstrations against the impressment of men into naval service. The agitation of so many helped elicit responses from both Britain and the colonial elites.

Britain’s response was swift. The following spring, Parliament passed four acts known collectively, by the British, as the Coercive Acts. Colonists, however, referred to them as the Intolerable Acts. First, the Boston Port Act shut down the harbor and cut off all trade to and from the city. The Massachusetts Government Act put the colonial government entirely under British control, dissolving the assembly and restricting town meetings. The Administration of Justice Act allowed any royal official accused of a crime to be tried in Britain rather than by Massachusetts courts and juries. Finally, the Quartering Act, passed for all colonies, allowed the British army to quarter newly arrived soldiers in colonists’ homes. Boston had been deemed in open rebellion, and the king, his advisors, and Parliament acted decisively to end the rebellion.

The Crown, however, did not anticipate the other colonies coming to the aid of Massachusetts. Colonists collected food to send to Boston. Virginia’s House of Burgesses called for a day of prayer and fasting to show their support. Rather than isolating Massachusetts, the Coercive Acts fostered the sense of shared identity created over the previous decade. After all, if the Crown and Parliament could dissolve Massachusetts’s government, nothing could stop them from doing the same to any of her sister colonies. In Massachusetts, patriots created the Provincial Congress, and, throughout 1774, they seized control of local and county governments and courts. 29 In New York, citizens elected committees to direct the colonies’ response to the Coercive Acts, including a Mechanics’ Committee of middling colonists. By early 1774, Committees of Correspondence and/or extralegal assemblies were established in all of the colonies except Georgia. And throughout the year, they followed Massachusetts’s example by seizing the powers of the royal governments.

Committees of Correspondence agreed to send delegates to a Continental Congress to coordinate an intercolonial response. The First Continental Congress convened on September 5, 1774. Over the next six weeks, elite delegates from every colony but Georgia issued a number of documents, including a “Declaration of Rights and Grievances.” This document repeated the arguments that colonists had been making since 1765: colonists retained all the rights of native Britons, including the right to be taxed only by their own elected representatives as well as the right to a trial by jury.

Most importantly, the Congress issued a document known as the “Continental Association.” The Association declared that “the present unhappy situation of our affairs is occasioned by a ruinous system of colony administration adopted by the British Ministry about the year 1763, evidently calculated for enslaving these Colonies, and, with them, the British Empire.” The Association recommended “that a committee be chosen in every county, city, and town . . . whose business it shall be attentively to observe the conduct of all persons touching this association.” These Committees of Inspection would consist largely of common colonists. They were effectively deputized to police their communities and instructed to publish the names of anyone who violated the Association so they “may be publicly known, and universally condemned as the enemies of American liberty.” The delegates also agreed to a continental nonimportation, nonconsumption, and nonexportation agreement and to “wholly discontinue the slave trade.” In all, the Continental Association was perhaps the most radical document of the period. It sought to unite and direct twelve revolutionary governments, establish economic and moral policies, and empower common colonists by giving them an important and unprecedented degree of on-the-ground political power. 30

But not all colonists were patriots. Indeed, many remained faithful to the king and Parliament, while a good number took a neutral stance. As the situation intensified throughout 1774 and early 1775, factions emerged within the resistance movements in many colonies. Elite merchants who traded primarily with Britain, Anglican clergy, and colonists holding royal offices depended on and received privileges directly from their relationship with Britain. Initially, they sought to exert a moderating influence on the resistance committees, but, following the Association, a number of these colonists began to worry that the resistance was too radical and aimed at independence. They, like most colonists in this period, still expected a peaceful conciliation with Britain and grew increasingly suspicious of the resistance movement.

However, by the time the Continental Congress met again in May 1775, war had already broken out in Massachusetts. On April 19, 1775, British regiments set out to seize local militias’ arms and powder stores in Lexington and Concord. The town militia met them at the Lexington Green. The British ordered the militia to disperse when someone fired, setting off a volley from the British. The battle continued all the way to the next town, Concord. News of the events at Lexington spread rapidly throughout the countryside. Militia members, known as minutemen, responded quickly and inflicted significant casualties on the British regiments as they chased them back to Boston. Approximately twenty thousand colonial militiamen laid siege to Boston, effectively trapping the British. In June, the militia set up fortifications on Breed’s Hill overlooking the city. In the misnamed “Battle of Bunker Hill,” the British attempted to dislodge them from the position with a frontal assault, and, despite eventually taking the hill, they suffered severe casualties at the hands of the colonists.

“The Battle of Lexington,” Published by John H. Daniels & Son, c1903.  Library of Congress .

While men in Boston fought and died, the Continental Congress struggled to organize a response. The radical Massachusetts delegates—including John Adams, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock—implored the Congress to support the Massachusetts militia, who without supplies were laying siege to Boston. Meanwhile, many delegates from the Middle Colonies—including New York, New Jersey, and Philadelphia—took a more moderate position, calling for renewed attempts at reconciliation. In the South, the Virginia delegation contained radicals such as Richard Henry Lee and Thomas Jefferson, while South Carolina’s delegation included moderates like John and Edward Rutledge. The moderates worried that supporting the Massachusetts militia would be akin to declaring war.

The Congress struck a compromise, agreeing to adopt the Massachusetts militia and form a Continental Army, naming Virginia delegate George Washington commander in chief. They also issued a “Declaration of the Causes of Necessity of Taking Up Arms” to justify the decision. At the same time, the moderates drafted an “Olive Branch Petition,” which assured the king that the colonists “most ardently desire[d] the former Harmony between [the mother country] and these Colonies.” Many understood that the opportunities for reconciliation were running out. After Congress had approved the document, Benjamin Franklin wrote to a friend saying, “The Congress will send one more Petition to the King which I suppose will be treated as the former was, and therefore will probably be the last.” 31 Congress was in the strange position of attempting reconciliation while publicly raising an army.

The petition arrived in England on August 13, 1775, but before it was delivered, the king issued his own “Proclamation for Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition.” He believed his subjects in North America were being “misled by dangerous and ill-designing men,” who were “traitorously preparing, ordering, and levying war against us.” In an October speech to Parliament, he dismissed the colonists’ petition. The king had no doubt that the resistance was “manifestly carried on for the purpose of establishing an independent empire.” 32 By the start of 1776, talk of independence was growing while the prospect of reconciliation dimmed.

In the opening months of 1776, independence, for the first time, became part of the popular debate. Town meetings approved resolutions in support of independence. Yet, with moderates still hanging on, it would take another seven months before the Continental Congress officially passed the independence resolution. A small forty-six-page pamphlet published in Philadelphia and written by a recent immigrant from England captured the American conversation. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense argued for independence by denouncing monarchy and challenging the logic behind the British Empire, saying, “There is something absurd, in supposing a continent to be perpetually governed by an island.” 33 His combination of easy language, biblical references, and fiery rhetoric proved potent, and the pamphlet was quickly published and dispersed. Arguments over political philosophy and rumors of battlefield developments filled taverns throughout the colonies.

George Washington had taken control of the army and after laying siege to Boston forced the British to retreat to Halifax. In Virginia, the royal governor, Lord Dunmore, issued a proclamation declaring martial law and offering freedom to “all indentured servants, Negros, and others” if they would leave their enslavers and join the British. Though only about five hundred to a thousand enslaved people joined Lord Dunmore’s “Ethiopian regiment,” thousands more flocked to the British later in the war, risking capture and punishment for a chance at freedom. Formerly enslaved people occasionally fought, but primarily served in companies called Black Pioneers as laborers, skilled workers, and spies. British motives for offering freedom were practical rather than humanitarian, but the proclamation was the first mass emancipation of enslaved people in American history. Enslaved people could now choose to run and risk their lives for possible freedom with the British army or hope that the United States would live up to its ideals of liberty. 34

Dunmore’s proclamation unnerved white southerners already suspicious of rising antislavery sentiments in the mother country. Four years earlier, English courts dealt a serious blow to slavery in the empire. In Somerset v Stewart , James Somerset sued for his freedom, and the court not only granted it but also undercut the very legality of slavery on the British mainland. Somerset and now Dunmore began to convince some enslavers that a new independent nation might offer a surer protection for slavery. Indeed, the proclamation laid the groundwork for the very unrest that loyal southerners had hoped to avoid. Consequently, enslavers often used violence to prevent their enslaved laborers from joining the British or rising against them. Virginia enacted regulations to prevent freedom-seeking, threatening to ship rebellious enslaved people to the West Indies or execute them. Many enslavers transported their enslaved people inland, away from the coastal temptation to join the British armies, sometimes separating families in the process.

On May 10, 1776, nearly two months before the Declaration of Independence, the Congress voted on a resolution calling on all colonies that had not already established revolutionary governments to do so and to wrest control from royal officials. 35 The Congress also recommended that the colonies should begin preparing new written constitutions. In many ways, this was the Congress’s first declaration of independence. A few weeks later, on June 7, Richard Henry Lee offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, Free and Independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connexion between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved . 36

Delegates went scurrying back to their assemblies for new instructions and nearly a month later, on July 2, the resolution finally came to a vote. It passed 12–0, with New York, under imminent threat of British invasion, abstaining.

The passage of Lee’s resolution was the official legal declaration of independence, but, between the proposal and vote, a committee had been named to draft a public declaration in case the resolution passed. Virginian Thomas Jefferson drafted the document, with edits being made by his fellow committee members John Adams and Benjamin Franklin, and then again by the Congress as a whole. The famous preamble went beyond the arguments about the rights of British subjects under the British Constitution, instead referring to “natural law”:

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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government. 37

The majority of the document outlined a list of specific grievances that the colonists had with British attempts to reform imperial administration during the 1760s and 1770s. An early draft blamed the British for the transatlantic slave trade and even for discouraging attempts by the colonists to promote abolition. Delegates from South Carolina and Georgia as well as those from northern states who profited from the trade all opposed this language, and it was removed. 38

Neither the grievances nor the rhetoric of the preamble were new. Instead, they were the culmination of both a decade of popular resistance to imperial reform and decades more of long-term developments that saw both sides develop incompatible understandings of the British Empire and the colonies’ place within it. The Congress approved the document on July 4, 1776. However, it was one thing to declare independence; it was quite another to win it on the battlefield.

The Declaration of Independence,  National Archives and Records Administration .

The war began at Lexington and Concord, more than a year before Congress declared independence. In 1775, the British believed that the mere threat of war and a few minor incursions to seize supplies would be enough to cow the colonial rebellion. Those minor incursions, however, turned into a full-out military conflict. Despite an early American victory at Boston, the new states faced the daunting task of taking on the world’s largest military.

In the summer of 1776, the British forces that had abandoned Boston arrived at New York. The largest expeditionary force in British history, including tens of thousands of German mercenaries known as Hessians, followed soon after. New York was the perfect location to launch expeditions aimed at seizing control of the Hudson River and isolating New England from the rest of the continent. Also, New York contained many loyalists, particularly among its merchant and Anglican communities. In October, the British finally launched an attack on Brooklyn and Manhattan. The Continental Army took severe losses before retreating through New Jersey. 39 With the onset of winter, Washington needed something to lift morale and encourage reenlistment. Therefore, he launched a successful surprise attack on the Hessian camp at Trenton on Christmas Day by ferrying the few thousand men he had left across the Delaware River under the cover of night. The victory won the Continental Army much-needed supplies and a morale boost following the disaster at New York. 40

An even greater success followed in upstate New York. In 1777, British general John Burgoyne led an army from Canada to secure the Hudson River. In upstate New York, he was to meet up with a detachment of General William Howe’s forces marching north from Manhattan. However, Howe abandoned the plan without telling Burgoyne and instead sailed to Philadelphia to capture the new nation’s capital. The Continental Army defeated Burgoyne’s men at Saratoga, New York. 41 This victory proved a major turning point in the war. Benjamin Franklin had been in Paris trying to secure a treaty of alliance with the French. However, the French were reluctant to back what seemed like an unlikely cause. News of the victory at Saratoga convinced the French that the cause might not have been as unlikely as they had thought. A Treaty of Amity and Commerce was signed on February 6, 1778. The treaty effectively turned a colonial rebellion into a global war as fighting between the British and French soon broke out in Europe and India. 42

In this 1782 cartoon, the British lion faces a spaniel (Spain), a rooster (France), a rattlesnake (America), and a pug dog (Netherlands). Though the caption predicts Britain’s success, it illustrates that Britain faced challenges—and therefore drains on their military and treasury—from more than just the American rebels. J. Barrow, The British Lion Engaging Four Powers, 1782. National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London .

Howe had taken Philadelphia in 1777 but returned to New York once winter ended. He slowly realized that European military tactics would not work in North America. In Europe, armies fought head-on battles in attempt to seize major cities. However, in 1777, the British had held Philadelphia and New York and yet still weakened their position. Meanwhile, Washington realized after New York that the largely untrained Continental Army could not win head-on battles with the professional British army. So he developed his own logic of warfare that involved smaller, more frequent skirmishes and avoided major engagements that would risk his entire army. As long as he kept the army intact, the war would continue, no matter how many cities the British captured.

In 1778, the British shifted their attentions to the South, where they believed they enjoyed more popular support. Campaigns from Virginia to South Carolina and Georgia captured major cities, but the British simply did not have the manpower to retain military control. And upon their departures, severe fighting ensued between local patriots and loyalists, often pitting family members against one another. The war in the South was truly a civil war. 43

By 1781, the British were also fighting France, Spain, and Holland. The British public’s support for the costly war in North America was quickly waning. The Americans took advantage of the British southern strategy with significant aid from the French army and navy. In October, Washington marched his troops from New York to Virginia in an effort to trap the British southern army under the command of General Charles Cornwallis. Cornwallis had dug his men in at Yorktown awaiting supplies and reinforcements from New York. However, the Continental and French armies arrived first, quickly followed by a French navy contingent, encircling Cornwallis’s forces and, after laying siege to the city, forcing his surrender. The capture of another army left the British without a new strategy and without public support to continue the war. Peace negotiations took place in France, and the war came to an official end on September 3, 1783. 44

Lord Cornwallis’s surrender signaled the victory of the American revolutionaries over what they considered to be the despotic rule of Britain. This moment would live on in American memory as a pivotal one in the nation’s origin story, prompting the United States government to commission artist John Trumbull to create this painting of the event in 1817. John Trumbull, Surrender of Lord Cornwallis, 1820.  Wikimedia .

Americans celebrated their victory, but it came at great cost. Soldiers suffered through brutal winters with inadequate resources. During the single winter at Valley Forge in 1777–1778, over 2,500 Americans died from disease and exposure. Life was not easy on the home front either. Women on both sides of the conflict were frequently left alone to care for their households. In addition to their existing duties, women took on roles usually assigned to men on farms and in shops and taverns. Abigail Adams addressed the difficulties she encountered while “minding family affairs” on their farm in Braintree, Massachusetts. Abigail managed the planting and harvesting of crops, in the midst of severe labor shortages and inflation, while dealing with several tenants on the Adams property, raising her children, and making clothing and other household goods. In order to support the family economically during John’s frequent absences and the uncertainties of war, Abigail also invested in several speculative schemes and sold imported goods. 45

While Abigail remained safely out of the fray, other women were not so fortunate. The Revolution was not only fought on distant battlefields. It was fought on women’s very doorsteps, in the fields next to their homes. There was no way for women to avoid the conflict or the disruptions and devastations it caused. As the leader of the state militia during the Revolution, Mary Silliman’s husband, Gold, was absent from their home for much of the conflict. On the morning of July 7, 1779, when a British fleet attacked nearby Fairfield, Connecticut, it was Mary who calmly evacuated her household, including her children and servants, to North Stratford. When Gold was captured by loyalists and held prisoner, Mary, six months pregnant with their second child, wrote letters to try to secure his release. When such appeals were ineffectual, Mary spearheaded an effort, along with Connecticut Governor, John Trumbull, to capture a prominent Tory leader to exchange for her husband’s freedom. 46

American soldiers came from a variety of backgrounds and had numerous reasons for fighting with the American army. Jean-Baptiste-Antoine DeVerger, a French sublieutenant at the Battle of Yorktown, painted this watercolor soon after that battle and chose to depict four men in men military dress: an African American soldier from the 2nd Rhode Island Regiment, a man in the homespun of the militia, another wearing the common “hunting shirt” of the frontier, and the French soldier on the end. Jean-Baptiste-Antoine DeVerger, “American soldiers at the siege of Yorktown,” 1781.  Wikimedia .

Black Americans, enslaved and free, also impacted (and were impacted by) the Revolution. The British were the first to recruit Black (or “Ethiopian”) regiments, as early as Dunmore’s Proclamation of 1775 in Virginia, which promised freedom to any enslaved person who would escape their enslavers and join the British cause. At first, Washington, an enslaver himself, resisted allowing Black men to join the Continental Army, but he eventually relented. In 1775, Peter Salem’s enslaver freed him to fight with the militia. Salem faced British Regulars in the battles at Lexington and Bunker Hill, where he fought valiantly with around three dozen other Black Americans. Salem not only contributed to the cause, he earned the ability to determine his own life after his enlistment ended. Salem was not alone, but many more enslaved people seized on the tumult of war to run away and secure their own freedom directly. Historians estimate that between thirty thousand and one hundred thousand formerly enslaved people deserted their enslavers during the war. 47

Men and women together struggled through years of war and hardship. For patriots (and those who remained neutral), victory brought new political, social, and economic opportunities, but it also brought new uncertainties. The war decimated entire communities, particularly in the South. Thousands of women throughout the nation had been widowed. The American economy, weighed down by war debt and depreciated currencies, would have to be rebuilt following the war. State constitutions had created governments, but now men would have to figure out how to govern. The opportunities created by the Revolution had come at great cost, in both lives and fortune, and it was left to the survivors to seize those opportunities and help forge and define the new nation-state.

Another John Trumbull piece commissioned for the Capitol in 1817, this painting depicts what would be remembered as the moment the new United States became a republic. On December 23, 1783, George Washington, widely considered the hero of the Revolution, resigned his position as the most powerful man in the former thirteen colonies. Giving up his role as Commander-in-Chief of the Army ensured that civilian rule would define the new nation and that a republic would be set in place rather than a dictatorship. John Trumbull, General George Washington Resigning His Commission, c. 1817-1824. From the  Architect of the Capitol .

Like the earlier distinction between “origins” and “causes,” the Revolution also had short- and long-term consequences. Perhaps the most important immediate consequence of declaring independence was the creation of state constitutions in 1776 and 1777. The Revolution also unleashed powerful political, social, and economic forces that would transform the new nation’s politics and society, including increased participation in politics and governance, the legal institutionalization of religious toleration, and the growth and diffusion of the population, particularly westward. The Revolution affected Native Americans by opening up western settlement and creating governments hostile to their territorial claims. Even more broadly, the Revolution ended the mercantilist economy, opening new opportunities in trade and manufacturing.

The new states drafted written constitutions, which, at the time, was an important innovation from the traditionally unwritten British Constitution. These new state constitutions were based on the idea of “popular sovereignty,” that is, that the power and authority of the government derived from the people. 48 Most created weak governors and strong legislatures with more regular elections and moderately increased the size of the electorate. A number of states followed the example of Virginia and included a declaration or “bill” of rights in their constitution designed to protect the rights of individuals and circumscribe the prerogative of the government. Pennsylvania’s first state constitution was the most radical and democratic. They created a unicameral legislature and an Executive Council but no genuine executive. All free men could vote, including those who did not own property. Massachusetts’s constitution, passed in 1780, was less democratic in structure but underwent a more popular process of ratification. In the fall of 1779, each town sent delegates—312 in all—to a constitutional convention in Cambridge. Town meetings debated the constitution draft and offered suggestions. Anticipating the later federal constitution, Massachusetts established a three-branch government based on checks and balances between the branches. Independence came in 1776, and so did an unprecedented period of constitution making and state building.

The Continental Congress ratified the Articles of Confederation in 1781. The articles allowed each state one vote in the Continental Congress. But the articles are perhaps most notable for what they did not allow. Congress was given no power to levy or collect taxes, regulate foreign or interstate commerce, or establish a federal judiciary. These shortcomings rendered the postwar Congress weak and largely ineffectual.

Political and social life changed drastically after independence. Political participation grew as more people gained the right to vote, leading to greater importance being placed on representation within government. 49 In addition, more common citizens (or “new men”) played increasingly important roles in local and state governance. Hierarchy within the states underwent significant changes. Society became less deferential and more egalitarian, less aristocratic and more meritocratic.

The Revolution’s most important long-term economic consequence was the end of mercantilism. The British Empire had imposed various restrictions on the colonial economies including limiting trade, settlement, and manufacturing. The Revolution opened new markets and new trade relationships. The Americans’ victory also opened the western territories for invasion and settlement, which created new domestic markets. Americans began to create their own manufactures, no longer content to rely on those in Britain.

Despite these important changes, the American Revolution had its limits. Following their unprecedented expansion into political affairs during the imperial resistance, women also served the patriot cause during the war. However, the Revolution did not result in civic equality for women. Instead, during the immediate postwar period, women became incorporated into the polity to some degree as “republican mothers.” Republican societies required virtuous citizens, and it became mothers’ responsibility to raise and educate future citizens. This opened opportunity for women regarding education, but they still remained largely on the peripheries of the new American polity.

In the thirteen colonies, boycotting women were seen as patriots. In British prints such as this, they were mocked as immoral harlots sticking their noses in the business of men. Philip Dawe, A Society of Patriotic Ladies at Edenton in North Carolina, March 1775. Metropolitan Museum of Art .

Approximately sixty thousand loyalists ended up leaving America because of the Revolution. Loyalists came from all ranks of American society, and many lived the rest of their lives in exile from their homeland. A clause in the Treaty of Paris was supposed to protect their property and require the Americans to compensate Loyalists who had lost property during the war because of their allegiance. The Americans, however, reneged on this promise and, throughout the 1780s, states continued seizing property held by Loyalists. Some colonists went to England, where they were strangers and outsiders in what they had thought of as their mother country. Many more, however, settled on the peripheries of the British Empire throughout the world, especially Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Quebec. The Loyalists had come out on the losing side of a Revolution, and many lost everything they had and were forced to create new lives far from the land of their birth. 50

In 1783, thousands of formerly enslaved Loyalists fled with the British army. They hoped that the British government would uphold the promise of freedom and help them establish new homes elsewhere in the Empire. The Treaty of Paris, which ended the war, demanded that British troops leave formerly enslaved people behind, but the British military commanders upheld earlier promises and evacuated thousands of freedmen, transporting them to Canada, the Caribbean, or Great Britain. They would eventually play a role in settling Nova Scotia, and through the subsequent efforts of David George, a Black loyalist and Baptist preacher, some settled in Sierra Leone in Africa. Black loyalists, however, continued to face social and economic marginalization, including restrictions on land ownership within the British Empire. 51

Joseph Brandt as painted by George Romney. Brandt was a Mohawk leader who led Mohawk and British forces in western New York.  Wikimedia .

The fight for liberty led some Americans to manumit their enslaved laborers, and most of the new northern states soon passed gradual emancipation laws. Some manumissions also occurred in the Upper South, but in the Lower South, some enslavers revoked their offers of freedom for service, and other freedmen were forced back into bondage. The Revolution’s rhetoric of equality created a “revolutionary generation” of enslaved people and free Black Americans that would eventually encourage the antislavery movement. Slave revolts began to incorporate claims for freedom based on revolutionary ideals. In the long term, the Revolution failed to reconcile slavery with these new egalitarian republican societies, a tension that eventually boiled over in the 1830s and 1840s and effectively tore the nation in two in the 1850s and 1860s. 52

Native Americans, too, participated in and were affected by the Revolution. Many Native American groups, such as the Shawnee, Creek, Cherokee, and Iroquois, had sided with the British. They had hoped for a British victory that would continue to restrain the land-hungry colonial settlers from moving west beyond the Appalachian Mountains. Unfortunately, the Americans’ victory and Native Americans’ support for the British created a pretense for justifying rapid and often brutal expansion into the western territories. Native American peoples would continue to be displaced and pushed farther west throughout the nineteenth century. Ultimately, American independence marked the beginning of the end of what had remained of Native American independence.

The American Revolution freed colonists from British rule and offered the first blow in what historians have called “the age of democratic revolutions.” The American Revolution was a global event. 53 Revolutions followed in France, then Haiti, and then South America. The American Revolution meanwhile wrought significant changes to the British Empire. Many British historians even use the Revolution as a dividing point between a “first British Empire” and a “second British Empire.” At home, however, the Revolution created a new nation-state, the United States of America. By September 1783, independence had been won. What the new nation would look like, however, was still very much up for grabs. In the 1780s, Americans would shape and then reshape that nation-state, first with the Articles of Confederation, ratified in 1781, and then with the Constitution in 1787 and 1788.

Historians have long argued over the causes and character of the American Revolution. Was the Revolution caused by British imperial policy or by internal tensions within the colonies? Were colonists primarily motivated by constitutional principles, ideals of equality, or economic self-interest? Was the Revolution radical or conservative? But such questions are hardly limited to historians. From Abraham Lincoln’s use of the Declaration of Independence in the Gettysburg Address to twenty-first-century Tea Party members wearing knee breeches, the Revolution has remained at the center of American political culture. Indeed, how one understands the Revolution often dictates how one defines what it means to be American.

The Revolution was not won by a few founding fathers. Men and women of all ranks contributed to the colonies’ most improbable victory, from the commoners who protested the Stamp Act to the women who helped organize boycotts against the Townshend duties; from the men, Black and white, who fought in the army to the women who contributed to its support. The Revolution, however, did not aim to end all social and civic inequalities in the new nation, and, in the case of Native Americans, it created new inequalities. But over time, the Revolution’s rhetoric of equality, as encapsulated in the Declaration of Independence, helped highlight some of those inequalities and became a shared aspiration for future social and political movements, including, among others, the abolitionist and women’s rights movements of the nineteenth century, the suffragist and civil rights movements of the twentieth century, and the gay rights movement of the twenty-first century.

1. George R. T. Hewes, A retrospect of the Boston Tea-party, 1834

George R.T. Hewes wrote the following reminiscence of the Boston Tea Party almost 61 years after it occurred. It is likely that his memories included more than a few stories he picked up well after 1773. Nonetheless Hews provides a highly detailed account of this important event.

2. Thomas Paine calls for American independence ,  1776

Britons had long understood themselves as the freest people on earth, blessed with a limited monarchy and an enlightened parliament. Paine’s pamphlet offered a very different portrayal of the British government. His criticisms swept across the North American continent and generated widespread support for American independence. 

3. Declaration of Independence, 1776

It is hard to overstate the significance of the Declaration of Independence. Designed as a measured justification for the severing of ties with Britain, the document has also functioned as a transformative piece of political philosophy. Most of the conflicts of American history from this point forward emerged from attempts to understand and implement what it means to believe “all men are created equal.” 

4. Women in South Carolina experience occupation, 1780

The British faced the difficult task of fighting a war without pushing more colonists into the hands of the revolutionaries. As a result, the Revolutionary War included little direct attacks on civilians, but that does not mean that civilians did not suffer. The following account from Eliza Wilkinson describes the stress faced by non-combatants who had to face the British army. 

5. Oneida declaration of neutrality, 1775

The Oneida nation, one of the Six Nations of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois), issued a formal declaration of neutrality on June 19, 1775 to the governor of Connecticut after the imperial crisis between Great Britain and their North American colonies erupted into violence. This declaration hints at the Oneida conceptions of their own sovereignty among the Six Nations confederacy, the independence of other Native American nations, and how the Oneida understand the conflict as a war “between two brothers.” Samuel Kirkland, a missionary living in Iroquois country, interpreted and transcribed the Oneida’s words and sent them to Governor Jonathan Trumbull of Connecticut.

6. Boston King recalls fighting for the British and securing his freedom, 1798

Boston King was born into slavery in South Carolina in 1760. He escaped to the British Army during their invasion of South Carolina in 1780. He served as a Loyalist in the British Army, and participated in several important battles. Although captured, and once again enslaved by the Americans, King was able to escape to the British again, who secured his freedom by sending him and other Black Loyalists to Canada. Many Black colonists sought freedom by joining with the British, with estimates as high as 5,000. King later became a missionary and one of the first Black Canadian settlers of Sierra Leone in West Africa.

7. Abigail and John Adams converse on women’s rights, 1776

The American Revolution invited a reconsideration of all social inequalities. Abigail Adams, in this letter to her husband John Adams, asked her husband to “remember the ladies” in any new laws he may create. In his reply, John Adams treated this sentiment as a joke, demonstrating the limits of revolutionary liberty.  

8. American Revolution cartoon, 1782

Political cartoons provide insight into public opinion and the decisions made by politicians. These cartoons became an important medium for voicing criticism and dissent during the American Revolution. In this 1782 cartoon, the British lion faces a spaniel (Spain), a rooster (France), a rattlesnake (America), and a pug dog (Netherlands). Though the caption predicts Britain’s success, it illustrates that Britain faced challenges –and therefore drains on their military and treasury—from more than just the American rebels.

9. Drawings of the uniforms of the American Revolution, 1781

American soldiers came from a variety of backgrounds and had numerous reasons for fighting with the American army. Jean-Baptiste-Antoine DeVerger, a French sublieutenant at the Battle of Yorktown, painted this watercolor soon after that battle and chose to depict four men in men military dress: an African American soldier from the 2nd Rhode Island Regiment, a man in the homespun of the militia, another wearing the common “hunting shirt” of the frontier, and the French soldier on the end.

This chapter was edited by Michael Hattem, with content contributions by James Ambuske, Alexander Burns, Joshua Beatty, Christina Carrick, Christopher Consolino, Michael Hattem, Timothy C. Hemmis, Joseph Moore, Emily Romeo, and Christopher Sparshott.

Recommended citation: James Ambuske et al., “The American Revolution,” Michael Hattem, ed., in The American Yawp , eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2018).

Recommended Reading

• Bailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1967.
• Berkin, Carol. Revolutionary Mothers: Women in the Struggle for America’s Independence. New York: Knopf, 2005.
• Breen, T. H. The Marketplace of Revolution: How Consumer Politics Shaped American Independence. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
• Carp, Benjamin L. Rebels Rising: Cities and the American Revolution. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
• DuVal, Kathleen. Independence Lost: Lives on the Edge of the American Revolution. New York: Random House, 2015.
• Egerton, Douglas R. Death or Liberty: African Americans and Revolutionary America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
• Eustace, Nicole. Passion Is the Gale: Emotion, Power, and the Coming of the American Revolution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008.
• Fliegelman, Jay. Prodigals and Pilgrims: The American Revolution Against Patriarchal Authority 1750–1800 . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
• Gould, Eliga. Among the Powers of the Earth: The American Revolution and the Making of a New World Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012.
• Greene, Jack P. The Constitutional Origins of the American Revolution . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
• Holton, Woody. Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves, and the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999.
• Jasanoff, Maya. Liberty’s Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World. New York: Knopf, 2011.
• Kamensky, Jane. A Revolution in Color: The World of John Singleton Copley. New York: Norton, 2016.
• Kerber, Linda K. Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980.
• Knott, Sarah. Sensibility and the American Revolution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009.
• Landers, Jane G. Atlantic Creoles in the Age of Revolutions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010.
• Maier, Pauline. American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence. New York: Knopf, 1997.
• ———. From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765–1776. New York: Vintage Books, 1974.
• Nash, Gary B. The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth of Democracy and the Struggle to Create America. New York: Viking, 2005.
• Norton, Mary Beth. Liberty’s Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women, 1750–1800. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1980.
• O’Shaughnessy, Andrew Jackson. The Men Who Lost America: British Leadership, the American Revolution, and the Fate of the Empire. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2013.
• Schiff, Stacy. A Great Improvisation: Franklin, France, and the Birth of America. New York: Thorndike Press, 2005.
• Waldstreicher, David. Slavery’s Constitution: From Revolution to Ratification. New York: Hill and Wang, 2009.
• Wood, Gordon S. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. New York: Vintage Books, 1992.
• Young, Alfred F., and Gregory Nobles. Whose American Revolution Was It? Historians Interpret the Founding. New York: New York University Press, 2011.
• Benjamin Rush to Ebenezer Hazard, October 22, 1768, in L. H. Butterfield, ed., Letters of Benjamin Rush , 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1951), vol. 1, 68. [ ↩ ]
• Jack P. Greene, The Constitutional Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, UK: New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010). [ ↩ ]
• James Otis, The Rights of the Colonies Asserted and Proved (Boston: Edes and Gill, 1764), 52, 38. [ ↩ ]
• Greene, Constitutional Origins of the American Revolution , 118. [ ↩ ]
• Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1967). [ ↩ ]
• Jack P. Greene, Pursuits of Happiness: The Social Development of Early Modern British Colonies and the Formation of American Culture (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988), 170–171. Also see John Murrin, “Anglicizing an American Colony: The Transformation of Provincial Massachusetts,” PhD diss., Yale University, 1966. [ ↩ ]
• Daniel Dulany, Considerations on the Propriety of Imposing Taxes in the British Colonies, for the Purpose of Raising a Revenue, by Act of Parliament. The Second Edition (Annapolis, MD: Jonas Green, 1765), 34. For a 1766 London reprint, see https://archive.org/details/cihm_20394 , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]
• Newport Mercury , June 24, 1765. This version was also reprinted in newspapers in New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Maryland. [ ↩ ]
• Proceedings of the Congress at New-York (Annapolis, MD: Jonas Green, 1766). [ ↩ ]
• Dulany,  Considerations on the Propriety of imposing Taxes in the British Colonies , 8. [ ↩ ]
• “The Colonist’s Advocate: III, 11 January 1770,” Founders Online, National Archives. http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-17-02-0009 , last modified June 29, 2017. [ ↩ ]
• George Canning, A Letter to the Right Honourable Wills Earl of Hillsborough, on the Connection Between Great Britain and Her American Colonies (London: T. Becket, 1768), 9. [ ↩ ]
• “New York, October 31, 1765,” New-York Gazette, or Weekly Mercury , November 7, 1765. [ ↩ ]
• “Resolution of Non-Importation made by the Citizens of Philadelphia,” October 25, 1765, mss., Historical Society of Pennsylvania. http://digitalhistory.hsp.org/pafrm/doc/resolution-non-importation-made-citizens-philadelphia-october-25-1765 . For the published notice of the resolution, see “Philadelphia, November 7, 1765,” broadside, “Pennsylvania Stamp Act and Non-Importation Resolutions Collection,” American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA. [ ↩ ]
• “The Petition of the London Merchants to the House of Commons,” in Prologue to Revolution: Sources and Documents on the Stamp Act Crisis, 1764–1766 , ed. Edmund S. Morgan (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), 130–131. [ ↩ ]
• Governor Francis Bernard to Lord Halifax, August 15, 1765, in ibid., 107. [ ↩ ]
• For Hutchinson’s own account of the events, see Thomas Hutchinson to Richard Jackson, August 30, 1765, in The Correspondence of Thomas Hutchinson, Volume 1: 1740–1766 , ed. John W. Tyler (Boston: Colonial Society of Massachusetts, 2014), 291–294. [ ↩ ]
• Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New-York, procured in Holland, England, and France , 13 vols., ed. Edmund O’Callaghan (Albany, NY: Weed, Parsons, 1856), vol. 7, 770. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Btm5M84IMAA4MCY.png:large , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]
• “The Declaratory Act,” The Avalon Project: Documents in Law, History, and Diplomacy. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/declaratory_act_1766.asp , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]
• “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, to the Inhabitants of the British Colonies. Letter II,” Pennsylvania Gazette , December 10, 1767. [ ↩ ]
• “Address to the Ladies,” Boston Post-Boy , November 16, 1767; Boston Evening-Post , February 12, 1770. Many female contributions to political commentary took the form of poems and drama, as in the poetry of Hannah Griffitts and satirical plays by Mercy Otis Warren. [ ↩ ]
• Carol Berkin, Revolutionary Mothers: Women in the Struggle for America’s Independence (New York: Knopf, 2005), 17–18. [ ↩ ]
• New York Gazette, or Weekly Post-Boy , June 18, July 9, 16, 1770. [ ↩ ]
• Pennsylvania Chronicle , September 27, 1773. For an example of how fast news and propaganda was spreading throughout the colonies, this piece was reprinted in Massachusetts Gazette , October 4, 1773; New-Hampshire Gazette, and Historical Chronicle , October 15, 1773; and Virginia Gazette , October 21, 1773. [ ↩ ]
• Massachusetts Gazette, and Boston Post-Boy , November 29, 1773. [ ↩ ]
• Boston Gazette , December 20, 1773. [ ↩ ]
• Virginia Gazette , November 3, 1774; Cynthia A. Kierner, “The Edenton Ladies: Women, Tea, and Politics in Revolutionary North Carolina,” in North Carolina Women: Their Lives and Times , ed. Michele Gillespie and Sally G. McMillen (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2014), 12–33. [ ↩ ]
• Ellen Hartigan-O’Connor, The Ties That Buy: Women and Commerce in Revolutionary America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009), 178–184. [ ↩ ]
• Ray Raphael, The First American Revolution: Before Lexington and Concord (New York: New Press, 2002), 59–168. [ ↩ ]
• American Archives: Fourth Series Containing a Documentary History of the English Colonies in North America , ed. Peter Force (Washington, D.C.: Clarke and Force, 1837), vol. 1, 913–916. https://archive.org/stream/AmericanArchives-FourthSeriesVolume1-ContainingADocumentaryHistory/AaSeries4VolumeI#page/n455/mode/2up , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]
• “From Benjamin Franklin to Jonathan Shipley, 7 July 1775,” Founders Online, National Archives. http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0057 , last modified June 29, 2017. [ ↩ ]
• Gt. Brit. Soveriengs, Etc., “His Majesty’s Most Gracious Speech to Both Houses of Parliament, on Friday, October 27, 1775 . . . New York? 1775].” https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.10803800/ , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]
• Thomas Paine, Common Sense (Philadelphia: W. T. and Bradford, 1776). https://www.gutenberg.org/files/147/147-h/147-h.htm , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]
• Pennsylvania Evening Post , September 21, 1776. [ ↩ ]
• Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 , 34 vols. (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1904–1937), vol. 4, 342. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/hlaw:@field(DOCID+@lit(jc004109 . [ ↩ ]
• “Report & the Resolution for Independancy Agreed to July 2d. 1776,” Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 23, folio 17, National Archives, Washington, DC. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/declarat.html . [ ↩ ]
• Journals of the Continental Congress 5: 510–516. [ ↩ ]
• For more on the process of writing the Declaration of Independence, see Pauline Maier, American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence (New York: Knopf, 1997). [ ↩ ]
• Barnet Schecter, The Battle for New York: The City at the Heart of the American Revolution (New York: Walker, 2002). [ ↩ ]
• David Hackett Fischer, Washington’s Crossing (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004). [ ↩ ]
• Richard M. Ketchum, Saratoga: Turning Point of America’s Revolutionary War (New York: Holt, 1997). [ ↩ ]
• For more on Franklin’s diplomacy in France, see Stacy Schiff, A Great Improvisation: Franklin, France, and the Birth of America (New York: Thorndike Press, 2005). [ ↩ ]
• David K. Wilson, The Southern Strategy: Britain’s Conquest of South Carolina and Georgia, 1775–1780 (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2005). [ ↩ ]
• Richard M. Ketchum, Victory at Yorktown: The Campaign That Won the Revolution (New York: Holt, 2004). [ ↩ ]
• Woody Holton, Abigail Adams (New York: Free Press, 2009), 208–217. [ ↩ ]
• Joy Day Buel and Richard Buel, The Way of Duty: A Woman and Her Family in Revolutionary America (New York: Norton, 1995), 145–170. [ ↩ ]
• For discussion of these numerical estimates, see Gary Nash’s introduction to Benjamin Quarles, The Negro in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Press, 1996), xxiii. [ ↩ ]
• Willi Paul Adams, The First American Constitutions: Republican Ideology and the Making of the State Constitutions in the Revolutionary Era (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2001), 126–146. [ ↩ ]
• Gordon S. Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1787 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969). [ ↩ ]
• Maya Jasanoff, Liberty’s Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World (New York: Knopf, 2011). [ ↩ ]
• Alan Gilbert, Black Patriots and Loyalists: Fighting for Emancipation in the War of Independence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012). [ ↩ ]
• Ira Berlin, Many Thousands Gone: The First Two Centuries of Slavery in North America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 217–289. [ ↩ ]
• For a summary of the global aspects of the Revolution, see Ted Brackemyre, “The American Revolution: A Very European Ordeal,” U.S. History Scene , http://ushistoryscene.com/article/am-rev-european-ordeal , accessed April 24, 2018. [ ↩ ]

Theses on the American Revolution

James p. cannon.

Drafted: 1946 Source: Fighting for Socialism in the “American Century”; Reprinted from Fourth International (c) Resistance Books 2001 Published by Resistance Books 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale NSW 2008, Permission for on-line publication provided by Resistance Books for use by the James P. Cannon Internet Archive in 2003. Transcription\HTML Markup: David Walters

The “Theses on the American Revolution” were drafted by Cannon and adopted by the 12th National Convention of the SWP, November 1946.

They affirm that, despite all the power of US imperialism, fresh from its victory in World War II, the “American Century” will fail. They reject any idea that the US is immune from the laws of the class struggle. The “American Theses” are a ringing declaration of confidence in the prospects for a socialist transformation in the United States and the ability of the working class to carry it through. The decisive intrument in this struggle is the leadership of a revolutionary workers party, the essential nucleus of which already existed in the SWP.

This not a conjunctural document. It is only concerned with presenting the most fundamental aspects of the question. In his convention report, Cannon stressed that “secondary questions of tactics and even of strategy, with all their importance, are left out ... The theses deal only with analysis and perspectives—and these only in the broadest sense—because that is the fundamental basis from which we proceed...Our theses ... proceed in accord with the Marxist method and the Marxist tradition by analysing and emphasising first of all the objective factors that are making for revolution. These are primary. These are fundamental.”

Developments in the US at the end of World War II certainly seemed to confirm the revolutionary optimism of the “Theses” and the expectation of the SWP convention that the US class struggle was moving toward a revolutionary situation.

The country experienced the greatest strike wave in its history—far greater than that of the 1930s. In the 1930s, the greatest number of workers on strike in any single year never exceeded two million but in 1945 some 6.5 million workers took part in strike action. The average yearly working days on strike in 1935-39 was 17 million; in 1945 it was 36 million—jumping to 116 million in 1946!

The SWP experienced rapid growth in this period. It built union fractions in key sections of industry. Its racial composition altered dramatically, with African-American workers constituting a quarter to a third of its membership. With a strong base of worker cadres, the party began to think and plan in terms of developing from a propaganda group addressing itself to the most politically advanced workers into a party that could undertake to lead large numbers of workers in action.

The “American Theses” was drafted with the aim of educating the wave of new SWP recruits in the party’s fundamental revolutionary perspectives.

However, with great rapidity, the strike wave ended. By the spring of 1947, industrial action was at its lowest ebb since the formation of the CIO in the mid-1930s.

The US ruling class was eventually able to stabilise the situation after the war for three main reasons:

The very real revolutionary prospects in Europe were derailed by the Stalinist and social-democratic misleaders. Furthermore, US imperialism provided large-scale aid for the reconstruction of West European and Japanese capitalism.

The survival of capitalism thus assured, a long capitalist boom began in the imperialist countries.

The Cold War anti-communist witch-hunt in the US had a chilling effect on political and cultural life. Getting underway in earnest in 1947, it penetrated deeply into the labour movement, resulting in the purging of all oppositional currents and intensifying the bureaucratisation of the union leaderships.

However, the ending of the postwar upsurge and the conservatism of the later 1940s and ’50s do not invalidate the basic revolutionary perspective outlined in the “American Theses”.

The United States, the most powerful capitalist country in history, is a component part of the world capitalist system and is subject to the same general laws. It suffers from the same incurable diseases and is destined to share the same fate. The overwhelming preponderance of American imperialism does not exempt it from the decay of world capitalism, but on the contrary acts to involve it ever more deeply, inextricably, and hopelessly. US capitalism can no more escape from the revolutionary consequences of world capitalist decay than the older European capitalist powers. The blind alley in which world capitalism has arrived, and the US with it, excludes a new organic era of capitalist stabilisation. The dominant world position of American imperialism now accentuates and aggravates the death agony of capitalism as a whole.

American imperialism emerged victorious from the Second World War, not merely over its German and Japanese rivals, but also over its “democratic” allies, especially Great Britain. Today Wall Street unquestionably is the dominant world imperialist centre. Precisely because it has issued from the war vastly strengthened in relation to all its capitalist rivals, US imperialism seems indomitable. So overpowering in all fields—diplomatic, military, commercial, financial, and industrial—is Wall Street’s preponderance that consolidation of its world hegemony seems to be within easy reach. Wall Street hopes to inaugurate the so-called “American Century”.

In reality, the American ruling class faces more insurmountable obstacles in “organising the world” than confronted the German bourgeoisie in its repeated and abortive attempts to attain a much more modest goal, namely: “organising Europe”.

The meteoric rise of US imperialism to world supremacy comes too late. Moreover, American imperialism rests increasingly on the foundations of world economy, in sharp contrast to the situation prevailing before the First World War, when it rested primarily on the internal market—the source of its previous successes and equilibrium. But the world foundation is today shot through with insoluble contradictions; it suffers from chronic dislocations and is mined with revolutionary powder kegs.

American capitalism, hitherto only partially involved in the death agony of capitalism as a world system, is henceforth subject to the full and direct impact of all the forces and contradictions that have debilitated the old capitalist countries of Europe.

The economic prerequisites for the socialist revolution are fully matured in the US. The political premises are likewise far more advanced than might appear on the surface.

The US emerged from the Second World War, just as it did in 1918, as the strongest part of the capitalist world. But here ends the resemblance in the impact and consequences of the two wars upon the country’s economic life. For in other major aspects the situation has in the meantime drastically altered.

In 1914-18 continental Europe was the main theatre of war; the rest of the world, especially the colonial countries, was left virtually untouched by the hostilities. Thus, not only sections of continental Europe and England but the main framework of the world market itself remained intact. With all its European competitors embroiled in the war, the way was left clear for American capitalism to capture markets.

More than this, during the First World War capitalist Europe itself became a vast market for American industry and agriculture. The American bourgeoisie drained Europe of her accumulated wealth of centuries and supplanted their Old World rivals in the world market. This enabled the ruling class to convert the US from a debtor into the world’s banker and creditor, and simultaneously to expand both the heavy (capital goods) and the light (consumer goods) industries. Subsequently this wartime expansion permitted the fullest possible development of this country’s domestic market. Finally, not merely did the American bourgeoisie make vast profits from the war but the country as a whole emerged much richer. The relatively cheap price of imperialist participation in World War I (only a few score billion dollars) was covered many times over by the accruing economic gains.

Profoundly different in its effects is the Second World War. This time only the Western Hemisphere has been left untouched militarily. The Far East, the main prize of the war, has been subjected to a devastation second only to that suffered by Germany and Eastern Europe. Continental Europe as well as England have been bankrupted by the war. The world market has been completely disrupted. Thus culminated the process of shrinking, splintering, and undermining that went on in the interval between the two wars (the withdrawal of one-sixth of the world—the USSR—from the capitalist orbit; the debasement of currency systems, the barter methods of Hitlerite Germany, Japan’s inroads on Asiatic and Latin American markets, England’s Empire Preference System, etc., etc.).

Europe, which defaulted on all its prior war and postwar debts to the US, this time served not as an inexhaustible and highly profitable market, but as a gigantic drain upon the wealth and resources of this country in the shape of lend-lease, overall conversion of American economy for wartime production, huge mobilisation of manpower, large-scale casualties, and so on.

With regard to the internal market, the latter, instead of expanding organically as in 1914-18, experienced in the course of the Second World War only an artificial revival based on war expenditures.

While the bourgeoisie has been fabulously enriched, the country as a whole has become much poorer; the astronomic costs of the war will never be recouped.

In sum, the major factors that once served to foster and fortify American capitalism either no longer exist or are turning into their opposites.

The prosperity that followed the First World War, which was hailed as a new capitalist era refuting all Marxist prognostications, ended in an economic catastrophe. But even this short-lived prosperity of the ’20s was based on a combination of circumstances which cannot and will not recur again. In addition to the factors already listed, it is necessary to stress: (1) that American capitalism had a virgin continent to exploit; (2) that up to a point it had been able to maintain a certain balance between industry and agriculture; and (3) that the main base of capitalist expansion had been its internal market. So long as these three conditions existed—although they were already being undermined—it was possible for US capitalism to maintain a relative stability.

The boom in the ’20s nourished the myth of the permanent stability of American capitalism, giving rise to pompous and hollow theories of a “new capitalism”, “American exceptionalism”, the “American dream”, and so forth and so on. The illusions about the possibilities and future of American capitalism were spread by the reformists and all other apologists for the ruling class not only at home but abroad. “Americanism” was the gospel of all the misleaders of the European and American working class.

What actually happened in the course of the fabulous prosperity of the ’20s was that under these most favourable conditions, all the premises for an unparalleled economic catastrophe were prepared. Out of it came a chronic crisis of American agriculture. Out of it came a monstrous concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands. Correspondingly, the rest of the population became relatively poorer. Thus, while in the decade of 1920-30, industrial productivity increased by 50%, wages rose only 30%. The workers were able to buy—in prosperity—proportionately less than before.

The relative impoverishment of the American people is likewise mirrored in national wealth statistics. By 1928 the workers’ share of the national wealth had dropped to 4.7%; while the farmers retained only 15.4%. At the same time, the bourgeoisie’s share of the national wealth had risen to 79.9%, with most of it falling into the hands of the Sixty Families and their retainers.

The distribution of national income likewise expressed this monstrous disproportion. In 1929, at the peak of prosperity, 36,000 families had the same income as 11 million “lower-bracket” families.

This concentration of wealth was a cardinal factor in limiting the absorbing capacity of the internal market. Compensating external outlets for agriculture and industry could not be found in a constricting world market.

Moreover, the need to export raw materials and agricultural products tended to further unbalance American foreign trade. This inescapably led to a further dislocation of the world market, whose participants were debtor countries, themselves in need of selling more than they bought in order to cover payments on their debts, largely owed to the US.

While appearing and functioning in the role of stabilisers of capitalism, the American imperialists were thus its greatest disrupters both at home and abroad. The US turned out to be the main source of world instability, the prime aggravator of imperialist contradictions.

In the interim between the two wars this manifested itself most graphically in the fact that all economic convulsions began in the Republic of the Dollar, the home of “rugged individualism”. This was the case with the first postwar crisis of 1920-21; this was repeated eight years later when the disproportion between agriculture and industry reached the breaking point and when the internal market had become saturated owing to the impoverishment of the people at one pole and the aggrandisement of the monopolists at the other. The Great American Boom exploded in a crisis which shattered the economic foundations of all capitalist countries.

The economic crisis of 1929 was not a cyclical crisis such as periodically accompanied organic capitalist development in the past, leading to new and higher productive levels. It was a major historical crisis of capitalism in decay, which could not be overcome through the “normal” channels; that is to say, through the blind interplay of the laws governing the market.

Production virtually came to a standstill. National income was cut into less than half, plummeting from 81 billion dollars in 1929 to 40 billion dollars in 1932. Industry and agriculture sagged. The army of unemployed swelled 10-fold “normal”, reaching the dizzy figure of 20 million. According to official estimates, based on 1929 averages, the losses in the years 1930-38 amounted to 43 million man-years of labour, and 133 billion dollars of national income.

By 1939 the national debt soared to 40 billion dollars, or 14 billion more than the highest point at the end of the First World War. The number of unemployed kept hovering at 10 million. Industry and agriculture stagnated. The foreign trade of the US in a reduced world market fell to less than half of its “normal” peacetime share.

What all these figures really express is the fearsome degradation of living standards of the workers and the middle class, and the outright pauperisation of the “underprivileged one-third” of the population. The wafer-thin layer of monopolists, naturally, did not suffer at all, but on the contrary utilised the crisis in order to gobble up even a larger share of the country’s wealth and resources.

The bourgeoisie saw no way out of the crisis. They had no way out. They and their regime remained the main obstacle in the way not only of domestic but of world recovery. In its downward plunge, the American bourgeoisie dragged the rest of the capitalist world with it, and kept it down.

Decisive is the fact that despite all the “pump-priming”, “brain-trusting”, and emergency “reforms”, American capitalism was incapable of solving the crisis. The partial upswing of 1934-37 proved to be temporary and passing in character. The precipitous drop that occurred in 1937 revealed the abyss facing American capitalism. The threatening new downward plunge was cut off only by the huge expenditures made in preparation for the Second World War.

Only the war temporarily resolved the economic crisis which had lasted in both hemispheres for 10 years. The grim reality, however, is that this “solution” has solved exactly nothing. Least of all did it remove or even mitigate a single one of the basic causes for the crisis of 1929.

The basis of the current American postwar prosperity is the artificial expansion of industry and agriculture through unprecedented government spending which is swelling constantly the enormous national debt. In its fictitious character the war and postwar boom of the early ’40s far exceeds the orgy engaged in by European capitalism during 1914-18 and the immediate postwar years. The diversion of production into war industry on an unheard-of scale resulted in temporary shortages of consumer goods. The home and foreign markets seemed to acquire a new absorbing capacity. Universal scarcities and war havoc are acting as temporary spurs to production, especially in the consumers’ goods field.

Overall there is, however, the universal impoverishment, the disrupted economic, fiscal, and government systems—coupled with the chronic diseases and contradictions of capitalism, not softened but aggravated by the war.

If we multiply the condition in which European capitalism, with England at its head, emerged from the First World War by 10 times and in some instances a hundred times—because of the vaster scale of the consequences of World War II—then we will arrive at an approximation of the actual state of American capitalism.

Every single factor underlying the current “peacetime” prosperity is ephemeral. This country has emerged not richer from the Second World War as was the ease in the ’20s, but poorer—in a far more impoverished world. The disproportion between agriculture and industry has likewise increased tremendously, despite the hothouse expansion of agriculture. The concentration of wealth and the polarisation of the American population into rich and poor has continued at a forced pace.

The basic conditions that precipitated the 1929 crisis when American capitalism enjoyed its fullest health not only persist but have grown more malignant. Once the internal market is again saturated, no adequate outlet can be hoped for in the unbalanced world market. The enormously augmented productive capacity of the US collides against the limits of the world market and its shrinking capacity. Ruined Europe herself needs to export. So does the ruined Orient, whose equilibrium has been ruptured by the shattering of Japan, its most advanced sector.

Europe is in dire need of billions in loans. In addition to lend-lease, Wall Street has already pumped almost $5 billion in loans into England; almost $2 billion into France; and smaller sums into the other satellite countries of Western Europe—without however achieving any semblance of stabilisation there. Bankrupt capitalist Europe remains both a competitor on the world market and a bottomless drain. The Orient, too, needs loans, especially China, which, while in the throes of civil war, has already swallowed up as many American dollars as did Germany in the early ’20s.

At home, the explosive materials are accumulating at a truly American tempo. Carrying charges on the huge national debt; the astronomic military “peacetime” budget ($18.5 billion for this year); the inflation, the “overhead expenditures” of Wall Street’s program of world domination, etc., etc.—all this can come from one source and one only: national income. In plain words, from the purchasing power of the masses. Degradation of workers’ living conditions and the pauperisation of the farmers and the urban middle class—that is the meaning of Wall Street’s program.

The following conclusion flows from the objective situation: US imperialism which proved incapable of recovering from its crisis and stabilising itself in the 10-year period preceding the outbreak of the Second World War is heading for an even more catastrophic explosion in the current postwar era. The cardinal factor which will light the fuse is this: The home market, after an initial and artificial revival, must contract. It cannot expand as it did in the ’20s. What is really in store is not unbounded prosperity but a short-lived boom. In the wake of the boom must come another crisis and depression which will make the 1929-32 conditions look prosperous by comparison.

The impending economic paroxysm must, under the existing conditions, pass inexorably into the social and political crisis of American capitalism, posing in its course point-blank the question of who shall be the master in the land. In their mad drive to conquer and enslave the entire world, the American monopolists are today preparing war against the Soviet Union. This war program, which may be brought to a head by a crisis or the fear of a crisis at home, will meet with incalculable obstacles and difficulties. A war will not solve the internal difficulties of American imperialism but will rather sharpen and complicate them. Such a war will meet with fierce resistance not only by the peoples of the USSR, but also by the European and colonial masses who do not want to be the slaves of Wall Street. At home the fiercest resistance will be generated. Wall Street’s war drive, aggravating the social crisis, may under certain conditions actually precipitate it. In any case, another war will not cancel out the socialist alternative to capitalism but only pose it more sharply.

The workers’ struggle for power in the US is not a perspective of a distant and hazy future but the realistic program of our epoch.

The revolutionary movement of the American workers is an organic part of the world revolutionary process. The revolutionary upheavals of the European proletariat which lie ahead will complement, reinforce, and accelerate the revolutionary developments in the US. The liberationist struggles of the colonial peoples against imperialism which are unfolding before our eyes will exert a similar influence. Conversely, each blow dealt by the American proletariat to the imperialists at home will stimulate, supplement, and intensify the revolutionary struggles in Europe and the colonies. Every reversal suffered by imperialism anywhere will in turn produce ever greater repercussions in this country, generating such speed and power as will tend to reduce all time intervals both at home and abroad.

The role of America in the world is decisive. Should the European and colonial revolutions, now on the order of the day, precede in point of time the culmination of the struggle in the US, they would immediately be confronted with the necessity of defending their conquests against the economic and military assaults of the American imperialist monster. The ability of the victorious insurgent peoples everywhere to maintain themselves would depend to a high degree on the strength and fighting capacity of the revolutionary labour movement in America. The American workers would then be obliged to come to their aid, just as the Western European working class came to the aid of the Russian Revolution and saved it by blocking full-scale imperialist military assaults upon the young workers’ republic.

But even should the revolution in Europe and other parts of the world be once again retarded, it will by no means signify a prolonged stabilisation of the world capitalist system. The issue of socialism or capitalism will not be finally decided until it is decided in the US. Another retardation of the proletarian revolution in one country or another, or even one continent or another, will not save American imperialism from its proletarian nemesis at home. The decisive battles for the communist future of mankind will be fought in the US.

The revolutionary victory of the workers in the US will seal the doom of the senile bourgeois regimes in every part of our planet, and of the Stalinist bureaucracy, if it still exists at the time. The Russian Revolution raised the workers and colonial peoples to their feet. The American revolution with its hundredfold greater power will set in motion revolutionary forces that will change the face of our planet. The whole Western Hemisphere will quickly be consolidated into the Socialist United States of North, Central, and South America. This invincible power, merging with the revolutionary movements in all parts of the world, will put an end to the outlived capitalist system as a whole, and begin the grandiose task of world reconstruction under the banner of the Socialist United States of the World.

Whereas the main problem of the workers in the Russian Revolution was to maintain their power once they had gained it, the problem in the United States is almost exclusively the problem of the conquest of power by the workers. The conquest of power in the United States will be more difficult than it was in backward Russia, but precisely for that reason it will be much easier to consolidate and secure.

The dangers of internal counterrevolution, foreign intervention, imperialist blockade, and bureaucratic degeneration of a privileged labour caste—in Russia all of these dangers stemmed from the numerical weakness of the proletariat, the age-long poverty and backwardness inherited from tsarism, and the isolation of the Russian Revolution. These dangers were in the final analysis unavoidable there.

These dangers scarcely exist in the US. Thanks to the overwhelming numerical superiority and social weight of the proletariat, its high cultural level and potential; thanks to the country’s vast resources, its productive capacity and preponderant strength on the world arena, the victorious proletarian revolution in the US, once it has consolidated its power, will be almost automatically secured against capitalist restoration either by internal counterrevolution or by foreign intervention and imperialist blockade.

As for the danger of bureaucratic degeneration after the revolutionary victory—this can only arise from privileges which are in turn based on backwardness, poverty, and universal scarcities. Such a danger could have no material foundation within the US. Here the triumphant workers’ and farmers’ government would from the very beginning be able to organise socialist production on far higher levels than under capitalism, and virtually overnight assure such a high standard of living for the masses as would strip privileges in the material sense of any serious meaning whatever. Mawkish speculations concerning the danger of bureaucratic degeneration after the victorious revolution serve no purpose except to introduce scepticism and pessimism into the ranks of the workers’ vanguard, and paralyse their will to struggle, while providing faint-hearts and snivellers with a convenient pretext for running away from the struggle. The problem in the US is almost exclusively the problem of the workers’ conquest of political power.

In the coming struggle for power the main advantages will be on the side of the workers; with adequate mobilisation of their forces and proper direction, the workers will win. If one wishes to deal with stern realities and not with superficial appearances, that is the only way to pose the question. The American capitalist class is strong, but the American working class is stronger.

The numerical strength and social weight of the American working class, greatly increased by the war, is overwhelming in the country’s life. Nothing can stand up against it. The productivity of American labour, likewise greatly increased in wartime, is the highest in the world. This means skill, and skill means power.

The American workers are accustomed to the highest living and working standards. The widely held view that high wages are a conservatising factor tending to make workers immune to revolutionary ideas and actions is one-sided and false. This holds true only under conditions of capitalist stability where the relatively high standard of living can be maintained and even improved. This is excluded for the future, as our whole analysis has shown. On the other hand, the workers react most sensitively and violently to any infringement upon their living standards. This has already been demonstrated by the strike waves in which great masses of “conservative” workers have resorted to the most militant and radical course of action. In the given situation, therefore, the relatively high living standard of the American workers is a revolutionary and not, as is commonly believed, a conservatising factor.

The revolutionary potential of the class is further strengthened by their traditional militancy coupled with the ability to react almost spontaneously in defence of their vital interests, and their singular resourcefulness and ingenuity (the sit-down strikes!).

Another highly important factor in raising the revolutionary potential of the American working class is its greatly increased cohesiveness and homogeneity—a transformation accomplished in the last quarter of a century. Previously, large and decisive sections of the proletariat in the basic industries were recruited by immigration. These foreign-born workers were handicapped and divided by language barriers, treated as social pariahs, and deprived of citizenship and the most elementary civil rights. All these circumstances appeared to be insuperable barriers in the way of their organisation and functioning as a united labour force. In the intervening years, however, these foreign-born workers have been assimilated and “Americanised”. They and their sons today constitute a powerful, militant, and articulate detachment of the organised labour movement.

An equally significant and profound development is represented by the transformation that has taken place in the position occupied by the Negroes. Formerly barred and deprived of the rights and benefits of organisation by the dominant reactionary craft unions and, on the other hand, regarded and sometimes utilised by the employers as a reserve for strikebreaking purposes, masses of Negroes have since the ’20s penetrated into the basic industries and into the unions. Not less than two million Negroes are members of the CIO, AFL, and independent unions. They have demonstrated in the great strike struggles that they stand in the front lines of progressiveness and militancy.

The American workers have the advantage of being comparatively free, especially among the younger and most militant layers, from reformist prejudices. The class as a whole has not been infected with the debilitating poison of reformism, either of the classic “socialist” variety or the latter-day Stalinist brand. As a consequence, once they proceed to action, they more readily accept the most radical solutions. No important section of the class, let alone the class as a whole, has been demoralised by defeats. Finally, this young and mighty power is being drawn into the decisive phases of the class struggle at a tempo that creates unparalleled premises for mass radicalisation.

Much has been said about the “backwardness” of the American working class as a justification for a pessimistic outlook, the postponement of the socialist revolution to a remote future, and withdrawal from the struggle. This is a very superficial view of the American workers and their prospects.

It is true that this class, in many respects the most advanced and progressive in the world, has not yet taken the road of independent political action on a mass scale. But this weakness can be swiftly overcome. Under the compulsion of objective necessity not only backward peoples but backward classes in advanced countries find themselves driven to clear great distances in single leaps. As a matter of fact, the American working class has already made one such leap which has advanced it far ahead of its old positions.

The workers entered the 1929 crisis as an unorganised, atomised mass imbued with illusions concerning “rugged individualism”, “private initiative”, “free enterprise”, “the American Way”, etc., etc. Less than 10% of the class as a whole was organised on the trade union field (fewer than 3 million out of 33 million in 1929). Moreover, this thin layer embraced primarily the highly skilled and privileged workers, organised in antiquated craft unions. The main and most decisive section of the workers knew unionism only as “company unionism”, remaining without the benefit, the experience, and even the understanding of the most elementary form of workers’ organisation—the trade union. They were regarded and treated as mere raw material for capitalist exploitation, without rights or protection or any security of employment.

As a consequence, the 1929 crisis found the working class helpless and impotent. For three years the masses remained stunned and disoriented by the disaster. Their resistance was extremely limited and sporadic. But their anger and resentment accumulated. The next five years (1933-37), coincident with a partial revival of industry, witnessed a series of gigantic clashes, street fights and sit-down strikes—an embryonic civil war—the end result of which was a leap, a giant leap, for millions of workers from non-existence as an organised force to trade union consciousness and organisation. Once fairly started, the movement for unionism snowballed, embracing today almost 15 million in all the basic industries.

In one leap—in a brief decade—the American workers attained trade union consciousness on a higher plane and with mightier organisations than in any other advanced country. In the study and analysis of this great transformation, rather than in vapid ruminations over the “backwardness” of the American workers, one can find the key to prospective future developments. Under the impact of great events and pressing necessities the American workers will advance beyond the limits of trade unionism and acquire political class consciousness and organisation in a similar sweeping movement.

The decisive instrument of the proletarian revolution is the party of the class conscious vanguard. Failing the leadership of such a party, the most favourable revolutionary situations, which arise from the objective circumstances, cannot be carried through to the final victory of the proletariat and the beginnings of planned reorganisation of society on socialist foundations. This was demonstrated most conclusively—and positively—in the 1917 Russian Revolution. This same principled lesson derives no less irrefutably—even though negatively—from the entire world experience of the epoch of wars, revolutions, and colonial uprisings that began with the outbreak of the First World War in 1914.

However, this basic conclusion from the vast and tragic experience of the last third of a century can be and has been given a reactionary interpretation by a school of neo-revisionism, represented by the ideologues, philosophers, and preachers of prostration, capitulation, and defeat. They say in effect: “Since the revolutionary party is small and weak it is idle to speak of revolutionary possibilities. The weakness of the party changes everything.” The authors of this “theory” reject and repudiate Marxism, embracing in its place the subjective school of sociology. They isolate the factor of the revolutionary party’s relative numerical weakness at a particular moment from the totality of objective economic and political developments which creates all the necessary and sufficient conditions for the swift growth of the revolutionary vanguard party.

Given an objectively revolutionary situation, a proletarian party—even a small one—equipped with a precisely worked out Marxist program and firm cadres can expand its forces and come to the head of the revolutionary mass movement in a comparatively brief span of time. This too was proved conclusively—and positively—by the experiences of the Russian Revolution in 1917. There the Bolshevik Party, headed by Lenin and Trotsky, bounded forward from a tiny minority, just emerging from underground and isolation in February to the conquest of power in October—a period of nine months.

Numerical weakness, to be sure, is not a virtue for a revolutionary party but a weakness to be overcome by persistent work and resolute struggle. In the US all the conditions are in the process of unfolding for the rapid transformation of the organised vanguard from a propaganda group to a mass party strong enough to lead the revolutionary struggle for power.

The hopeless contradictions of American capitalism, inextricably tied up with the death agony of world capitalism, are bound to lead to a social crisis of such catastrophic proportions as will place the proletarian revolution on the order of the day.

In this crisis, it is realistic to expect that the American workers, who attained trade union consciousness and organisation within a single decade, will pass through another great transformation in their mentality, attaining political consciousness and organisation. If in the course of this dynamic development a mass labour party based on the trade unions is formed, it will not represent a detour into reformist stagnation and futility, as happened in England and elsewhere in the period of capitalist ascent. From all indications, it will rather represent a preliminary stage in the political radicalisation of the American workers, preparing them for the direct leadership of the revolutionary party.

The revolutionary vanguard party, destined to lead this tumultuous revolutionary movement in the US, does not have to be created. It already exists, and its name is the SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY. It is the sole legitimate heir and continuator of pioneer American Communism and the revolutionary movements of the American workers from which it sprang. Its nucleus has already taken shape in three decades of unremitting work and struggle against the stream. Its program has been hammered out in ideological battles and successfully defended against every kind of revisionist assault upon it. The fundamental core of a professional leadership has been assembled and trained in the irreconcilable spirit of the combat party of the revolution.

The task of the SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY consists simply in this: to remain true to its program and banner; to render it more precise with each new development and apply it correctly in the class struggle; and to expand and grow with the growth of the revolutionary mass movement, always aspiring to lead it to victory in the struggle for political power.

Back to the James P. Cannon Internet Archive Back to the Marxists Internet Archive

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides