Defying Empire: An Analysis

The British men gathered full control of the trading center present in the Americas, and created the Navigation Acts to help aid them in their tactics to take control over all trade within the Americas. The Navigation Acts were passed under a mercantilist system, and was used to regulate trade in a way that only benefitted the British economy. These acts restricted trade between England and its colonies to English or colonial ships, required certain colonial goods to pass through England before export, provided subsidies for the production of certain raw goods in the colonies, and banned colonial competition in large-scale manufacturing. This lowered the competition in the trading world for the British and caused the British to have a major surge in power, that greatly attributed to the growth of their rising empire. The British’s ambitious motives in the trading world help portray a way that the British took control of an important piece in the economy of all of the other nations present in the colonies in the time period, and shows another leading factor in the growth of the British empire.

The tarring and feathering of royal officials became a common act by colonists as way to show England that they were not pleased with having to pay the taxes. However, not all of these “rebellious” acts were physically taken out on royal officials. The Boston Non-Importation Agreement, was a formal decision made by Boston merchants and traders to not import or export items to Britain. The agreement, essentially a boycott, was a series of agreed upon restrictions the colonists put in place in regards to trade with the England. The decision for the agreement came about as a way to protest and impede the Townshend Revenue Act.

To help pay for the cost of the Seven Years’ War, taxes was increased in the American colonies. The rapid deviations in the colonists’ lives began to create tension between the Empire and colonies. These unforeseen consequences of the Seven Years’ War altered the political relations, independence, and ultimately the loyalty of the American colonist. The British American colonies, with little aid or presence from the British Empire, began to thrive and establish themselves. However, after the Seven

Lane, Kris E. Pillaging the Empire: Piracy in the Americas 1500-1750 (M.E. Sharpe Inc., 1998).

The colonist were forced to buy british goods,and that’s how and why the colonist started smuggling goods. 1764 of the sugar act britian started lowering the prices of molasses and sugar from being six-pence to three pence.

In actuality, many influential early Americans engaged in activity which contemporary society would consider criminal. Maybe today’s current politician’s actions correlate with those of our early American heroes and founding fathers? Hamilton even acknowledged writing love letters to his wife while living and carousing with prostitutes. It is ironic, how respectable people down through history engaged in lying and illicit activities, but contemporary society perceives the same despicable behavior as a new occurrences pointing to a downward spiral in contemporary society. When looking at colonial America, it is interesting to see that the acceptance of vigilante justice and the practice of residential hospitality has so drastically changed; however, the human condition of engaging in dishonesty and despicable behavior never seems to change.

The war of 1812 pitted the young America against the large empowered force of Britain, as well as many native Americans. This war was a huge influential factor in the growth of America from that point on. Britain's tyrannical rule over America and Canada eventually brought America to war. Although they suffered many casualties, American troops pushed the redcoats back and boosted the nation's confidence. The outcome of this war affected America’s foreign policies, economy, and society as a whole.

Although British officials consistently widened the definition of piracy, they failed to clearly differentiate the significance between a volunteer and a forced sailor on board a pirate ship. Therefore, nothing contributed to the unpredictability of the later trial proceedings as much as the inconsistency of pirate designations. If seventeenth century piracy trials hinged on the question of violating commissions, those after 1715 rested on determining the accused’s voluntary participation. The court’s determination of a sailor’s status was frequently random and wildly erratic. Worse yet, some justices made no effort to determine the active participation of individuals aboard pirate vessels, leading to instances of brutal rulings even by seventeenth

The war was known as The Seven Years ' War to the British but to the Americans it was called The French and Indian War, it was the bloodiest American war in the 18th century taking more lives than the American Revolution. Spreading across and involving three continents which included much of Europe, the Caribbean and India. The war was sparked by a clash between the English and French over colonial territory and wealth. “The land- variously claimed by Virginians, Pennsylvanians and the French-was actually inhabited by more than a dozen Indian tribes.” (pg 130)

Introduction The period of the trial was the 1910, more specifically the trial started on May 13, 1910 (pg.1). During the 1910 America was still developing into a world power, and many immigrants from other countries where attracted to t he prosperity that was available in America (Baily, S. L., 1983, pg.281). New York State specifically was one of the fastest growing states in the country with one of the best economical prosperity for native workers, and immigrants (Baily, S. L., 1983, pg.281). What is the crime in the trial?

The Seven Years War was a big contributor to the arrival of the French Revolution in 1789. Not only was it a big contributor to the French Revolution, it was also a very big contributor to the American Revolution. Following the nine years of war between the British and French, the English gave London more control over the thirteen colonies. This was a big part of the colonies resentment towards the British and soon led to the American

Historically, it is believed that the causes of large scale events and wars are often rooted in the outcomes of previous conflicts. The American Revolution, one of the largest most historically significant events of all time, was caused by a multitude of events. Specifically, many of the causes were in fact the results of past conflicts and ongoing tension, such as the French and Indian War and British taxation acts. Contrary to popular belief, the impact of American Revolution was not solely confined to the colonies and the British crown. Aside from leading to American independence, the American Revolution was a part of a larger global conflict, involving issues between Great Britain, France, and other foreign nations.

The American Revolution The French and Indian War impacted the American Revolution in many ways. Britain incurred a large debt from the cost of the war and the taxes that they imposed on the colonists created feelings of anger and rebellion that led to the revolution. As a result of the French and Indian war, the British were not at full strength which allowed the actions of the colonists to be more effective. Because of the outcome of the war, France was willing to help the colonists. Without the much needed help from the French the colonist may have never won the war.

The historical significance in this passage is the actions that were utilized with logistics then, are totally different than what we know and accomplish today. This is a quote I would like to highlight "While the ships stayed, our allowance was somewhat bettered by a daily proportion of biscuit, which the sailors would pilfer to sell, give, or exchange with us, for money, sassafras, furs, or love." From what I understand reading this they were willing to pilfer anything from anyone while they awaited the logistics and the resupply process. I would say today our society has successfully solved that problem and it is unquestionably significant in our daily day to day lives. The reason I chose to highlight the area is simple.

Defined as the promotion of human welfare in the Oxford dictionary, humanitarianism, contrary to popular belief, is not a modern practice. According to western literature and Michael Barnett in “Empire of Humanity: A history of Humanitarianism”, the moral idea behind humanitarianism originated in the West in the nineteenth century during the Enlightenment period in Europe and grew exponentially to presently become a global theory and practice. Barnett suggests three ages of humanitarianism; imperial (from the nineteenth century until World War 2), postcolonial (from World War 2 to the end of the Cold War) and liberal (from the end of the Cold War to today) calling the last age “liberal humanitarianism” and tying it to globalization, democracy