Consequences Of Conflict And Violence In The American Revolution
Conflicts and violence in society are nothing new to the human race. Whether it's between the “haves” and the “have nots,” the government versus it's citizens, or citizens verses each other, constant conflict seems to be an aspect of civilization that humanity cannot live without. The most detrimental of conflicts that influenced the Revolution were factors of economic strife, the brewing conflict between colonists and the British rulers, as well as the discord between the colonists themselves. Although there are different theories as to how or why the initial conflicts started, there is no denying that America has a bloody history and a common usage of violence as an end to its means. A constant factor throughout history is the bloodshed
…show more content…
When the government could not levy punishment, it was up to the elites, militias and the army to do so in the name of “civilized order.” Government authorities went so far as to hang and/or decapitated criminals, leaving their bodies in public as an example of the consequences of crime [2]. Some of the most bloody conflicts in America was George Washington's campaign against the Indians. Washington had a wishy-washy attitude when it came to what he was going to do and how he was going to attempt reconciliation between the Indians and the colonists. On one side of the token he approached the situation with a mind set of equality, rights for the Indians and fairness, on the other side of the token he used “punishment and offensive operations” to advance the westward migration [State of the Union p515]. However, when diplomatic efforts failed, Washington had no problem asserting his control via violent conquest. The highest death count of American soldiers occurred during November of 1789 when both General Harmar and General St lair were defeated by Little Turtle. Expansion with Honor, a concept that Washington wanted to displace the Indians “with honor” was finally enacted when General Wayne defeated Little Turtle at Fallen Timbers [Lecture wk 6]. Although Washingtons goal was to “gradually integrate the natives” because was …show more content…
The value of money steadily decreased and the availability of hard coin, either in gold or silver, was a rarity. In addition to that, the British took over St Eustatius for unenforced bans against America. They took possession of stores, warehouses, shops, private property including clothing, money, food, weapons, petty cash [Lecture]. Dealing with hardship due to the blockades creating shortages and the British confiscation of goods headed for America, merchants began hoarding their wares or cornering the market by price gouging [Lecture]. Although the government stepped in and moderated price controls, it did not stop the community from demanding a fair price and resorting to violence if negotiations failed. If the merchant refused a fair price, his shop was torn apart, his goods were taken and a fair price was left in it's wake [countryman pg 138]. This was the community's way of asserting their control over the prices of goods. After all, if the merchants were going to allow their greed to dictate others starvation, those “others” would simply take what they needed to survive. Although the common consensus was that it was the responsibility of the elites to take care of the poor in times of economic stagnation, it rarely
When the government could not levy punishment, it was up to the elites, militias and the army to do so in the name of “civilized order.” Government authorities went so far as to hang and/or decapitated criminals, leaving their bodies in public as an example of the consequences of crime [2]. Some of the most bloody conflicts in America was George Washington's campaign against the Indians. Washington had a wishy-washy attitude when it came to what he was going to do and how he was going to attempt reconciliation between the Indians and the colonists. On one side of the token he approached the situation with a mind set of equality, rights for the Indians and fairness, on the other side of the token he used “punishment and offensive operations” to advance the westward migration [State of the Union p515]. However, when diplomatic efforts failed, Washington had no problem asserting his control via violent conquest. The highest death count of American soldiers occurred during November of 1789 when both General Harmar and General St lair were defeated by Little Turtle. Expansion with Honor, a concept that Washington wanted to displace the Indians “with honor” was finally enacted when General Wayne defeated Little Turtle at Fallen Timbers [Lecture wk 6]. Although Washingtons goal was to “gradually integrate the natives” because was …show more content…
The value of money steadily decreased and the availability of hard coin, either in gold or silver, was a rarity. In addition to that, the British took over St Eustatius for unenforced bans against America. They took possession of stores, warehouses, shops, private property including clothing, money, food, weapons, petty cash [Lecture]. Dealing with hardship due to the blockades creating shortages and the British confiscation of goods headed for America, merchants began hoarding their wares or cornering the market by price gouging [Lecture]. Although the government stepped in and moderated price controls, it did not stop the community from demanding a fair price and resorting to violence if negotiations failed. If the merchant refused a fair price, his shop was torn apart, his goods were taken and a fair price was left in it's wake [countryman pg 138]. This was the community's way of asserting their control over the prices of goods. After all, if the merchants were going to allow their greed to dictate others starvation, those “others” would simply take what they needed to survive. Although the common consensus was that it was the responsibility of the elites to take care of the poor in times of economic stagnation, it rarely