I agree with Howard Zinn's interpretation of the Declaration of Independence. He explains that the upper-class colonists spread revolution against England using an inspiring and patriotic language that persuaded the lower classes. This document was used to bring together people from the cononies to protect the economic interests of the privileged Bourgeoisie. In adition, he mentions that this document was written to "unite large number of colonists" but some Americans were "omitted" like indians, slaves and women.
A clear evidence that supports his arguments is the tone, language and adjectives used in the list of grievances. A patriotic tone is used to unite colonists against England, giving examples about their brutality and destruction caused in America. However, some of these injustices would affect only the rich and powerful colonists, and that makes me think that the economic is the main reason why they would want to start a revolution.
On the other hand, according to Bernard Bailyn, the Declaration of Independence was written because the Founding Fathers feared that England would crush liberty in America. Furthermore, they believed that America was chosen by God to “play a special role in history”. I agree with this argument too, but I don’t think that ideological principles of the Enlightment like liberty or happiness were the ones that moved the upper-class colonists to write this document and start a revolution.
To sum up, I think the abusive taxes and economic problems were the main causes by which the upper-class colonists started a revolution against England. The Founding Fathers used an inspiring and patriotic language to unite large number of colonists only referring to “people” in a generic way and turn them against England, and this started the American Revolution.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario