Was it justified?

No taxation without representation desu

Other urls found in this thread:

strawpoll.me/10247961
youtube.com/watch?v=u2xwoFhkVTo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

strawpoll.me/10247961

Every war is justified to some extent

It's the winners that paint it to be justified or not.

Regardless of the moral justifications, it was sort of necessary. If America hadn't rebelled its western border would probably have remained the Appalachians.

No reproduction without copulation desu.

No, it was stupid.
They rebelled just because of some measly taxes, when Britain paid taxes to protect their ass against the French.

If that rebellion was just, then the secession of the Confederacy is too.

>Was it justified?
Not completely.
The real question is "does that matter?", and the answer to that is no.

now you have the idea.

>taxation without representation

>what is Puerto Rico

especially interesting when you compare the Puerto Rican population with the smaller US states

They actively choose to not become a state specifically to avoid paying federal tax, though. Fuck having an all-latino state in the union anyway, California is bad enough.

The American Revolution was a force of nature. The taxes were only the catalyst not the cause.

Puerto Rico is a state of leeches

>Was it justified?
It was after they won. You don't need a justification when you have force.

edgy

The interests and the colonies and England simply diverged. It's as simple as that. Thinking it was some high minded ideal that spurred the revolution just muddies up the true issues.

Puerto Rico is actively fighting to become a US state.

here, have a fun little illustrated video by some taig about the american war of independence

youtube.com/watch?v=u2xwoFhkVTo

we should sell them to germany

Justification is a political issue and improve that board.

For the common American colonist, no.

For the American elite, it's the most wildly successful tax evasion scheme in all of history.

Yes, it was justified, and the only downside to the revolution is that we didn't finish the job and expel the Union Jack from the continent. I'm fucking looking directly at you Canada.

Yes it was justified. Taxation without representation is indistinguishable from tribute. It doesn't matter that the taxation was light or that the tea dumped at the Boston tea party was going to be sold very cheaply. If someone takes Monet from you and you have no say in how it is used; call it what you like: tribute,taxation, protection money,stealing; it's all the same.

No, it was treason.

Louis XVI learned the taste of karma.

Kill yourselves you dumb niggers

What a well thought out argument...

I'm going to sound a little bit like a Marxist here, but from what I gather it was really just a war between rich landowners wanting more power from their rich landowner overlords across the ocean.

From the point of view of political participation, sovereign self-determination, etc. for those who had the means to seize these, I'd say it was justified. But for the vast majority of non-landowning men it really didn't make much of a difference.

Go on...

Bullshit. If the British had their way then Americans would never had settled beyond the east coast. The proclamation of 1763 forbid settlement beyond Appalachians. This land was what the lower class in america needed to move up a rung on the ladder. All they had to was steal it from the indians.