What the fuck was his problem?

>without representation
But that's wrong.

At least America got Florida, the sub-saharan Africa of America.

>tell colonists they're not allowed to colonize
>tax them for a war that happened on the other side of the Atlantic with people that aren't a threat to them in any way
>send German mercenaries to enforce your will
>tell them they have to quarter your soldiers etc.
>boo hoo why they getting mad?

The taxes would have been completely reasonable, however, the colonies had no representation in parliament.

The Brita never really governed the colonies in any effective sense. The colonies revolted when they did. I don't think that is completely unreasonable.

>didn't decide to have

If they didn't want the war, they could easily have taken the "raped to death by screaming redskins" route instead

>war that happened on the other side of the Atlantic

Lolwut

>England sticks all of their citizens with a grudge against the Crown thousands of miles away and encourages them to be self-reliant and govern themselves
>Wtf why are you revolting

Really nigga?

It doesn't matter how much they paid in taxes, what matters is that they had no representation in Parliament.

Pretty much this and poor administration.

A ton of people at the time thought it was nuts. But a lot also knew putting up with Britain's abuses was untenable in the long term. Ergo, resistance while still extending the olive branch, to a point.

Because the colonies saw themselves not as colonies of England, but as co-equal partners in the Union with separate laws and customs, but united under one King, whereas Parliament saw them wholly as creatures of England itself subject to the whims and control of Parliament.

>Unreasonable
>Dude can we get representation in parliament since we are paying taxes like Englishmen.
>No
What the fuck I love the British now.

There was the European theater.

The colonists did have SOME valid complaints, but it was pretty clearly actually about liberal elites wanting to put Enlightenment ideas into practice.

Most Englishmen had no representation in parliament at that time. And it would have been unworkable anyway when communication across the ocean took weeks for a one way message.

Lmao you aeren't even taxed. Read on the sugar and tea acts of 1763/64. We didn't put an extra tax on you, we gave our East India company tax exemptions (because they were in the red as that moment due to some production cost issues in india and brits not wanting to buy as much - probably a strain on the economy post 7year war). So in reality it was the american business who were suffering from the tea act because the exemption did not apply to them, and therefore their goods were more expensive to buy than ours. The american people, the consumers themselves, were not impacted by the tax exemption at all.

But ameritards had to revise history and pretend they were being lumped with extra taxes, blablabla MUH REPRESENTATION, MUH FREEDUMBZ. They still unironically believe this today. Why do you think it was british tea they threw in the harbour? Real mighty convenient for US businessmen, huh?

In reality the very first "american" act in history was to run after your corporate masters and suck bigbusiness cock. Which eventually grew and became an american trafition still practiced to this day. And all that just so you could buy tea more expensively than we sold it for. No really, well done chaps!

Kek, Amerilards BTFO

Lol, here the kids in school are taught that the British administrators were greedy pricks who would always abuse the poor, poor colonists, and they just absolutely had to defend themselves from these dictators. I didn't hear about the French-Indian war or tea tax aspects until high school (outside of class). Many, if not most adult Americans probably still believe this.

>fight a war and gain new land
>lol you're not allowed to settle it
>now pay for a war in which you literally gained nothing

Any claim that colonists were being unreasonable went out the window the moment the British army started actively murdering people in the streets.

Common sense, mate.

>huge mob harasses, throw stuff and spit against armed soldiers
>keep taunting to fire
>be surprised when some nigger loses his temper or gets really afraid and eventually fire
The soldiers and officer were arrested and stood trial for that, they were even defended by John fucking Adams. Most were found innocent and only 2 were found guilty of actively shooting against people. It's wasn't like a systematic killing of innocent colonists like the local elite tried to push.

Also,
>5 people dead
>Massacre
Even american school shootings already killed more people than that back then.

...

'The Colonies' didn't want to be 'the colonies' anymore, they wanted to be their own country. Considering how many civil wars the Brits had on their two tiny islands you'd think they'd get it.

They get it, they're just in strong denial over their missed chance at being undisputed lords of North America.

Should've had USA in semaphore desu
And any American gun instead of Uzis

Your points are valid, but ultimately irrelevant. That was the beginning of the end of British rule in America.

You should have posted a pic of Sam Adams and not based Washington.

All in all, it could've been worse. North America could have ended up completely French or, gods forbid, Spanish.

>Have civil war in 1640s due in part because king wishes to tax freemen without representation
>Get mad when the same sorts of men have the same sorts of reactions to similar actions in the 1770's

Eat shit bongs

Actually I think you've got to have a bit of Israel in there to get the true picture of America.

>Message to the king
>"Send more toilet paper"

A government forcing you to buy a commercial product and pay high taxes on it and punishing you if....you.....don't........

Holy shit.

The Boston Massacre was responsible for 5 lives.

5 people get killed in Chicago any given Saturday.

Br*ts are the scum of the earth and deserve no remorse. Only British people could be so evil and autistic that they feel a need to control a quarter of the world, just to plunder it for resources. No wonder they needed to do it, lazy Br*ts will do anything to get out of doing any honest work themselves. And for what? Now the whole world it waking up to the crimes of the Br*ts, Americans just discovered it early on and freed themselves from the vile Br*tish crown. It doesn't matter why they even started the war, Br*ts are Br*ts and any action taken to undermine them is inherently moral.

I'm glad you Br*ts chose to Brexit, now Scotland will leave the UK and the eternal Anglo's United Kingdom will disappear forever.

>3 million people in all of the American colonies at the time of the revolution
>Boston Had ~16,500 people at the time
>Chicago metro has 11 million people

Most people are rather shocked to find out that the infamous "Boston Massacre" only killed a handful of people.

A tempest in a tea pot, you might say.

>harass someone enforcing the law
>get violent and throw shit at them
>cry and play victim when they retaliate

Ironic

>starts revolution over taxes without representation
>afterward enact unfairly high whiskey tax on poor westerners who didn't have representation
>when they revolt you send in the federal troops to squash them

really activates the almonds

They fought for some land out west, but were denied it following the war. In fact, they were heavily taxed on this. The Brits were kind enough to go for the luxuries like sugar, stamps, and paper, but America was wealthy and these were commonplace. Then people decided to do stuff like the Boston Tea Party and vandalize goods. This sent a military presence which was quartered in people's homes. The Boston Massacre was a bunch of drunken dockworkers told to throw stones at some guards at a customs office. The propaganda of this was misrepresented and even John Adams defended the Brits. The final straw was when they took our gunpowder and people really started revolting over the prospect of no being able to revolt.