|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144468
Location: The Gold Coast
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:21 pm Post subject: Sons of Liberty |
|
|
3 part mini series on the History channel. Part 1 was last night, parts 2 and 3 are tonight and tomorrow night. I DVR'd it last night and waited to watch it today with my 17 yo son. He is the history buff in the family, he is taking AP US history this year and wants to major in history in college. So I wanted to see it with someone who had a good grasp on what went on and to see how authentic it was.
He was pretty impressed with the first part, the right names and events were pretty accurate. He wasn't sure that Sam Adams was present at the Boston massacre, but that Paul Revere was. As for me, I had no idea that Sam Adams was that involved in the revolution, I was taught about Franklin, Hancock and the others, but in this episode it was all about Adams leading the early parts of the revolution. Hancock was a capitalist, he just wanted to get paid and didn't care who the money came from. John Adams was loyal to the British, my son told me that he represented the two British soldiers who were indicted for the massacre. Good acting, the guy who played Hank no Breaking Bad plays Franklin and Tom from The Blacklist is a Dr. close to Sam Adams.
Looking at what is going on in the world today, from Yemen to Afghanistan and in between, it is amazing how that group of men were able to fund and train a revolution and then create a democracy that will last for centuries. I look at today's politicians and see how the fat have gotten fatter, and that what matters is no longer the US, but feeding the machine.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
numero-ocho
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 18222
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the tip. I'll check it out. Glad to see History Channel still knows how to do history shows. It used to be one of my favorite channels before they sold out and went to reality TV with shows like "Ice Road Truckers" and "American Pickers". They used to produce a lot of interesting history documentary series.
_________________
"Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakergal16
Star Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Posts: 1904
Location: San Gabriel Valley
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I teach AP US history, so this could be go into my collection....will have to check it out myself before I let the kiddos see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Johnny boy wasn't exactly a British sympathizer, he just believed in the rule of law above all else. The "Boston Massacre" was fabricated in large part by the revolution.
I suggest the John Adams series, speaking as the resident history major in my family.
As someone who one day hopes to be a professor of 17th/18th century American history, I can tell you that it's amazing the amount of important material textbooks gloss over in high school (out of necessity really).
If your son does major in history, tell him to be prepared for a bunch of revelations. What it really does is make you laugh at some modern day politicians, but I digress...
Last edited by Don Draper on Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakergal16 wrote: | | I teach AP US history, so this could be go into my collection....will have to check it out myself before I let the kiddos see it. |
I think it's worthy of showing to an APUSH class, maybe after the test as a form of entertainment/learning. Though yeah I'd screen it first and maybe jot down some notes in terms of whether you notice any inaccuracies that you can point out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cutheon
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 12182
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Don Draper wrote: | | lakergal16 wrote: | | I teach AP US history, so this could be go into my collection....will have to check it out myself before I let the kiddos see it. |
I think it's worthy of showing to an APUSH class, maybe after the test as a form of entertainment/learning. Though yeah I'd screen it first and maybe jot down some notes in terms of whether you notice any inaccuracies that you can point out. |
Definitely after the test. Iirc, you have about a month after the AP exam until the end of school. Not a whole lot to do other than let student's study or watch movies |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sam Adams was very active in the early days in the American War of Independence; in fact he and John Hancock were excluded from pardon in the Proclamation of Amnesty issued by General Thomas Gage, following the outbreak of hostilities at Concord and Lexington. The Brits felt that Adams and Hancock were demagogues, rallying the mindless colonists against the Crown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What amazes me is how the colonists rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. On a basis of self-interest, how many colonists really consumed much tea? How many colonists ever needed a legal stamp? How many really felt Parliamentary representation was that important? Yet many rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakergal16 wrote: | | I teach AP US history, so this could be go into my collection....will have to check it out myself before I let the kiddos see it. |
I would like to see it as well. It was an interesting war, but we tend to teach it from a rather narrow lens. The war itself was a continuation of the Seven Years War, and that we were but one of many fields of battle between England and France and to a lesser degree, Spain. In the words of that great historical scholar, "Mongo only pawn in the game of life."
Last edited by angrypuppy on Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | | What amazes me is how the colonists rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. On a basis of self-interest, how many colonists really consumed much tea? How many colonists ever needed a legal stamp? How many really felt Parliamentary representation was that important? Yet many rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. |
Not as many as you'd think. It was an engineered revolution. Additionally, there we many MANY British loyalists living in the colonies, who either fled to England or didn't participate in the war effort.
Actually, a large percentage of them moved to Canada. American forces planned to invade Canada (I think through New Foundland) but nixed that idea. Been a while since I've read about that though.
The truth of the matter is that England was busy managing a global empire. They sent a force to deal with the colonies, but the risk far outweighed the reward for them, especially since France had taken our side.
In a lot of ways our history has a lot to do with luck. For instance, only reason we got the Louisiana Purchase is because Napoleon was sick of dealing with Haiti and the Americas in general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | | lakergal16 wrote: | | I teach AP US history, so this could be go into my collection....will have to check it out myself before I let the kiddos see it. |
I would like to see it as well. It was an interesting war, but we tend to teach it from a rather narrow lens. The war itself was a continuation of the Seven Years War, and that we were but one of many fields of battle between England and France and to a lesser degree, Spain. In the words of that great historical scholar, "Mongo only pawn in the game of life." |
Yeah, and the Seven Years War was merely a continuation of stuff like Queen Anne's War.
The narrow lens thing is why I'm likely going to be lobbying for students taking a required historical course in college in the future (we do it for stats right?). You just learn so much about multiple perspectives and events that you're limiting yourself if you aren't familiar with them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| For a fun and maybe slightly controversial read, I suggest The Radicalism of the American Revolution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Don Draper wrote: | | angrypuppy wrote: | | What amazes me is how the colonists rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. On a basis of self-interest, how many colonists really consumed much tea? How many colonists ever needed a legal stamp? How many really felt Parliamentary representation was that important? Yet many rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. |
Not as many as you'd think. It was an engineered revolution. Additionally, there we many MANY British loyalists living in the colonies, who either fled to England or didn't participate in the war effort.
Actually, a large percentage of them moved to Canada. American forces planned to invade Canada (I think through New Foundland) but nixed that idea. Been a while since I've read about that though.
The truth of the matter is that England was busy managing a global empire. They sent a force to deal with the colonies, but the risk far outweighed the reward for them, especially since France had taken our side.
In a lot of ways our history has a lot to do with luck. For instance, only reason we got the Louisiana Purchase is because Napoleon was sick of dealing with Haiti and the Americas in general. |
Actually the majority did rally behind the Sons of Liberty, which is why the war had a successful conclusion.
The Tories (and a number of freed loyalist slaves) fled to the occupied cities (chiefly New York) and were evacuated to the fourteenth colony at the end of the war.
As I mentioned earlier, the war itself was a continuation of the Seven Years War. This was but one battle front for England, which was besieged by belligerents on four separate continents. That is why Lord North's intransigent policies made no sense. The real enemy was France and to a lesser degree Spain and the Netherlands. The best strategy as embraced by the opposition to Lord North was to grant autonomy to the colonies as they were important for trade (raw materials, ship building, leg of triangle trade). The economic jewel was to the south where Spain had plundered riches and the French were establishing plantations. That is where the war continued after the American War of Independence ended. As an ironic footnote, the entire affair ended with England as the dominant power in the Americas. The United States really was a pawn in what was a greater game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Legacy
Star Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 7054
Location: So. Californ-I-A
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Don Draper wrote: | | angrypuppy wrote: | | What amazes me is how the colonists rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. On a basis of self-interest, how many colonists really consumed much tea? How many colonists ever needed a legal stamp? How many really felt Parliamentary representation was that important? Yet many rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. |
Not as many as you'd think. It was an engineered revolution. Additionally, there we many MANY British loyalists living in the colonies, who either fled to England or didn't participate in the war effort.
Actually, a large percentage of them moved to Canada. American forces planned to invade Canada (I think through New Foundland) but nixed that idea. Been a while since I've read about that though.
The truth of the matter is that England was busy managing a global empire. They sent a force to deal with the colonies, but the risk far outweighed the reward for them, especially since France had taken our side.
In a lot of ways our history has a lot to do with luck. For instance, only reason we got the Louisiana Purchase is because Napoleon was sick of dealing with Haiti and the Americas in general. |
Price per acre and the circumstances involving Haiti and the slave revolt we're extremely lucky for us indeed.
As for the show itself, I was pleasantly surprised they didn't overlook William Dawes leading up to the "midnight ride" scene.
I'm enjoying it for the most part. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | | Don Draper wrote: | | angrypuppy wrote: | | What amazes me is how the colonists rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. On a basis of self-interest, how many colonists really consumed much tea? How many colonists ever needed a legal stamp? How many really felt Parliamentary representation was that important? Yet many rallied behind the Sons of Liberty. |
Not as many as you'd think. It was an engineered revolution. Additionally, there we many MANY British loyalists living in the colonies, who either fled to England or didn't participate in the war effort.
Actually, a large percentage of them moved to Canada. American forces planned to invade Canada (I think through New Foundland) but nixed that idea. Been a while since I've read about that though.
The truth of the matter is that England was busy managing a global empire. They sent a force to deal with the colonies, but the risk far outweighed the reward for them, especially since France had taken our side.
In a lot of ways our history has a lot to do with luck. For instance, only reason we got the Louisiana Purchase is because Napoleon was sick of dealing with Haiti and the Americas in general. |
Actually the majority did rally behind the Sons of Liberty, which is why the war had a successful conclusion.
The Tories (and a number of freed loyalist slaves) fled to the occupied cities (chiefly New York) and were evacuated to the fourteenth colony at the end of the war.
As I mentioned earlier, the war itself was a continuation of the Seven Years War. This was but one battle front for England, which was besieged by belligerents on four separate continents. That is why Lord North's intransigent policies made no sense. The real enemy was France and to a lesser degree Spain and the Netherlands. The best strategy as embraced by the opposition to Lord North was to grant autonomy to the colonies as they were important for trade (raw materials, ship building, leg of triangle trade). The economic jewel was to the south where Spain had plundered riches and the French were establishing plantations. That is where the war continued after the American War of Independence ended. As an ironic footnote, the entire affair ended with England as the dominant power in the Americas. The United States really was a pawn in what was a greater game. |
Luckily for Britain, Spain had already squandered much of its Peruvian (and the like) silver by the 18th century, and the Dutch had since been replaced by the East India Company.
The real money in the south was in sugar at this point, and the British were making a small fortune in the Caribbean (the colonies' raw materials were shipped there in large part, to sustain the British population).
The patriots had about 45% of the white male population on their side. The rest were pacifists or loyalists (about 15% for the latter).
But it's also important to remember that the British recruited not only loyalists to their side, but also slaves and Native Americans, who were promised their freedom and/or land.
What tipped it in our favor, as you suggest, is that the Revolution was but a small part of a larger conflict. That said, we owe a great deal to France for assisting us in our victory, both in terms of their navy and troops.
Funnily enough, France paid the price for their involvement, as heavy wartime spending led (in part) to their own revolution... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^
Exactly, paving the way for both their revolution and our massive land grab (Louisiana Purchase). The power wasn't just the standing English fleet, it was in their ability to finance the war with banking, taxation (or exploitation) of colonial land and free trade. Further it brought reforms in finance and representation under the capable stewardship under William Pitt. Unlike France, the conclusion of the war opened increased trade between the fledgling United States and England, making it easier for the latter to pay down debt. Strangely enough, though the Brits were exceedingly generous under the Treaty of Paris, the French were actually wary of granting more land to the Americans may well have prevented the ceding of additional territory to the north (perhaps because of the French speaking populace, they had designs of their own).
And yes, that is what I alluded to, the freed slaves and some Native Americans (particularly the northern tribes, they lost access to the southern tribes) who fought with the British were treated well after the war and were evacuated (note: the Native Americans were less motivated to leave their lands). Those slaves and Native Americans who fought for American freedom did not fare as well. So much for all men being created equal.
Last edited by angrypuppy on Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52656
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Don Draper wrote: | | lakergal16 wrote: | | I teach AP US history, so this could be go into my collection....will have to check it out myself before I let the kiddos see it. |
I think it's worthy of showing to an APUSH class, maybe after the test as a form of entertainment/learning. Though yeah I'd screen it first and maybe jot down some notes in terms of whether you notice any inaccuracies that you can point out. |
Of which there are apparently many:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/pj-gladnick/2015/01/26/history-channel-presents-laughably-inaccurate-sons-liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28461
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | ^
Exactly, paving the way for both their revolution and our massive land grab (Louisiana Purchase). The power wasn't just the standing English fleet, it was in their ability to finance the war with banking, taxation (or exploitation) of colonial land and free trade. Further it brought reforms in finance and representation under the capable stewardship under William Pitt. Unlike France, the conclusion of the war opened increased trade between the fledgling United States and England, making it easier for the latter to pay down debt. Strangely enough, though the Brits were exceedingly generous under the Treaty of Paris, the French were actually wary of granting more land to the Americans may well have prevented the ceding of additional territory to the north (perhaps because of the French speaking populace, they had designs of their own).
And yes, that is what I alluded to, the freed slaves and some Native Americans (particularly the northern tribes, they lost access to the southern tribes) who fought with the British were treated well after the war and were evacuated (note: the Native Americans were less motivated to leave their lands). Those slaves and Native Americans who fought for American freedom did not fare as well. So much for all men being created equal. |
Maybe we should coauthor a textbook one day, hahaha.
DMR: yeah as I suspected. Still would be fun for AP kids to watch, with a little context from the teacher of course. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
