-----Time cannot be stopped, altered, slowed, sped, or controlled. The only thing that we as humans can do with time is utilize it. The utilization of time is one of the most important parts of our daily schedule. A procrastination of time cannot be taken back nor can it be changed, it has passed and cannot be replayed or undone. The only thing that we can change is how we apply ourselves the next time around. -----In my educational history I have not used my time wisely, procrastinating the day, week, and month away until the only time I have left is Sunday night before the paper is due that Monday. This was not a problem for me because I found learning to come naturally to me. I could easily use the aforesaid schedule and still pass with an A or high B. Not until I entered PSEC did I find this schedule faulty. Early on I learned that my teachers would not be impressed with the same work that satisfied the low expectations of my former teachers. This is when I truly began to apply myself. Bacon’s Rebellion was my first true multi-draft essay. Once again finding that my teachers would not be satisfied with a rough draft that would pass in high school, I approached this essay in a way that I had not before. Writing up multiple drafts, I applied my rather advanced analytical thinking and created a series of drafts that were vastly different in intellectual level. “Though a traitor to his king and country, Bacon saw himself as a liberator, winning the support of the people and defending their land” (full rough draft) became “Knowledge is the key lesson that can be taken away from this often overlooked event. Learning from the reasons, reactions, and thoughts of the colonists what to or not to do in a very similar situation is the lesson” (Bacon’s Rebellion Final). The stage of writing between these two conclusion topic sentences is enormous, leaving the realm of eighth grade history assignment, I entered the realm of analytical application. -----This progression was something foreign to me and so took a little more time to develop than for someone who had been practicing this method throughout their entire school career. With four weeks to finish this first essay, I found myself blindsided by the meager two weeks we were given for the second essay. Finding my developmental process to be slowed by the new, more efficient system of drafts and rewrites, my second essay left much to be desired. While having a stable thesis and very solid introduction paragraph, I found my writing to be very jumpy and wandering in multiple places. In paragraph four I even failed to support my topic sentence in any way. The comment “In this anarchy caused by the desires of the Patriots there are piles and piles of Patriotic documents, reveling in the total destruction of everything that has been built by and for the British” (Economic and Political Advantages of a British Massachusetts) is in no way supported by my ramblings about the fear of the Loyalists in the face of the Patriots. -----I pointed this out not to show my weaknesses as a writer but to show that my growth is being measured in very different situations. If given the same amount of time on my second essay as my first, my second most likely would have rivaled my first in almost every way. My writing style has changed, and with change comes present setbacks and future advancements. “You must first take a set backward before you can take two steps forward”.
Economic and Political Advantages of a British Massachusetts
-----In December of 1773, the Patriots of Boston, Massachusetts threw 45 tons of tea into the BostonHarbor. In retaliation, British Parliament saw fit to punish the people of Boston by blocking up their harbor with warships.As a mother punishes her son or daughter, so Britain punished America.All the British government wanted was for the Bostonians to replace the tea and apologize, but the arrogance of the Bostonians would not allow this.Did the residents of Boston not take into account the consequences of their actions?It was not the offences of the British that caused this war, but the offences of the Americans.British rule has afforded economic stability and has maintained a fair leadership in the colonies, but especially in Massachusetts. -----Over the past 100 years, Massachusetts' colonists' material goods have not lowered or rose in value. "We cannot as yet measure farm income in early New England, but we can measure the value of farmers' material goods, and from the evidence so far collected, that value did not decline" (Main 101-102).Though the Patriots have used this against the British, saying that Parliament is holding us back economically, this also proves that Parliament has kept us steady in our times of need.If in order to keep all thirteen colonies functioning Britain must regulate the economics of Boston or Massachusetts Bay then so be it.The good of the many is more important than the good of the few.Unfortunately the Patriots took this saying too literally, using force and tyrannical means to get their way.
-----Using the excuse of stopping the tyranny of the British, the Patriots took it upon themselves to assume their own form of democratic tyranny.In this tyranny, it is not the will of one or a few that is being fulfilled, but the will of the majority, for that is what the Patriots are, the majority. "the wayfaring American [,]though a fool[,] could not err in reading, in very crimson letters painted on the air in front of him, the tidings of the arrival of a race-crisis altogether transcending those ordinary political altercations which had from time to time disturbed, and likewise quickened and clarified, the minds of his British ancestors" (Coit Tyler 25).This majority preys on us, the weaker and lesser people of our respective communities, but it is not outsiders that prey upon us, but our very neighbors.Assuming the law upon themselves, every man has called upon his neighbor to either unite with him under the flag of anarchy, or to torture him under the flag of justice.
-----Justice has been twisted in the sight of these monsters, covering the sins of violence they commit. Tarring and feathering, and dragging their very neighbor across town, displaying him to the world is the new pastime of our corrupt generation.I ask, would the British have allowed such mistreatment under their guiding hand?No, such oppressions would be punished just as Boston was punished, with Acts of taxation and withdrawal.Where is the order that Britain would have assumed but in Britain itself.This anarchy is the result of the desires of the colonists and the colonists alone.
-----In this anarchy caused by the desires of the Patriots there are piles and piles of Patriotic documents, reveling in the total destruction of everything that has been built by and for the British. The idea of Patrick Henry inciting rage ad hysteria within the community with one such Patriotic document that included his declaration of “give me liberty or give me death.” Appalls any true British Patriot. It is an embarrassment to everything we call British or American.I implore, where are the letters contradicting such action? Where are the letters saying that what the Patriots are doing is wrong and unjust? They are not seen, and if they are somewhere it is in a cupboard of a building burnt down by these anarchists that call themselves Patriots. The loyalist writers were afraid to express their views, not expecting open minds from their fellow colonists, and why should they?They had already seen government officials and nobles of the like strung up just for being for the British. "[S]o many of the ablest conservative writers refrained, in that stage of affairs, from engaging very actively in the discussion"(Coit Tyler 25). Where could they write without being met by only hatred, injustice, and violence but within Britain itself.The discussion of the rationale for war had no controversy -- not because the Patriots had the perfect argument, but because the Loyalists were silenced.
-----Silence such as this cannot give way to rationalization or even clear thinking, only propaganda and forced thoughts.Who is to say that the rationale of Britain is unjust?I see no understanding of reason by the Patriots, or asking of questions by those who believe this does not affect them.I see only anger, violence, hatred, and closed minds.If this is the soil that America will grow from then I wish to be far from here.If we start our world with blood and violence then we will live in a world of blood and violence, only requited when there is a monarch to rule over us and for us to unite under.This is what Britain stands for, a monarch to unite the people and the people to rule themselves.This is what Britain stands for, and this is what I stand for.
Citations
Coit Tyler, Moses. "The Party of the Loyalists in the American Revolution." The
American Historical Review 1(1895): 24.
L. Main, Gloria. "The Standard of Living in Colonial Massachusetts." The Journal of Economic History 43(1983): 101-108.
Henry, Patrick. "Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death."1775.
-----According to Dictionary.com, a hero is "A man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities," while rebellion is," Open, organized, and armed resistance to one's government or ruler.” Although there may be everyday heroes like firemen, policemen, or good role models, it is much more common to have heroes among leaders, soldiers, and “freedom fighters” in a time of war, such as a rebellion. In a rebellion, a leader, soldier, or “freedom fighter” must distinguish himself to his government and/or the people of his country. It is also imperative that the people or person he or she is recognized by believes that they have their best interests in mind. In the case of Nathaniel Bacon Jr., having the recognition and respect of the majority of the population meant being a savior to the poor and recently freed colonists, but only at the price of being a traitor to William Berkeley (the governor) and the rich plantation owners (the government).
-----The idea that Bacon and his men were causing nothing but trouble for the colonists and the government is nothing new. Michael J. Puglisi, president of VirginiaIntremontCollege, is one with such an interpretation of the event. Clarifying a shadow of injustice over the event, Puglisi states in his article "'Whether They Be Friends Or Foes:' The Roles And Reactions Of Tributary Native Groups Caught In Colonial Conflicts" that the colonists had "a record with a lack of regard for the integrity and the well-being of the tributary tribes [...]" (83). Though this is a very mild presentation when it comes to the dissension between the Indians and the colonists, it is safe to assume that there were much larger prejudices than this lets on. Bacon was a person who would have this sort of extreme prejudice, because an Indian raid on one of his plantations had killed his plantation overseer and close friend. This actually happened to be the event that propelled him into the war.
-----Although Puglisi makes a very strong and plausible argument, there are others such as Robert Beverly, who takes his interpretation to an almost extremist level in his excerpt from "The History and Present State of Virginia". In this excerpt, Beverly persuades that Bacon's real reason for the rebellion was "endeavored to ruin a Governor, whom they all entirely loved and had unanimously chosen; [...]" (Document #1). This statement implies that all Bacon wanted to do was take the Governor’s power for himself without inciting complete anarchy within the colony so he could govern later. Farther into the excerpt Beverly explains this when he infers the four base reasons he believes the rebellion began; “First, the extremely low Price of Tobacco, and the ill usage of the Planters in the Exchange of Goods for it…Secondly, the Splintering [of] the Colony into [numerous] Proprietaries…Thirdly, the heavy restraint and Burdens laid upon their Trade by Act of Parliament in England. Fourthly, the Disturbance given by the Indians….” In so arguing, he reasons that Bacon (as the General by Consent of the People, or the ideas which they stand for) was not just an anarchist or terrorist, but a person who could manipulate the anger and frustration of the poor and recently freed to serve his own will, making him even more dangerous to the delicate society they held.
-----Though Puglisi and Beverly make many very logical points, there is another popular interpretation that indicates the massacre by the colonists and Bacon's hatred of them was justified by their need to defend themselves, which coincidentally makes Bacon look like a "True American Hero", or a sort of Robin Hood. "The History of Bacon's and Ingram's Rebellion" is a perfect example of this view, though the author is unknown. It is obvious through the amount of detail presented that the writer clearly was a first-hand witness of "these brutish and inhumane brutes" (Document #5), but the fact that we do not know the status or standing of the author makes him less credible than a stated author. In “The History of Bacon and Ingram’s Rebellion”, the thought-to-be colonist exclaims "they de-vised a hundred ways to torter and torment those poore soules [colonists] with, whose reched fate it was to fall in to there unmercyfull hands" (Document #5). This morally justifies the Indian’s slaughter to the poorer colonists, who made up the majority of the population and Bacon’s army. The moral justification of the colonists made them see Bacon as a hero and Berkeley as a villain.
-----In every conflict where there is a hero, there also must be a villain. Though in conflict neither side will agree on who is the hero and who is the villain, there is always a pair for each side in conflict to adore (hero) or hate (villain). To the common poor farmer, the hero was Bacon while the villain was Berkeley, the generic oppressive dictator only out for his own gain and the gain of those close to him. In a letter to his friend and ally Henry Coventry he confides,” he [Bacon] came downe to James Towne with about three-score men thinking to surprise me and the Councel… [S]ome other loyal gentlemen had sent me fourty men of quality to assist me in any exigent” (http://www.jstor.org/stable/1915651?seq=6). Here Berkeley himself admits that the common poor/free men wanted him dead so that they could take Jamestown for themselves. Multiple Berkeley supporters exaggerate that Bacon had his own agenda; of course he did.
----- On this agenda is to kill or handicap the leadership of Berkeley in order to take over the leadership of the colony.The death of William Berkeley would have been more of a symbolic way of showing to everyone watching that the old ways had failed, and there was a new way to react to the problems at hand.Bacon was trying to become the governor and gain the backing of the people and for the reason to improve the lifestyle of the people with these new ways. The view that Bacon was trying to improve the lifestyle of the people is not shared with the Berkeley supporters, though. Thinking of Bacon as a greedy man out to gain a hefty profit from the backs of the people, they did not see that they were doing the same thing.The bias of the rich and powerful was so great that they believed “[Nathaniel Bacon was] of a most impervious and dangerous hidden Pride of heart, […]” (Document 18).Since they only wanted the best for themselves, the rich did not see how much the majority of the population needed a hero and savior, as stated earlier.“No course was taken to secure them [the Indians], til Mr. Bacon went out against them” (Document 14).This is a testimony given by Mrs. William Bird to the Royal Commissioners sent to investigate what happened in Jamestown.Though the polarity of these two accounts is evident, both are true.Bacon changed his reasons many times, using the colonists as a scapegoat for his actions.
-----Written by Bacon, the following letter expresses the fear the poor colonists of Bacon’s Rebellion had of losing their lives and their land. “Of these the aforesaid Articles Wee accuse Sr. Wm: Berkeley as guiltie of Each and Everie of the same. As one who hath Traiterouslie attempted, violated and Injured his Maties: Interest here, by the loss of a greate Part of his Maties: Colonie” (http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/jamestown-browse?id=J1035). Accusing the governor of the terrible things that had happened recently, the people betray a sort of panic and fear they had of the Indian threat.This may have sprouted from the constant paranoia that all colonists shared of the Indians joining together in the struggle against them.Since there is an underlying panicked tone then the colonists were likely reacting out of fear without thought of later consequences and not out of a want to overthrow the government.Bacon’s loss of a friend in one of the Indian raids most likely caused him to share this fear of destruction by the Natives, creating a reason for him to enter into the rebellion.Racing to support the rebellion, Bacon did not think of what the long term consequences this decision could have.He only wanted the security of his own militia.
-----As time went on, the original sense of panic that Bacon felt wore off, leaving him with the love of the “mob” and the scorn of the government.Beginning to see the true reasons for the rebellion, Bacon grew into the leader that the colonists had always thought he was.These reasons are later recorded by Bacon himself, where he states his followers’ arguments with the government and the reasons.Known as “Bacon’s Declaration”, the document focuses on the betrayal by the governor and his assembly and the threats of the Natives around them.As Bacon continued to lead the rebellion, his motives changed from finding security to fighting for the common good of the people.
-----Growing rather power hungry later in his “reign”, Bacon became the thing he was fighting against.Replacing his rather recent idea of leading the people, Bacon began to lead for his own benefit.This caused him to see his soldiers as a reflection of his leadership qualities.“Binding their actions to reflect on himself, he not only betake himself to a strict Discipline over his men but also to more moderate courses himself […]”.He considered the men his force and his position as one of power, which actually deceived himself into thinking he was a better leader than he was.Whether he was ready or not, this denotes a time in the rebellion when the priorities of the leader change from the good of the people to the good of himself.
-----As Bacon controlled his followers for his own gain, he began to attack the one place that would give him the power he strove for.He would take the governor’s place and rule the colony. Based on the facts and opinions I have read from Puglisi, Zinn and Steffof, and Beverly, Bacon initially started the rebellion out of fear, grew into the role of leader against what they saw as the government’s reign of tyranny, and was then corrupted be the very thing he as fighting. At the beginning, Bacon may have been reacting out of fear, but once he lost that initial feeling of panic and understood what it was he was doing and the implications of it, he weighed the odds and found it would be better for himself and those he loved to try and refine the government to better fit the common good. In short, he allied himself with the majority of the population because he saw that as safer and more beneficial, although riskier, than allying himself with the government.When his wants and the wants of the people clash, his won out. This was also an effect of the façade that Bacon kept up as the Face of the People.He chose to deceive the mob into thinking of him as a savior while trying to appease his own ambition.This is something that happens all the time throughout history and life.Knowing it may come up is the best weapon we can have against it.
-----Knowledge is the key lesson that can be taken away from this often overlooked event.Learning from the reasons, reactions, and thoughts of the colonists what to or not to do in a very similar situation is the lesson. The Afghanistan Conflict is one recent event where the knowledge gained from Bacon’s rebellion can really benefit the government and the American people.The parallels of the two events include that our community was under constant threat of attack from terrorists (Indians) and that it was a cause of great sadness within the community, as well as a rallying factor.Whether the rallying was out of the anger, revenge, fear, or desperation for change that the people felt, the thoughts and ideas that came from the attack(s) were the same.From this knowledge of Bacon’s Rebellion, the current government chose that it was best for them and American people as a whole to take a completely different direction in retaliation to the attack(s).For current America, this was to declare war and redirect the anger of the American people towards the terrorists and away from internal strife and blame that could have come up. Again, this choice is completely different from that of Berkeley, who chose that it was in the best interest of the rich and the trade company to avoid war with the Indians.He did not take into account what was best for those he governed. If Berkeley had declared war on the Indians, the government would have had the backing of the population and the outcome would have been much different.
-----Development of thought can be is accomplished through an infinite number of ways. Some ways are through song, brainstorming, writing, discussion, contemplation, examples, or acting out the development that is taking place. Every person adapts the above processes to their own style or mutation of the original idea. One of the most adaptable of these processes is writing, because every person writes with different feelings, passions, determinations, and goals. Some think that the best way to develop thought through writing is to depend only on a person's own knowledge and the first-hand knowledge that only they can acquire, but against such practices are people like Optimism One, who believes that thought can be developed better through peer review, communication about writing, and a forum-like discussion about the ideology presented. -----Peer review and discussion can help to sharpen and hone the blade that is a writer's words and thoughts. With the input of others all around the world or even just the person across the table, an idea can take on a new level of insight and depth. "Of course, the writing process would be greatly improved if students had a group of peers with whom they can share their writing" (Optimism One). There is only so much that a single person can think of with the biases in their own life and the life they have had. By combining these experiences and thoughts with others then we have a new worldwide view on a certain subject that never could have been thought of by a single biased person. ------Through discussions with my peers, many of my own beliefs and thoughts have changed. By hearing the multiple sides of the Bush administration, I have become knowledgeable of what the Republicans, Democrats, and anyone in between thinks of Bush, his ideas, and his actions. I used to think that he was an amazing man who had don nothing but right for his country. Now, I believe that he has made mistakes, but he made them thinking that they were the best for his country and people. By combining my thoughts and ideas with those around me, a new discussion was born. Not how good was Bush for America, or how bad a President was he, but what were his thoughts during such mistakes. The combination of thoughts lead us from opinions and biases to a want to understand an overall view of what has and what could happen. -----Unfortunately, I have not always voiced my thoughts to those around me. It was not until recently that I realized the advances in my own thought process and ability to understand that I had gained by listening to others and asking questions. Along with this revelation came a hunger to understand more, which fueled me through my first essay, Bacon's Rebellion. Researching as many sides of the arguments I could, I began to form my own opinion based on on the slight information that I myself had, but upon the information I had gathered from the discussions between and with others. Peter Elbow spoke the truth when he said, "If you are stuck writing or trying to figure something out, there is nothing better than finding one person, or more, to talk to." -----Through group discussion, ideas can be created to rival the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence. Such greatness was born through the combination of the minds of a few great men. Consider what could be born out of the enlightened thought of a generation linked by instant communication. Many say we are a generation striving for it's own destruction. I say we are a generation creating new things that have never been seen before. We are a generation with the envy of all others. We are a generation of change. We are a generation of mental revolution.
-----In this essay I felt much more rushed than in the last essay. This may have been because we had 4 weeks on the first one and a week and a half on the second. All in all, I was not happy with the finished product of my essay and would have liked to do a few more rough drafts to complete and organize my thoughts. Though this may be a wekness of mine, I find it hard to organize my thoughts while I do have the analytical skills to complete a very good essay. I may need to shorten the amount of time it takes me to organize my thoughts and i would rather have a much more comprehensive meeting with Craige like we did on the first essay. Again, I do not believe that my essay does it's points justice or fully informs the readers in a comprehensive easy to understand way. -----On the other hand, I thought it was good to be able to research the full reaches of technology to harness for our use in this essay. Unlike the first essay, where we were given much of the information that we would be using by Ben and Craige with a few outside sources being used, I fully enjoyed the research side of this essay and turning my views to fit the Loyalist ideals. It was a good experience for me being rushed and having my side chosen for me but I thought that with what I was given, my paper was sub-par. I believe that nothing more than a B would serve my essay justice, but of course if you give me a higher grade than that then I will not complain. If I do get a higher grade than that, then maybe I can learn some things that I did right that I did not think I did.
-----In December of 1773, the Patriots of Boston, Massachusetts threw 45 tons of tea into the Boston Harbor. In retaliation, British Parliament saw fit to punish the people of Boston by blocking up their harbor with warships. As a mother punishes her son or daughter, so Britain punished America. All the British government wanted was for the Bostonians to replace the tea and apologize, but the arrogance of the Bostonians would not allow this. Did the residents of Boston not take into account the consequences of their actions? It was not the offences of the British that caused this war, but the offences of the Americans. British rule has afforded economic stability and has maintained a fair leadership in the colonies, but especially in Massachusetts. -----Over the past 100 years, Massachusetts' colonists' material goods have not lowered or rose in value. "We cannot as yet measure farm income in early New England, but we can measure the value of farmers' material goods, and from the evidence so far collected, that value did not decline" (Main 101-102). Though the Patriots have used this against the British, saying that Parliament is holding us back economically, this also proves that Parliament has kept us steady in our times of need. If in order to keep all thirteen colonies functioning Britain must regulate the economics of Boston or Massachusetts Bay then so be it. The good of the many is more important than the good of the few. Again, Patriots see this regulation as monarchical tyranny that Britain has assumed. -----In order to stop the tyranny Patriots say Britain has assumed, the Patriots took it upon themselves to assume their own form of tyranny, democratic tyranny. In this tyranny, it is not the will of one or a few that is being fulfilled, but the will of the majority, for that is what the Patriots are, the majority. "the wayfaring American [,]though a fool[,] could not err in reading, in very crimson letters painted on the air in front of him, the tidings of the arrival of a race-crisis altogether transcending those ordinary political altercations which had from time to time disturbed, and likewise quickened and clarified, the minds of his British ancestors" (Coit Tyler 25). This majority preys on us, the weaker and lesser people of our respective communities, but t is not outsiders that prey upon us, but our very neighbors. Assuming the law upon themselves, every man has called upon his neighbor to either unite with him under the flag of anarchy, or to torture him under the flag of justice. Justice has been twisted in the sight of these monsters, including tarring and feathering, and dragging their very neighbor across town, displaying him to the world. I ask, would the British have allowed such mistreatment under their guiding hand? No, such oppressions would be punished just as Boston was punished, with Acts of taxation and withdrawl. Where is the order that Britain would have assumed but in Britain itself. This anarchy is the result of the desires of the colonists and the colonists alone. -----In this anarchy caused by the desires of the Patriots there are piles and piles of Patriotic documents, reveling in the total destruction of everything that has been built by and for the British. I implore, where are the letters contradicting such action? Where are the letters saying that what the Patriots are doing is wrong and unjust? They are nowhere, and if they are somewhere it is in a cupboard of a building burnt down by these anarchists that call themselves Patriots. The loyalist writers were afraid to express their views, not expecting open minds from their fellow colonists, and why should they? They had already seen government officials and nobles of the like strung up just for being for the British. "[S]o many of the ablest conservative writers refrained, in that stage of affairs, from engaging very actively in the discussion"(Coit Tyler 25). Where could they write without being met by only hatred, injustice, and violence but within Britain itself. The discussion of the rationale for war had no controversy -- not because the Patriots had the perfect argument, but because the Loyalists were silenced. -----Who is to say that the rationale of Britain is unjust? I see no understanding of reason by the Patriots, or asking of questions by those who believe this does not affect them. I see only anger, violence, hatred, and closed minds. If this is the soil that America will grow from then I wish to be far from here. If we start our world with blood and violence then we will live in a world of blood and violence, only requited when there is a monarch to rule over us and for us to unite under. This is what Britain stands for, a monarch to unite the people and the people to rule themselves. This is what Britain stands for, and this is what I stand for.
Citations Coit Tyler, Moses. "The Party of the Loyalists in the American Revolution." The American Historical Review 1(1895): 24.
L. Main, Gloria. "The Standard of Living in Colonial Massachusetts." The Journal of Economic History 43(1983): 101-108.
