Zinn argues that the American Revolutionary War "was making the ruling elite more secure against internal trouble"
Who were the “ruling elite”? Zinn points at those who were the rich, white landowners and merchants. By designing a war against England, who were to be the biggest losers if the Americans lost? Was it the poor or the landless, slaves or the freedmen, or women? An English win would certainly mean death to the Continental Congress and to those who fought against England. “The revolutionary leadership distrusted the mobs of the poor. But they knew the revolution had no appeal to slaves and Indians. They would have to woo the armed white population”. (Zinn 61) If they so distrusted the poor, why did they recruit and arm them? The militia was the civilian armed population, defending their towns and communities against the British. Continental Regulars were the actual Congress funded and formally trained military.
Its true George Washington, himself a slave owner; and then Congress, banned Blacks from enlisting. Before the Congress mandated ban, George allowed blacks who served already in the army to re-enlist. Blacks were promised freedom in return for their service, the British held the same promise, but broke it when they lost; sending blacks back to slavery or back to Africa. Why did the Blacks fight? Not for money or gain, but for freedom and a chance to be landowners.
I think Zinn’s view on the Revolution was one of class warfare and wrong; all who fought had something to lose, not just the rich whites who orchestrated it all. The conclusion of the Seven Years’ War had left most colonists proud of their place in the British empire. The soldiers began to shock and Americans with lewd, profane, and violent behavior. “Those who witnessed such savage punishments found it easy to believe in the threat of British enslavement.” (Farager 154) Fear of increased British rule and unfair taxation was a major factor for the "poor" to embrace and support the revolution and self government.
The “war was making the ruling elite more secure” argument doesn’t make sense when all who were involved had something to lose, and all who fought were from all different walks of life. The war wasn’t fought just by the poor, but the freed slaves, the women who were at the camps tending to wounded and supporting the men, and the people who wanted the freedom promised by God and natural law.
Faragher.J.M., Buhle, M.J., Czitrom, D. and Armitage, S.H. Out of Many: A History of the American People. 5th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2007.
Zinn, Howard. A People's History of the United States. The New Press. New York, NY. 2003
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree the poor did have a lot to lose, but the elite founding fathers had much more since each individually signed their names to the Proclamation and monetary wise they would crumble with the nation if they were to lose. For all the countless poor who thought to better themselves through enlisting it was also dire!!
I agree that the war was not just won by poor but all those nameless women and men who were not even allowed recognition.
They did not trust the poor but had no choice. They needed more people to fight for them in the war. They will take what they can get because they were in need. I thought that it was a good idea for blacks to help out in return for their freedom, just as long as their word was kept and the blacks were given their freedom.
Great Argument! I agree that everyone involved in the war had something to lose, but I think that the white ‘elite’ class lost the least. Following the revolution, for example, middle to upper class citizens were able to pick up where they left off- socially and in some cases, economically. White men continued to own the “better” job market, married white women were praised if able to forgo the workforce and spend their life as mothers and housewives.
On the other hand, black men who suddenly became free following the revolution were subject to intense racial discrimination and harsh vagrancy laws. If a black woman was able to find work it was most often either domestic and/or laborious such as working in the fields. If either a black woman or black man was unable to find work, they would be accused of vagrancy, fined and forced to work for free. Black women were not praised if able to forgo the workforce by means of a well-off husband. Rather, they would be considered lazy and a disgrace to civil society.
It is sincerely true that in war, all had something to lose, but I think the question is who lost the most. I don’t like generalizing populations, but it seems clear that the white class suffered the least, while the black class suffered the most. Fair or unfair, socially it is a truth and should be recognized for what it is.
~Chantel Johansen
Post a Comment