Essay 2 rough draft

As a citizen of the state of New Jersey, I know where my loyalties lie. I have seen, as my fellow people have, the many injustices and tyrannies committed by the state of Great Britain against us. Their behavior is incorrigible and indefensible. Once a warm and loving parent, she now strikes at the very core of our values, taking from us what is never meant to be taken. I have seen, in my own backyard, horrible battles and unnecessary bloodshed. Our ancestors fled from Britain to escape persecution; now we are strong enough to fight back for a similar cause. The loyalists are just as dangerous to us as the great power we seek independence from. They support, blindly and willingly, tyranny of men. This is our duty to those who are fighting now, to those who died in their fight for freedom, and to those brave men who will spill blood for our cause. Patriotism is the most important cause we will live to see.


Firstly, in enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has infringed on our natural rights. It is not intrinsic (inherent) that one group of people should lead over the masses. The time is now for revolutionary ideas and rebellious behavior. This is a battle that will be remembered by all, because it is just that. A Revolution. Further, Britain chooses to fight New Jersey on our ground. Coming to this land, this state, they attempt to deprecate the ideas of the hearts and minds of people. The monarchy is compromised, instead of a pillar of strength and purity; now a greedy clique taxes the people of these colonies into poverty. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people, the rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Paine)


They have slapped us with the aspersion of slave, not citizen. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice nor respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like were enemies instead of kin. There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial workers now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Patrick Henry concurs, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”(Henry) . Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like serfs to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together united, as a single thinking force. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable.

The people of New Jersey are worthy of freedom. We are no longer a small group of people 3000 miles away from home; we are no longer a huddled mass waiting for handouts. New Jersey is “The best country I have seen for people of middling fortunes who live by the sweat of their brows”- Jonathan Belcher. (Bill 3-4).




What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, If you as a citizen do not care about the deprivation, the starvation of freedoms, that are rightfully yours, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, the cause is of utmost significance. For your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, patriot blood will be spilt. We are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. But now we have the strength to fight. As a community, as a united whole, the people state of New Jersey must join this desperate fight. We will win.


Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.

Henry, Patrick. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death." 23 Mar 1775 Page 1, Paragraph 1. 17 Nov 2008 .

Paine, Tomas. "Thoughts on Present State of American Affairs." Common Sense Page 1, paragraph 4. 17 Nov 2008 .

Essay #2 draft (unfinished)

As a citizen of the state of New Jersey, I know where my loyalties lie. I have seen, as my fellow people have, the many injustices and tyrannies committed by the state of Great Britain against us. Once a warm and loving parent, she now strikes at the very core of our values, taking from us what is never meant to be taken. I have seen, in my own backyard, horrible battles and unnecessary bloodshed. Our ancestors fled from Britain to escape persecution; now we are strong enough to fight back for a similar cause. This is our duty, to those who died in their fight for freedom, to those who are fighting now, and to those brave men who will spill blood for the patriot cause.
In enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has pushed us too far. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice not respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like were enemies instead of kin. The monarchy is compromised, instead of the pillar of strength and purity it was; now it’s a greedy corrupt clique taxing the people of these colonies into poverty. They do not have the right to control our people like they are. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people, the rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. As a community, as a united whole, the people state of New Jersey must join this desperate fight. We will win. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, but this is a cause that has the most importance. As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs”). What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, the cause is of utmost significance. For your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance.
There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial peons now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like slaves to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together, united, as a single thinking force. Patrick Henry concurs in his article, Give me Liberty or Give me Death, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable. New Jersey is, “The best country I have seen for people of middling fortunes who live by the sweat of their brows”- Jonathan Belcher. (Bill 3-4)
The people of New Jersey are worthy of freedom. We are no longer a small group of people 3000 miles away from home. We are no longer a huddled mass waiting for handouts. We are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. But now we have the strength to fight.


Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.

Essay 2 Outline

Patriotism in New Jersey is the only course of action because:


I. Our natural rights are being infringed upon
A. It is not constitutional that one group of people should lead over the masses (oligarchy/ monarchy)
B. This is a cause that will set a precedent for all future generations
i. “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs”

II. Because we will be turned into slaves
A. If we continue to let Britain strip us of our rights, what is the difference between us and slaves?
i. “ I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery” (Patrick Henry, “Give me Liberty or Give me Death”



III. We have outgrown Britain
A. Their governing has become tyrannical in nature
i. “We may as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to have meat.” (Tomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs)
ii. “ She [Britain] did not protect us from our enemies on our account, but from her enemies on her account” (Tomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs)

B. We are strong enough to hold our own( stable enough to be a world power)

justification

Justifications,
Bacon
Bacon was a wealthy Englishman who believed that Native Americans were dangerous enemies, not peaceful friends He beleived that they must be killed to protect the colony
and the violent acts by the Native Americans before the rebellion
The Indians, however, became exceedingly more hostile after Bacon started attacking.
The Indians retaliated by killing colonists, setting traps, and even capturing the colonists

Government
Bacon’s Rebellion was caused by corruption in the Virginian government and mistrust between the native tribes.
However, William Berkeley, the governor of the colony, had a different view towards the Native Americans.

Natives
Native Americans wanted peace with the colonists most of the time.
Eventually, most of the settlers hated keeping the peace with, what they saw as. the savage people, and were not given the respect or shown respect from the government they thought they had deserved as the established people of Jamestown.

11/3 homework

As Craig has already pointed out, the Psec Advisory Council mirrors the First Continental Congress. Psec is similar to Early America with its diversity (especially the middle colonies like New York and New Jersey, thank you Ben) and the strength of its community. In the upcoming elections, we face a different problem that the one Early Colonists did. I think if Psec was severely flawed, the situations would be more similar. Psec (in my view) is under no imminent threat, so I don’t quite see the connection there. But if it was, the power we hold as students, as members of a widely varied community is exactly the same. The leaders of the advisory council would speak for the mass, the people, the individual voice, which is exactly what the first Continental Congress did. They did not act of their own accord, they themselves deciding what was best for the masses, how could they? They would not be any better than the tyrannical English.
I think that Psec is great the way it is. If I saw some gaping defect, I would no doubt bring it up to someone. But I, in the synonym of the continental congress, am a happy citizen. I’m in no hurry to change the way things are run here, just because it’s possible. Students of Psec should not take for granted the fact that they can change things, and I don’t think they do.

Stamp Act Synthesis

These documents are the beginning discussions of freedom and independence. The colonists have been given rights to govern themselves for so long, almost being ignored (governmentally) by England. They would grow accustomed to that way of life, being spoiled by English protection, the English asking little of them in return. When the stamp act was inducted, this challenged their entire former system of government. A country taxing them from afar, to pay for things they would never see? Colonists, with their newfound unity and patriotic spirit, would find this move insulting. Taxation without representation reinforced their “lower class citizen” status. They argued that they were just as much English citizens as anyone living in there at the time, and that taxing them without consultation brought them equal to any lower class minority. Were they to be “tamed like slaves?” This is when the ideals of independence first took wing in the colonies. Sending out an act of resolves to the Crown was a huge step in American history, because this was them fighting back against what they thought was unjust. The significance of this event was not the repeal of the stamp act; but a change in the attitudes, a change of heart, and a shift in power. For the first time in the colonies history, they were strong and confident enough to defy those who inflicted those injustices.

Essay Semi Final

How do you tell the difference between heroes and villains? Some would say the difference is actions, others say about perspectives. Since history is an art of interpretation, it gives us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led the poor and underprivileged to revolt against their malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero... I believe he wasn’t a hero at all.


Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.

First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.




Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people”, as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?

It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi elucidates in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.



Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.

The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.

The government’s crimes also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.

And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.

In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.


Bibliography

“Bacons Rebellion: The declaration (1676) by Nathanial Bacon” (online) available at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5800

“Nathanial Bacon Declaration, 1676” Reading the American past, pg 55

Puglisi, Michael “Whether they be friends or foes: The roles and reactions of tributary native groups caught in colonial conflicts” Marian College, pg 77

Zinn, Howard and Steffoff, Rebecca. A Young People’s History of the United States. Pg 35-51.
fvfv