British vs Colonists free essay sample

In 1763, a worldwide imperial conflict called the Seven Years War ended in resounding victory for the British Empire, which smashed Its European rivals to emerge from the conflict as one of the largest and most powerful empires In world history. During the war the British and Americans became a unifying force standing side by side, but short while later they were the ones In conflict with one another. England was left with an even larger debt, from the French and Indian War, than what they had started with.To compensate Britain started to heavily tax the colonies which lead to many events such as the Boston Massacre and boycott of British goods. But in this time period it was always England changing older policies and colonists complying with them. The colonists never strongly pursued the idea of independence, only to become a larger more representative force in England. The British were truly the revolutionaries leading up to the Revolutionary War, rather than the colonists, as seen by Englands significant change on Americas trading/ taxing policies, and the colonists strong will to stay with old tradition until the very sat moment. We will write a custom essay sample on British vs Colonists or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Eager southern farmers were speculating land grab, once the Seven Years War was over, wanting to expand their plantations to the backgrounds of Kentucky and Tennessee. But England afraid of increased costs due to conflict with Indians established the Proclamation of 173, which prevented settlers from going West of the Appalachians. The proclamation also kept Native Americans under the wing of the king, who was interested in fur trade with them. Though many colonists were upset with this event, they took care of it quite peacefully and were able to negotiate with he French and mother country to expand the borders.Another event was the revoking of the famed Salutary Neglect. For about a hundred years Britain had passed laws to regulate colonial trade in the best interest that the commerce benefited themselves. One example of this law allowed Americans to only trade with English merchants. But the Imperial forces In London allowed those laws to go unforced giving the colonies freedom of trade. In 1763 English lawmakers had strongly enforced trade with Britain, taking away from the freedom of the colonists.In OTOH these cases England is the first to start change, and stray way from traditions that were present before the French and Indian War. It would make sense that the more powerful country would be the one to start something new. These acts did not immediately vault the colonists into a revolution, but made them accept that change was happening, preparing them for the upcoming tax policies. England was in need of large sums of money, so they decided to take it from the Colonists who were thought to be well compensated for. The Sugar Act of 1763 strictly put high duties on sugar.Though some may argue that this was quite similar to the Molasses act of 1763, and it Just gave the colonists an excuse to rebel It was actually not. The Sugar Act was strictly enforced and the Americans could be tried and accused of smuggling In courts. So though the colonists were unhappy with the act, they showed no signs of separation, even when England had changed most of the economic policies specifically in taxation. Another example is the Townsend Duties and were doing quite well under the various taxes England decided to put another one.Even Benjamin Franklin himself said Americans would not object to external taxes, meaning that they werent going to fight over some small change, because England was a valuable partner to them. This act put tax on British import goods, and though the colonists boycotted it wasnt because of wanting to separate they only wanted more representation. It was actually seen that most were opposed to the few violent conflicts that happened here and there. Most of the upper and middle class were worried about the tactics of the lower class because they thought that it would sister the peace establ ished. Many settlers actually defended British soldiers that were found in the middle of conflict, such as Samuel Adams because they knew that it was themselves that had hurt the British crown. It was England, most of the time, that brought upon change in the colonies. And in most cases the colonists always went with the option that brought them the least conflict/ change with the mother country. Benjamin Franklin created the Albany plan to achieve a more centralized government in the thirteen colonies, in hopes to colonists could create their own defense.But a majority of the people voted it down, because of the incompetence that they had displayed in Ohio. This was one of the first fires of independence but many of them did not want to go a long with the change and instead kept the safety o the British. Another example is in July 1755 the Continental Congress sent King George Ill the Olive Branch Petition which reasserted American loyalty to the crown but asked for some leeway stating wit h all humility submitting to your Majestys wise consideration, hoping for a happy and permanent reconciliation. Angered by the appeal King George declared any of his officers in America were to do anything to bring the traitors to Justice. So in a sense it was the English who started this first surge of violence, not the colonists who Just wanted to have peaceful relations. In October, the House of Lords voted more than two-to-one and the House of Commons by an even greater majority to support war against the rebellious Americans. In conclusion, it is observable that England was the one to bring about a majority of the change and the initiative to start war.The colonists complied to many of the new restrictions that were put upon them. They were unsure of their need for independence until the very last moment, and even that was because of the violence of England. This relationship shows how England was not yet ready to take control over such a large area of land and so many people, and that the colonists only became strove for freedom when they were backed up to a wall, and there was no other option. The slowly suffocating acts of the British caused the conservative colonists to flee.

8 Crazy Things That Could Happen to the Workplace Within 30 Years

8 Crazy Things That Could Happen to the Workplace Within 30 Years Ever think about how the workplace of the future will be different? Here’s some food for thought: a few scenarios to consider as we plan our careers in a changing world. 1. Driverless CarsThis isn’t so much about the workplace, but will certainly change commutes and also fundamentally alter fields like mass transit and transportation, and maybe also change the face of the auto industry forever.2. No More OfficesMore and more companies might opt to have workers set up remotely, either at home or in shared co-working spaces. This will save companies lots of money on office space and give them the ability to hire talent from around the world.3. Big BrotherGPS monitoring might enable employers to track your location, your health, and your productivity. This certainly won’t be popular, but as long as the technology exists, some companies will want to use it.4. Workers’ ChoiceMore and more millennials entering the workforce are demanding that their employers mee t their ethical standards. Expect workers to switch companies and jobs more than they used to as they follow their passions and try to sculpt their ideal careers.5. Work ‘Til You DropWe’re all living longer, and companies are getting rid of costly retirement programs. We’ll all probably have to work much, much longer, particularly as medical advances keep us alive well past the life expectancy of our parents’ parents.6. Part-Time PlusFreelancing may be the wave of the future. It’s much cheaper for an employer to hire a freelancer, without having to provide benefits or health insurance. And many workers prefer the control and flexibility that lifestyle affords them. The steady 9-5 may be a dinosaur by the time our kids enter the job market.7. Artificial IntelligenceArtificial intelligence will start to replace as many jobs as feasible, putting more manual tasks in digital hands. This will destroy certain jobs, but create others in technology and serv ice.8. No More BossesZappos did it with their controversial â€Å"holacracy.† More and more companies are restructuring from the typical linear grunt-level-up-to-big-boss model. We can expect more lateral, integrative hierarchies to start forming, which will change the face of how we work and who we work for.9 ways the workplace will be different in 2050

Answers the two Questions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Answers the two Questions - Essay Example The infamous Zimmermann Telegram became the basis of United States formal entry into the conflict. Woodrow Wilson himself gave a speech to congress and declared war on Germany marking the official entry of United States into the World War. My personal opinion is that Zimmermann Telegram was not a good enough reason to enter the war. It was more of a self fulfilling prophecy where United States thought that Mexico would join Germany in turn declaring a war against Germany. The telegram was sent in case United States joined the war therefore it cannot be used as a justification to enter the war. According to Benjamin Freedman, Zionist were the main reason behind US involvement in the war against Germany. Freedman thinks that Zionists wanted assurance from Britain regarding Palestine and in return they took the task of involving US in the war against Germany (Freedman, 1). Jews were controlling all the newspapers and banks so it was easy for them to force US in the war. Freedman concludes that US had no reason to join the war. America was Pro Germany before 1917 to a certain extent and was not interested in the war. America should not have involved itself in the war because there was nothing to gain out of it. United States had little to gain from entering the war but only due to Zionist intervention did they take part in the war. The whole of the world changed as a result of US intervention because it was the first time when public opinion was deliberately changed in order to keep the war efforts going (Spielvogel). American public was not interested in the war but the public was made to believe that they were under threat. All this was done because of a powerful lobby of Zionists in United States. American history for certain would have been far better if US would not have declared war against Germany. Lives were lost and money was wasted, but the most perilous socio