Although the first to spark a series of revolutions, the American Revolution was different because of reason, “it originated in an effort t preserve the existing liberties of the colonies rather than to create new ones” (p 502). Nothing about the word ‘revolution’ sounds conservative. I had always thought of the American Revolution as a radical demand for freedom, with the idea that the colonies were deeply dependent on Britain but ultimately oppressed and confined by its policies from across the pond. I never considered the fact that the colonies were fairly self-sufficient and essentially self-governed although regulated from across the world. So the idea that the American Revolution was actually a conservative act was new to me.
Democracy came easy and naturally for the Unites States, but that is not true of other nations. I think the US sometimes tries to force democracy on other nations, like Iraq for example. The war in Iraq was not a revolution per say, but it sort of looked like one. Of course, the Bush administration started the war on the false idea that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction. Anyway... it was like America came in, thinking that Iraqi people wanted freedom and revolution, and took out the leader. However, no one really planned for what to do after that. It was not the American colonies, where democracy was already developing before liberation from Britain. Iraq was not used to democracy, it was not like the American Revolution, where we take away Britain (Saddam Hussein) and the colonies (Iraq) continues to govern themselves… it was total chaos. “ ‘Liberty,’ noted Simon Bolivar, ‘is a succulent morsel, but one difficult to digest” (p 501). Freedom from Saddam Hussein was probably a good thing overall, however after a dictatorship freedom came through Iraq like a tornado stirring up a lot of wild emotions and actions.
It is so interesting to read about the succession of revolutions. It makes the world, which is so big and spacious, seems more tightly connected. The Declaration of Independence gave people the ‘right to revolution’ and started a domino affect of revolts against governments across the world. Although America was founded on this idea that people have a right to revolution, I wonder what would happen if something like a revolution happened today. Now that the country is established, and has a number of imperfections, would citizens be allowed to rise up and make a change? Not necessarily break free from government, but for reform- to change the way the government is run. Or if a revolution started in another country, would it have the same affect as the American Revolution? There is certainly room for change in many countries today, but do people have the same power they had in the late 1700s to spark a transformation?
No comments:
Post a Comment