Chapter five in Howard Zinn’s novel A People’s History of the United States discusses the issues of the American Revolutionary War, the drafting and ratification of the Constitution, and the development of a national government.
The first major event that chronologically appears in this chapter is the American Revolutionary War or otherwise known as the war for American independence. One of most important demographics when scrutinizing the American Revolution is the proportion of patriots (pro-rebellion), loyalists (pro-British), and neutralists. According to various studies done since the event, the numbers and proportions display unstable summaries between the three affiliations. John C. Shy, a modern historian, claims that perhaps 20% …show more content…
The first question that immediately arises is how come through all the tyranny, injustice, unrepresented taxation, and turmoil in the colonies was there only one-third of the population that vigorously desired escapement from the British parliament and monarchy? Well, Zinn explains that revolution not only excluded a great portion of the colonial population (by excluded meaning the failing to enroll into the militia or the later Continental Army) but it also did not appeal to many colonists. Firstly, women, African slaves, Native Americans, mulattos, certain government officials, Yale students, white servants, homeless/property-less whites, and ministers were rejected entrance into the colonial army. Furthermore, the appeal of rebellion was not overwhelmingly strong as many colonists were unaware of the events rousing others. This, not surprisingly, caused Alexander Hamilton, assistant and aide of General George Washington, to claim that the war cannot be won without military reinforcement from the French or …show more content…
A prime example of this is the Fifth-Thirds Compromise of 1787. This compromise was issued in purpose to resolve the conflict between the proto-industrious North and the agrarian and slaveholding South. Basically, the compromise allowed for slaves in the United States to be accounted as three-fifths (60%) or a human being instead of five-fifths (100%). What really is shocking here is that if African Americans, slaved or not, are accounted into the population and give state delegates more power and representation in the House of Representatives why are they not protected by the Constitution? Better yet, look at Caucasian women throughout the early United States. They were accounted as citizens, residents, and population for their state and made their state more potent in the House of Representatives; however they too were not protected or granted any equal, democratic treatment under the U.S. Constitution. Even though groups like African Americans, women, and slaves were counted as citizens or half citizens they were absolutely not treated like they were counted as. So does this mean that the U.S. government along with the individual state governments was corrupt upon representation in the House of Representatives? Can it also be drawn that the American Revolutionary War was designed by the colonial elite in order to win
The first major event that chronologically appears in this chapter is the American Revolutionary War or otherwise known as the war for American independence. One of most important demographics when scrutinizing the American Revolution is the proportion of patriots (pro-rebellion), loyalists (pro-British), and neutralists. According to various studies done since the event, the numbers and proportions display unstable summaries between the three affiliations. John C. Shy, a modern historian, claims that perhaps 20% …show more content…
The first question that immediately arises is how come through all the tyranny, injustice, unrepresented taxation, and turmoil in the colonies was there only one-third of the population that vigorously desired escapement from the British parliament and monarchy? Well, Zinn explains that revolution not only excluded a great portion of the colonial population (by excluded meaning the failing to enroll into the militia or the later Continental Army) but it also did not appeal to many colonists. Firstly, women, African slaves, Native Americans, mulattos, certain government officials, Yale students, white servants, homeless/property-less whites, and ministers were rejected entrance into the colonial army. Furthermore, the appeal of rebellion was not overwhelmingly strong as many colonists were unaware of the events rousing others. This, not surprisingly, caused Alexander Hamilton, assistant and aide of General George Washington, to claim that the war cannot be won without military reinforcement from the French or …show more content…
A prime example of this is the Fifth-Thirds Compromise of 1787. This compromise was issued in purpose to resolve the conflict between the proto-industrious North and the agrarian and slaveholding South. Basically, the compromise allowed for slaves in the United States to be accounted as three-fifths (60%) or a human being instead of five-fifths (100%). What really is shocking here is that if African Americans, slaved or not, are accounted into the population and give state delegates more power and representation in the House of Representatives why are they not protected by the Constitution? Better yet, look at Caucasian women throughout the early United States. They were accounted as citizens, residents, and population for their state and made their state more potent in the House of Representatives; however they too were not protected or granted any equal, democratic treatment under the U.S. Constitution. Even though groups like African Americans, women, and slaves were counted as citizens or half citizens they were absolutely not treated like they were counted as. So does this mean that the U.S. government along with the individual state governments was corrupt upon representation in the House of Representatives? Can it also be drawn that the American Revolutionary War was designed by the colonial elite in order to win