Pros And Cons Of Parliamentary Policies

Many people argue with the viewpoint on the despotism of Parliamentary Policies. Some argue that the British imperial policies towards America were set in place to rob Americans from their natural rights, basically enslaving them. Others argue that it was a convenient idea to justify rebellion for self-serving reasons. I believe that the parliamentary policies robbed Americans from their natural rights. The British policies were irrational for Americans giving them the right to start an American Independence movement to gain that feeling of freedom. Two university students gave their takes on whether or not they believed that the parliamentary policies were justified or not. Kim Klein, a student at Shippensburg University, argued that the colonial policies of parliament violated Americans’ right as Englishmen. John D. Fair, a student at Georgia College, argued that the parliament was justified in tightening loopholes in its imperial administration of the 13 colonies and insisting that Americans recognize their supremacy. To begin, both the authors had some pros’ to their argument. Klein opposed the parliamentary policies. She stated that Americans viewed the policies as abusive to their imperial relationship with Britain and their constitutional rights …show more content…
The British proposed these parliamentary policies after the Seven Years’ War. These policies were set in place to raise revenue in order to pay for the damage that the war had caused as well as regulate trade. The Americans did not agree to any of these policies. The British thought that the Americans should not have a problem with the policies since they were admirable to other. The Americans rebelled against these policies. Some influential British leaders also agreed with the Americans. The Americans opposed these policies until they were granted with the freedom from the Declaration of Independence becoming individual colonies on July 4,