The Shoemaker And The Revolution Summary

In the article “The Shoemaker and the Revolution” by Alfred F. Young, he explores what caused the common man to become a revolutionary. In 1764, when the Sugar Act was put into effect, the common man was not affected. Though the second act, the Stamp Act, affected everyone, the first major act of rebellion was not until nearly ten years later, when The Boston Tea Party occurred. While the taxes were surely unwanted, the fact remains that the colonists were paying far less than what the British were, and today we pay far more than what we did as colonists. Therefore, logic shows that the common man had other purposes for revolution besides being taxed.
Young starts by addressing the presence of soldiers in the colonies. He begins by telling a story of how Hewes had personally been cheated by a soldier, and names several other instances in which soldiers showed extreme brutality and injustice towards colonists, particularly the murder of an eleven year old boy, which took place just a few days before The Boston Massacre. Showing this emotional connection between people Hewes knew and …show more content…
Tar and feathering, for example, though not commonly mentioned, is shown through the tar and feathering of John Malcolm. It also further demonstrates the acts committed by British soldiers, such as the robbery of the woman Hewes witnessed, and the murder of the eleven year old boy, just a few days before the Boston Massacre. The article also explains the mindset of the common man during this time, and uses Hewes as an excellent example of how deference was being cast off. Deference is perhaps the least looked into of these three things, but is a very crucial part in understanding the mindset behind the revolution. As soon as the colonists were put in a place where they no longer regularly saw a king, and social classes were far more fluid than that of Britain, the idea of superiority was slowly