apparently, aocia claimed american war of independence was against rich people
*found it https://nitter.net/MarcoFoster_/status/2053273753401143399
AOC: “America was founded in revolt of British aristocracy. The American Revolution was against the billionaires of their time. It’s actually the most American thing in the world for us to be fighting for the working class. It’s actually patently un-American to transform our country into a place of kings and landed gentry”
Wdm…? All of them.
Large plantations & established trade routes/businesses, slaves & their labour, the untaxed land & it’s natural resources (now paywalled to the British & co), the war industry was just being going, etc.
Basically everything that gave the colonies so much power that it could literally rival the British empire - and everything that was the reason why the USA had such a high GDP growth after.
What more could there even have been?
All the colonies at all times want more local autonomy (even now under USA empire).
And at what time were the USA politics not governed by greed?
And how much did the British crown affect the average settler (not the wealthy)? They didn’t do much outside their local village/municipality.
… it’s the rich folk that didn’t want to have bosses that can affect their wealth & power at any point.
The idea that the people wanted to vote in a complicated & not that democratic system is just propaganda to not follow the money & clearly see who had the financial motives.
Same as the land grabs afterwards.
They already had that. The only thing they were barred from after the French and Indian wars was doing unsupervised landgrabs westward. I mean they actually lost access to trade as a result of their war, which was also part of the plan (American traders could not compete with Indian tea)
That is if anything a point in the favor of what I’m saying. The Americans could not solely be interested in lucre, because they were already in an extremely advantageous position.
In this I would recommend “The Many Headed Hydra” as to the ground-up analysis of working class discontent going into the American War of Independence (really it talks about the development of the working class of the Atlantic Basin from the 1600s to the late 1700s, but the end cap there is the Age of Revolutions). I read it some years ago, but as I recall, the urban poor that made up part of the revolutionary armies were marshalled into service by the local bourgeoisie and slaver aristocrats after simmering discontent against Imperial authority had been building for centuries of indentured service, press ganging, work houses, enclosure of the commons, and other things I’m forgetting rn. The yoeman farmers who took up the patriot cause had their own materialistic reasons for revolting (namely, cheap land they could steal from the natives), as did the Loyalist farmers (tired of getting raided by aforementioned natives).
So, like, rebellion had been happening intermittently for a long time, it just took some young, plucky, genocidal fuckers to channel that working class anger into a focused attack on the British Crown.
this was a very big deal to the yankees, mostly the ruling class but also poorer folks looking for cheap/free land. the other outrageous part of the quebec act was it pre-empted the expropriation of quebecois land, something else the 13 colonies had expected after fighting the 7 years war. and while yankees temporarily lost access to (part) of atlantic trade during the war, the end result was that british interests were squeezed out of US ports–good deal for new england. settler-colonialism produces outrageously, irrationally entitled ideology. look at israel if you want a sense of how yankee colonials could feel slighted and keep pushing no matter how much free land and resources they heaped together