| Question Home |
Position:Home>History> Revolutionary War question, opinion.?Question: Revolutionary War question, opinion!.!? Do you think King George was correct when he stated that by losing the colonies and allowing independence would destroy or ruin the British Empire!?
Who agree or disagree with his statement and why!? I am curious as to what people think of King George III view point!. ThanksWww@QuestionHome@Com Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: When you examine the situation without "American" bias, it's somewhat akin to the situation America faced some 90 years later, when a number of states wished to secede from the Union!. The federal government of the time exhibited Ling George's view exactly!.!.!.!.that by allowing these "breakaways" to determine their own future, the very existence of the former situation was gravely at risk!. By this!.!.!.these former situations!.!.!.!.for King George!.!.the British Empire!.!.!.!.!.for the United States!.!.!.!.the "union" itself!. Of course!.!.!.!.one of the interesting differences was that England!.!.!.and English money bankrolled the original colonies!.!.!.and the English had established the colonies!. For the "confederate" states!.!.!.!.they voiced the concern that had they known in advance they COULD NEVER withdraw from the arrangement!.!.!.this "union"!.!.!.they never would have signed on in the first place!. In retrospect!.!.!.King George was probably correct!. As these 'colonies' exerted strength and independent attitudes, the British Empire did finally end!. Whereas the U!.S!. had a violent means to achieving independence, countries like Canada merely signed papers and became independent in 1867!. Other countries, like India, for example, achieved their independence through non-violent demonstrations headed by Ghandi, in the early 1940's!. In The United States!.!.!.it can probably be successfully argued that had the confederate states been permitted to leave!.!.!.or had won the "Civil War"!.!.!.the existence of the United States of America would be startlingly different than what it is today!.Www@QuestionHome@Com He was afraid in one colony attained independence that the rest of them would quickly follow suit and the British would have wars on almost every continent!. As to being correct!. It was several hundred years later that Britain was forced to give up almost all of it's colonies following WW2!. So no he was not correct!.Www@QuestionHome@Com In the long run He was wrong!. The colonies in America would end up being a stronger trading partner and a staunch ally to the British Empire than they would have remaining as colonies!. From King Georges frame of reference he could not possibly have seen this coming!. The growth of the Independent colonies was faster than it could ever have been under the mismanagement of the British!.Www@QuestionHome@Com I would say he was incorrect!. Remember that Britain lost the 13 older colonies in North America, but they retained Canada, and won several islands in the West Indies!. In addition, the American Revolution, when expanded out to the world stage, resulted in a French defeat in India, which ultimately yielded the Jewel in the Crown to Great Britain!. It does, however, set a precedent, for other colonial holdings to revolt against Britain!. This, encouraged in the mid twentieth century by the US government, ultimately led to the break up of the Empire!. I'm not saying that we were sending agents into Rhodesia or places to try and undermine British rule, but Churchill was suspicious that FDR and Stalin were maneuvering to break up the empire, Stalin because he wanted control of those countries, and FDR because he didn't like empires period!. He was probably justified in his suspicions, though I don't really believe they were conspiring against the UK!.Www@QuestionHome@Com |