The Puritans of Massachusetts Bay
The Puritans of Massachusetts Bay had fled an established church and religious persecution in England. Why, then, did they promptly establish their church and persecute dissenters?
The mid-1600s was characterized by religious evolution. The social and religious integration witnessed in the past centuries brought conflict within the Christians factions. The Puritans responded by establishing their own religion, which was seen as a pure form of the Christian religion (Henratta, Edwards, Self, 2012). The religion adopted by the Puritans sought to hold leaders and the entire traditional England church at a higher moral responsibility. The notion of a higher morality requirement did not please the monarchy of England, who disregarded the Christians laws when engaging in politics. The Kingship of England responded by evicting puritans from the land.
The Puritans faced a choice to either abandon their newly found faith or leave England. Most fled to America, which was more tolerant and without a single dominant church that shaped the daily lives of the people. Without objection, Puritans established their church in America, prompting more people to leave England and exercise their religious freedom. Unlike the ideologies held by the traditional England church, the Puritans sought a church that focused on the welfare of its members and hold leaders accountable. In a way, the new faith was deviant from the social, cultural, and political norms that ensure power for the elites.
According to these sources, what were the major challenges facing Europeans settling the North American colonies?
The European Settlers to the North faced many challenges due to the social and climatic differences between America and Europe. To begin with, they suffered hunger and diseases as they were not accustomed to the local foods, and their bodies were not immune to the diseases that affected the Americans. Additionally, the Europeans faced crop failure as the farming methods used in Europe did not always work in America. The Europeans came to try these methods of farming. When their crops failed, as they often did, they were forced to look for an alternative source of food and income, which was hard without the income from their farms. Other challenges included social marginalization by the locals and the language barrier that limited the efficiency of trade.
What were the major challenges facing Europeans settling the North American colonies?
Weigh the importance of economic and ideological motives in creating and sustaining the colonial resistance movement. Which was more important? Why?
The resistances sustained by Americans against European colonies and other movements all across the globe have had both economic and ideological motivations. From an economic perceptive, colonies were mostly used for the benefits of colonial countries. The local communities worked mostly as workers, while the colonial masters controlled the lands and the trade of the products. Therefore, the local communities had an inherent desire for freedom so that they could control their economic resources.
On the other hand, there was ideological motivation, which pushed the locals to regain their position of dominance and superiority. The cultural connotations endowed through generations makes each community take pride in their identity and resources. When the colonial masters threatened to take that away, there was a cultural motivation to realign their identity. Henratta, Edwards, and Self (2012) also note that there was a need for a balanced government that ensured the future of everyone. The colonial system was based on absolute brutality and no negotiations. Although the colonial masters used local systems of suppressed democracy to control the locals, they were willing to use brutal force in case of a disagreement or revolt. The colonies thus felt suppressed a trend that had to change to ensure an equitable society.
When compared, the ideological motivation outweighs the economic motivations. The taxes imposed by the colonial masters denied Americans a chance to live a comfortable life. However, with time, the issue changed from an aspect of economic marginalization to an issue of equality and fairness. As Henratta, Edwards, and Self (2012) argue, even with economic benefits to the colonies, they would have remained suppressed in social equality, representation, and freedom. Therefore, while economic benefits acted as one of the motivation, ideological motivation was the unifying factors that led to the collaboration of people who had suffered under the colonial governments.
How did the Philadelphia convention resolve three contentious political issues: the representation of large and small states, slavery, and state sovereignty?
The Constitutional Convention took place in Philadelphia in 1787 that sought to address the issue that arose with the independence in 1776. One of the major issues addressed by the convention was the representation of the colonies in the federal government. Before independence, the colonial masters had used economic value, and population to determine the budget and power yielded by each state. However, the notion of freedom, as expressed by the American people called for inclusivity of all states despite their size and population. There was a need to ensure that the population from weaker and less populated states got equal benefits from the federal government. The convention solved this issue by appointing two representatives from each state. The convention also gave special consideration to highly populated States that got more representatives.
The second issue was slavery. At the time, slavery was still legal in America. However, the achievement of freedom from the British colony created a social need to offer some freedom to the slaves. The Philadelphia convention set out rules that controlled the treatments of slaves and the valuation. The central idea was to treat the slaves better by offering better working conditions, housing, and better trading rather than offering freedom to the slaves. The convention also allowed the inclusion of the slave population in determining the representation of the large and smaller states.
Thirdly, the convention addressed the issue of sovereignty of the States. The formation of the federal government overlapped with the freedoms of the State governments. Americans across the political divides worried that if the other controlled the federal government, then they would control the sovereignty of the States. The convention mostly adopted the Virginia plan that outlaid the representation of the federal government and the two-third veto power of the Congress. This ensured that the southern and the northern states had almost the same number of representatives when it came to federal decisions affecting the states.
How did ideas about government change as a result of the Revolutionary War experience?
The Revolutionary War was the first prove that a structured government that controls the resources can be challenged when the locals unite with a common agenda. Despite the Americans being more in number than the Britain colonizers, their prior attempts to achieve independent had failed due to lack of unity and coordination. For decades, they reported to the representatives of the colonizers. The revolutionary war occurred when all the thirteen colonies were independently interested in becoming free, thus leading to collaboration. From a social perceptive, the war helped to shape the American identity of freedom and fairness after winning against the colonial government.
How might the Constitution have read had Abigail Adams, Daniel Gray, and the enslaved Africans in Massachusetts delegate to the Philadelphia convention?
Abigail Adams is hailed by man as the First Second Lady of America, through many letters she sent to her husband John Adams who lived in Philadelphia. Abigail and Gray believed that slavery was evil and threatened the American fight towards a democratic nation. If Abigail, Gray, and the slaves of Massachusetts had been in the convention, slavery would have been abolished. Abigail Adams is also known for her intellectual and her position on women rights. It is thus objective to assume that had she been in the convention, women rights could have been better represented.
Do you see the American Revolution more as a radical social movement (the people demanding liberty and equality) or as a conservative political movement (colonists demanding respect for their traditional rights)? Explain.
Revolution war was more of conservative political movements. Henratta, Edwards, and Self (2012) observe that Americans have always been notorious for their rights. The revolution against the British was a political uprising for the local communities demanding their local resources and political freedom. Although it brought about social justice and equality, the need for supremacy and reformation of the American identity was the leading motivation.