American History

1A. The Kansas-Nebraska Act has been called the most significant law ever enacted by the US Congress because it subjected slavery to popular sovereignty. Senator Stephen Douglas wanted to allow settlers to decide whether to allow slavery in the newly established territories of Kansas and Nebraska.

1B. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 created the territories of Kansas and Nebraska (hence from the name of the law), repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and allow settlers to determine decide the future of slavery in the new territories.

1C. The law was initially designed to create opportunities for Mideastern Transcontinental Railroad. However, there was always the problem with popular sovereignty. So, to resolve this issue additional features were added to the proposed law. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 would have to be repealed, and settlers would be allowed to decide the future of slavery in those territories. Sen. Douglas hoped that this new law would ease the tensions between the North and the South.

1D. Opponents denounced the law as a concession to slave power of the South. The Republican Party launched a furious campaign aimed to stop the expansion of slavery. In the long-run, the law divided the nation and engulfed it in a future civil war. The act itself repealed the Compromise of 1850. The turmoil over the act split both the Democratic and Know Nothing parties and gave rise to the Republican Party.

2A. The major goal of the Union was to end the rebellion in a matter of 90 days. The Confederate capital, Richmond, would be captured in a lightning campaign. The major goal of the Confederate was to force the Union to negotiate for peace terms. The peace terms would recognize the Confederacy as an independent state.

2B. The war had three major theaters eastern theater (1861-1863), western theater (1861-1863), and the trans-Mississippi theater 1861-1865.

2C. In a strategic sense, despite being a tactical draw, Antietam maybe considered a turning point of the war because it ended Lees strategic initiative and allowed Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation.

2D. The battle forced Lee to adopt a defensive stance in his campaigns against the North. It enabled Union forces to consolidate both manpower and resources for a final campaign against the South.

2E. The battle of Gettysburg ended Lee attempts to invade the North. It also weakened his numerically inferior forces. The battle of Vicksburg had an important logistic outcome. Control of the Vicksburg area would give logistic control over the Mississippi region. The Confederates lost the battle, and hence the battle for the Mississippi region.

2F. Former Union General McClellan was running against President Lincoln on a platform of peace in the 1864 election. Part of the Democratic platform called for a peace agreement with the South. The capture of Atlanta and Hoods burning of military facilities were covered by Northern press. This significantly boosted Northern morale. In effect, Lincoln won by a large margin.

3A. Dred Scott was born a slave in Virginia between 1795 and 1800. In 1830, his owners took him to Missouri. Two years later, Major John Emerson of the US Army purchased Scott. After some years, Emerson died. His wife took possession of Scott. Scott wanted to purchase his freedom but Emersons wife refused. A series of lawsuits were filed in the court the first being against Emersons wife and the second against John Sanford, the executor of John Emersons estate.

3B. The Court ruled that people of African descent imported into the country and held as slaves, or their descendants (whether slaves or not), were not protected by the Constitution and could never be citizens of the United States. It also ruled that the US Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories. The broadness of the decision was a response to growing cynicism over the issue of slavery. The court apparently was afraid of a major political storm should the decision be specific.

3C. The decision sent shockwaves throughout the nation. Opponents of slavery argued that the courts decision was a Southern propaganda  that the court gave in to pressures from slaveholders. Some argued that the court simply became a propagandist of human slavery. The decision severely divided the nation  an event which led to the Civil War.

The nineteenth century in America marked an era on the policing of race and racial boundaries. This involved giving of legal definition to the borders of belonging, an event that brought about the racial priviledging and the racial excursion operation in the American law and racial inequality. Slavery was a touch stone measure of the freedom and denied the right of self ownership and personhood. This led to a strong anti slavery campaign and apparently, some of the slaves were able to acquire property.

The main theme of my essay is that the United States constitution was formed to establish the whites general welfare and more so frustrate any other party related to the colored population in the creation of boundaries. The colony had united its conflicting interests and diverse sentiments through the use of compromises and concession to attain its common goal for the safety and welfare against the enemies.

Unfortunately, the same very protection of the citizens right, in a way turned into a red hot sword to the gender differences of the same country. There was the limitation of legal rights and a parallel legal working status between the working class white men and other racial group and women.

But the constitution is meant for the equal representation, whereby the citizens have the right to understanding each and every section, article and a clause in it. Without this consideration the adopters of the same constitution uncertainly never raised a voice against it immediately.

The northern white women worked hard to achieve racial and gender equality, but their efforts and connections turned problematic. This was after the civil war during the reconstruction that determined a lot on the status of the working people and the labor movements.

The ownership of property and the property rights law on property control was greatly determined by the race and citizenship. Some policy makers were against the legalizing of slavery due to its foul and monstrous character.  But some denied it saying what the concessions and the compromises were known when the compact was framed and adopted relating to the prosecution of the foreign slave trade for twenty years to the allowance of the slave representation in the Congress, to the hunting of fugitives slaves, and to the suppression of the domestic insurrections for the special benefit of the slave states. (Garrison W. The United States Constitution p303).

The recapture of slaves law was passed immediately after the adoption of the constitution. This led to the elimination of the words slaves and slavery in the constitution to avoid the protection of the slave system whereas those that were used were used very intelligently. Really if slave trade was a humane task, do you think there was the need to use was there the need to use equivocal and collusive phraseology Was it not a means to cover up the misfits and help meet the disagreeable necessity The law denounced the white men as the self owning individuals not even the women unless through marriage and the covertures law.  The husbands were presumed as the providers by law and had the rights to their wives, labor and persons. Women were excluded from certain professions like law and medicine and they were maintained as white mens domain.

The laws on racial boundaries on land ownership were even tightened in the North and West at the end of the nineteenth century. African Americans were bared from settling in the South under strict regulations. The miscegenation laws, the covenant laws and the alien land laws had a very great impact on this.
The north was fighting for the anti slavery laws that would have lead to the abolition of slavery in the south. But there was fear of the civil war. This is cheerfully granted but are these Anti Slavery interpreters ready for a civil war, as the inevitable result of their construction of the constitution (Garrison W. The United States Constitutionp306). What case have they to believe that a civil would not occur immediately shaking the union to its foundation.

This led to the formation of the Anti Slavery Movement to fight for the accomplishment of the rights.  This to date conveys the present difference in the state of the North and the South. The movement objective was to fight the ages of oppression and ill hearted selfishness against the colored race. In the name of respecting the forefathers and their ways some would argue the enslavement of the colored race as a begotten right. Not considering that the generation change and development as the projection to future of the country. But many were also against this.

And the Methodist, Baptist and Presbyterian churches stood firm behind the movement terming it as against the laws of God as well as the laws of man. In1780 the denomination said The conference acknowledged that slavery is contrary to the laws of God, man and nature, and hurtful to society- contrary to the dictates of conscience, and true religion, and doing to others that we would not they should do unto us. (Douglas F.Anti slavery Movement p11).

A revolution emanates from the rule of majority. The intense and expeditious campaign by he Anti slavery movement sects which consisted of four divisions, i.e. The Garrisons, the Anti Garrisons, The Free Soil Party and the Liberal Party,  led to the acceptance of the Fugitive Slave Bill that made a positive change on the anti slavery movement.

The society was faulty and the writer says Its chief energies are expended in confirming the opinion that the United States constitution is, and was, intended to be a slave-holding instrument- thus piling up, between the slave and his freedom, the huge work of the abolition of the government, as an indispensable condition to emancipation. (Douglas F.Anti slavery Movement p33). This wonderful amendment denounced the degraded colored race and imposed some rights though not fully but worth a start.

The Mississippi Act of law represented the amendment for the freed men. In this act, it consisted of many sections of rights for the group that included the freed men free Negroes and mullattoes. Among the acts involved acquired judicial rights and state equality and the right to the ownership of land and property in some of the states. Though, they had no power to lease or rent the property unless in the incorporated authorities. There was the right to inter marry but not with the whites, using the same rules as the white men. This was in the fear that they might use the land to benefit the non citizens. This was the fight to retain the country resources. Its the difference between perceived freedom and denounced freedom where ones efforts are turned disability. They were allowed to take part in lawful employment with the documentation with the county authority. This would in turn take their responsibility to obey the labor laws and liability to face court case in case of failure since their tenure of employment was secured.

There were also the act to regulate the relation between the master and apprentice as related to the freed man. This involved the reporting of any freed person to the counties and protection of the minors by the master. The master had the right to recapture any of the minors who leave the employment and take him to a court of law and he never had the right to transact the masters property.  Concurrently, as he works he had the right to get a child. These were major steps to attaining equal rights with the whites but the economical differences were the inclusive slavery.

The constitution amendment was progressive and the colored race turned to be assets in the economy engine. Each and every citizen was to participate in the growth of the country and having realized this, the vagrants laws of the states were also amended where all vagrants were to be charged and imprisoned. The freed men were also to take part in the paying of the taxes and live a responsible live under employment. All the cases involving justices of the peace in the counties were being handled by the mayors and they had the power to try all the vagrants and to take them to a court of law.

All the businesses that were against the morals were also deemed as vagrants by this law. The freed men were deemed with the full responsibilities of the white men including caring for their families. Any person feeling himself or herself aggrieved by judgment of any justice of the peace, mayor, or alderman in cases arising under this act, may within five days appeal to the next term of the county court of the proper county, upon giving bond and security in a sum not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than one hundred and fifty dollars, conditioned to appear and prosecute said appeal, and abide by the judgment of the county court and said appeal shall be tried de novo in the county court, and the decision of the said court shall be final. (Black codes of Mississippi 6).

This gave each and everybody an equal chance to defend his rights.

The United States mining laws consisted of local states laws. The California state and other states then composed of the many counties that were governed at the county offices by a team of elected members. The miners in this state had a working constitution that governed the different counties and their life in the mining industry.

All then miners actively participated in the decision making of the counties through the direct election of their representatives to the county. The miners used to hold a meeting and choose leaders that would then set up specific county laws. Among these included, any citizen of the country had the chance to become a member of mining under the laws and also consisted of rules and regulations of taking a claim on the ground for all the mining counties. It also consisted of laws relating to water. They also contained rules on the relation between the miners. No representation by another party once each person is absent. Pertaining sickness it was dictatorship whereby incase on was sick this would have resulted to his absentees and there was no one who had the right to represent him. Quartz miners of the Sacramento County also had the same rules as the New York miners. Each U.S citizen was entitled to one claim of the quartz. In Sierra County the holders of the claims were American citizen and those who possessed the mining tax permits. This was a greater advantage for the foreigners. The hard working discoverers were entitled to a bonus claim in many of the counties.

In conclusion, these results of legal and extra legal violence that were evident in the century were essential in enforcing the borders of belonging. In the south in particular, the safe guarding of the white mens claims of the property and the nation space as a whole was through the use of violence. This was all the fight for the colored race where the whites short-changed their efforts to disabilities.

Europeans have been part of the history of America since the 15th century when Spanish explorer, Christopher Columbus, discovered the Americas, paving way for other Europeans to follow. England colonized the United States for the next several centuries. In these texts, Galloway and Paine argue for and against Englands colonization of the U.S. as the latter comes to declare her independence.

According to Galloway, the United States relied on England for protection. The British therefore argued that they had the right to maintain dominance over the United States. In return, the United States was obligated to swear allegiance to Britain. Paine faults Galloway, observing that the U.S. was home to European immigrants from not just Britain, but from the entire continent. According to Paine, Britain was cannibalizing its young one.

These two texts appear towards the end of British colonial hold on the United States and Britain finds herself having to defend the colonial policy against an American who sees Britain as the enemy who has no moral right to be in the United States. Galloway defends Britains dominance by arguing that because Britain protects the colony, then it follows that the colony cannot declare independence.

Although British emigrants outnumbered immigrants from other European countries, America was inhabited by immigrants from all over Europe. Britains interest in America had little to do with protecting the colony. Britain was more interested in exploiting resources found in America. Britain however attempted to justify its colonization of America even as it became clear that it was time for colonialist to leave America. The colonizeds views are in direct opposition to the colonizers views of the justification for colonization, and urgent need to end the master-slave relationship.

PROLOGUE
Oppenheimer makes a reference to the Bhagavad Gitas words on death when he speaks of the explosion of the first atom bomb in the New Mexican Desert in 1945. The same words could be remembered by the Spanish ships that reached the Mexico in 1492 to explore the New Lands. Though these two instances are spoken of as periods of crowning glory for the technology age, they were at the same time, moments that laid the ground for the worst form of human destructiveness. Hispaniola and Hiroshima were the products of destruction.

When the Europeans contacted the outside world, there always was a bloodbath following after which only very few of the natives were left alive. The greatest genocide though was that of the native Indians at the hand of the invading Europeans. The current statistics of the post  Columbian holocaust declares that atrocities committed against the natives of the New Lands were far greater than those often stated in general history. The writings of the Spanish adventurers themselves are testimony to the brutalities they committed on the natives. One Mayan woman was even thrown to the dogs because she refused to indulge sexually with the invaders (pg.xi). Killing the women and children was merely a sport for the invaders (pg.xi). In the post  Columbian America, only a few of the natives remained after the carnage so that their race did not go extinct. It is true that epidemics and plagues caused due to infectious diseases put an end to the lives of natives. At the same time, it is cannot be ignored that the brutality of the invaders did exist immensely.

Attempts are made to erase all the blame that must necessarily fall on the invaders for the carnage on the natives. This book tends to study cases of the racist carnages that occurred from 15th century Hispaniola to 19th century California and to find out the underlying theme and culture behind this wild attitude of the invaders. The need to study this history, as a historian of the Jewish Holocaust put it, is not merely so that we pay homage to the dead, but also that so that we do not see a repetition of the same tomorrow due to our own ignorance and negligence of the holocaust history behind us (pg.xiii). Columbus is being praised for his conquests in media today, but the carnage that his voyages resulted in should not be ignored, so that carnages like those of yesteryears being committed today can be stopped. Such carnages do occur even today as was witnessed in Guatemala in 1986. Killings of a lesser degree have occurred in the Vietnamese War, the Korean War, the Civil War. The natives always resisted the attacks of the invaders to a degree that even amazed the invaders themselves. In this book we tend to look into the magnitude of the destruction caused by these carnages.

The following chapters explore the native civilization in comparison to the invaders to the New Lands. Did they have their own cultures before those from the New Lands supposedly civilized them Or was there ever a need for them to be civilized by the invaders Did the invaders actually need to be civilized by these natives who were already living on the peak of civilization

THE MAGNIFICANCE OF THE CULTURE OF THE CITIES OF THE NATIVES IN THE PRE-COLUMBIAN ERA
     
BEFORE COLUMBUS
Before the Spanish conquest, the Lake of Moon in the Valley of Mexico had many populations of people in its various towns and cities. Trade and commercial activity ran high, and the landscape and creative town planning was unbelievingly impressive. The Spanish invaders were amazed by Tenochtitlan, the central city of the Aztecs and surrounding Iztapalapa.

The invaders were appalled by landscape, the volcanoes with the mountains and volcanoes, the creative abilities of the inhabitants, and construction of the city. Public works and the sanitation system of the city were flawless and accurate. The network of canals running through the city resembled Venice, but the floating gardens were matchless. Trade and commerce in the Great Market of the city was uncomparable. However, the eyes of the invaders were on the citys Gold mines that resulted in the destruction of these cities by 1492  starting from the ruin of Hispanolia and extending to Tenochtitlan and spreading further.        

The natives were emigrants from Berengia, which city the melting glaciers drowned and the migrants settled in Hispanolia and Tenochtitlan in early 70,000 B.C(pg.11). Unlike popular belief, the natives were cultured and civilized long before the Old World. Mere cultural conceit hides this truth from the public eye and history being taught today. The history and cultural thickness of these civilizations were distorted in the greedy search of the invaders for gold mines(pg.13) beside the attempt to rationalize colonial conquests. The colonist is portrayed as benevolent arm of the Holy amidst the barbarian natives who allegedly have no past.

The natives of America have a long civilization and history than Europe, for eg., the Adena culture of 500 B.C. People of these cities were hunters and farmers, nomads who lived in iglus. Yet their well organized culture speaks of respect for the elderly, excellent social networking and political makeup. Women were well valued. Pottery, jewelry, carpentry, agriculture, and fisheries flourished. Homes of chieftains were exquisite. In fact, their political thinking had a great impact on European social mind that logic suggests that it was the Indians who civilized the Europeans and not vice-versa. Women suffrage, and equality were contributions to the American Constitution by these native Indians. The natives regard for nurturing children and for the poor impacted the European mind(pg.32). Their architectural masterpieces were also brought to ruins by the invaders.

The Olmec culture also thrived with trade activity. Teotihuacan with its great pyramids and artworks monuments, town planning and writing methods, trade and commerce of the Maya culture and the Toltecs and the Mixtecs were other awe inspiring cultures. Central and South American cultures too was no less civilized. The Inca Empire also had similar impressive trade, commerce and town planning, palaces with magnificent masonry and social organization that explorers earmarked them as model cities. The Cuzco civilization, the Awaraks and Amazon lowlands also had such ancient cultures of well organized people who lived in peace and amity with their neighbours, courteous and affectionate and hospitable to strangers from other lands. Pre-Columbian era was disease free.

The native peoples of America before the Columbian conquest lived with their cultural diversity and speaking in many tongues but living in peace and cordially.

THE POST COLUMBIAN ERA AND THE IMPACT OF THE INVADERS ON THE NATIVE CULTURE AND CIVILISATION.

Spain, Switzerland and France in the 14th and 15th centuries were attacked by plague and famine. Public health suffered, and diseases, rebellions, food riots, violence, witchcraft, torture and murder thrived (pg.62). During these dark days that Columbus set sail on his first voyage from the City of Palos, Spain in 1942 (pg.62), along with deported Jews to the New Lands mistaking them as areas around the Indian Sea. Natives were unchristian pagans who needed Christian transformation the Spanish invaders prided in the same, which made the natives detest Jesus. These peaceful natives were made to read a declaration they never understood that subjected them to the brutal Christian rule.

Columbuss second voyage to Hispaniola in1949 to build his town Isabela (pg.68). On arrival there, disease broke out among the Spaniards and spread to the natives who died in huge numbers though history blames the natives for the plague. However, Columbus focused on the goldmines. The natives were forced to give gold as a tax for staying alive. These slaughters have been recorded as brutal and merciless even killing little children (pg.71, 72). The invasions spread to the Caribbean Islands and the Bahamas, Central America and Mexico and the Aztec Tenochtitlian. The Spanish used treachery and the divide and rule policy to destroy the city and left behind the small pox virus to annihilate it.  Dogging and murderous attacks on women were done in order to terrorize the natives. Native rituals were condemned. Birth rates of the depressed natives declined to extinction. Peru and Chile, the Andeans, the Brazilians and the Mayas and the Incas were massacred.
           
Aguirres expeditions of Peru were equally brutal. At this time, the English also began racist reactions to the native Irishmen. In fact, the English wanted to conquer the beautiful lands occupied by the Irish in the pretext of civilizing the Irish modeling on the Spanish holocaust of native Indians (pg.99). While English expeditions reached the New World, the Spanish were terrorising Florida, Georgia, Virginia and beyond to capture the Indians to labour as slaves in the Bahamas. The measles epidemic spread during this time and English men who attempted help natives were killed(pg.105). George Percy sent a brutal campaign to subdue the Indians. The British used the Bible verses to justify their actions (pg.111). Captain John Endicotts army proudly destroyed the Block Islands (pg.113). Rhode Island that was neutral was also pulled into attacks (pg.118).

Modern warfare also only exhibits this European craze for killings like the attack of Nagasaki and Hiroshima of Japan. Even today, American invaders believe that natives need elimination(pg.120).The genocides today have lessed native population in North and South Carolina. The Cherokee population, the Nootka Indian Village in 1972, tribal populations in Lower Mississipi and Eastern Colorado in 1864, Santa Barbara and California have been driven off their land by the whites brutally. When the Indian adults attempt to use courts to give them justice, will they ever get it (pg.145)

GENOCIDE
These stories of genocide are indeed stories that tell of 4 centuries of American invaders attacking, conquering and destroying the native innocent Indians, a history that should not be turned a blind eye to.

The issue on slavery has long been the cause of contention amongst different groups of people especially during the African American Civil Rights Movement. It was during the 17th century when the British colonizers brought the first Africans at Virginia, North America and that instigated the vast expansion of slavery in the Americas. For a very long time, from this period up to the present, African Americans have fought hard for their freedom and for social equality. Slavery brought along with it grave conditions to the African Americans. These people faced discrimination and injustice that led numerous states to secession and people to the numerous rebellions (e.g. The 1676 Bacons Rebellion, New York Slave Revolt of 1712, The 1739 Stono Rebellion, and The 1831 Nat Turners Rebellion). Many have lost their lives in pursuit of the radical transformation in the society.

Amidst the struggles and rebellion of the oppressed African Americans, feted and important figures emerged from them. The collective effort of these people was seen and bore fruit their voices echoed and then heard at the halls of the policy-making bodies. Significant events in the history of African Americans fight for freedom since 1863 include the following focal points The Emancipation Proclamation (1863), Martin Luther Kings I Have a Dream (1963), and Barack Obamas Acceptance Speech (2008).

Emancipation Proclamation (1863)
The Emancipation Proclamation issued on January 1, 1863 by the then U.S. President Abraham Lincoln declared that all slaves in the ten states who have declared their secession from The Union shall be free (1863). These states include Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. The Proclamation could also have been aimed to address the progression of the American Civil War. In line with this, the Proclamation was to protect The Union and carry on with its obligations.

The Proclamation did not free all slaves. Border states that were against the Union and the southern states that were already controlled by the Union were exempted from the Proclamation. Nonetheless, it had granted freedom to over three million slaves in the ten states formerly members of the Confederate States of America (CSA). Slavery was brought to end when the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified in 1865.  

Martin Luther Kings I Have a Dream Speech (1963)
On August 28, 1963, at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., the I Have a Dream speech was addressed to over two hundred thousand people who were supporters of the Civil Rights Movement. King used anaphora, metaphors, and allusions to give emphasis and show credibility in his speech. He gave a historical background of the condition of the African Americans in the American society since the Emancipation Proclamation. A hundred years had passed and the African Americans are still suffering from the discrimination in the very society where they were declared free. Freedom was not yet completely at hand. King cited what his dreams were and two of them are the following

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

Racial equality and impartiality were his ambition for them and for the coming generation. He strongly believes that that day will come.

Barack Obamas Acceptance Speech (2008)
After winning the Presidential race for the White House, U.S. President Barack Obama gave his victory speech at a rally in Grant Park in Chicago, Illinois on the 5th November 2008. In his speech, he gave his warm thanks to all the people who have appointed him in his current position he gave compliment to the efforts of Senator McCain, his competitor and then he gave a brief overview of the problems that the current administration is facing two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century (2008).

He looked back into the past, into the political bigotry and tyranny of the times. Looking into the time when people were discriminated by their sex and color. President Obama set the 106 years old Ann Nixon Cooper as a good example of someone who has came from a long way and then found hope. And when she saw it, she grabbed it. She stood up and made her voice heard through her ballot.

Changes in Racial Equality Since 1863
In the aforementioned declarations given by three distinguished people during the critical times in the timeline of trying to end up discrimination and injustice towards African Americans, struggles and progress were seen. Efforts made by these three people have created an impact towards the state of mind and conditions of the African Americans who were the foremost people affected in these series of events. There had been tremendous changes that have happened since 1863. The current standing of African Americans in the social and political facet has been better since.  The current president of the United States is Barack H. Obama, the first African American to hold the position. Although there has been growth in the number of African Americans taking part in the government, education, and employment, there still is insufficiency in the number of representatives in these institutions.

The fight for racial equality has come a long way and it continues as long as there are voices that havent been heard. Having Ann Nixon Coopers voice heard was embracing victory that was longed for for centuries. This victory shall serve as hope for the present and the future generations of the society. It shall encourage people to dream just like how Martin Luther King did. Voices were heard and dreams came true and it is now time to exclaim, Free at last Free at last Thank God Almighty, we are free at last.

The revolutionary period of America was marked by some as a time in which division amongst colony members occurred over the feelings colonists felt about Britain. Many of the early American colonists shared a common respect and identity with Britain, and considered it a place of their heritage. While other colonists viewed Britain as an engine of tyranny, who would go so far as to attack people from her own land. The Second Continental Congress eventually joined together, collectively determining that the British monarchy, by acts of tyranny, could no longer claim their allegiance.

The historical context from which the two documents arose primarily took place during a time in which a series of intellectual, political, and social ideals held by a large portion of the colonists were undergoing radical change. People from all over the various locations of the colonies were beginning to feel a general sense of oppression from their British counterparts, therefore, the colonies eventually moved towards an armed resistance against the British. One of the main reasons many colonists began to side with the revolutionaries, revolved around the Boston Massacre. The aftermath from this incident helped spark the rebellion which took place a short time later.

Comparing and contrasting the positions on the relationship between the colonizers and colonies, although the majority of the colonies stood on the side of the colonizers, or, Britain, a small number of the colonists decided to fight back. This eventually led to physical battle. Some differences between colonizers and the gernal public of the colonies revolved around the feelings held by some of the colonists regarding political beliefs about national sovereignty and enlightened republican liberalism. The revolution itself took place in a time were the working class became discontent with the state and condition of their government.

The American Revolution, which occurred during the last half of the 18th century, was a major success for the American colonies. The colonies revolted against the governance of the parliament of the Great Britain and the British monarch. After wining the revolution, the United States of America was established.

The revolution was not an easy task as it was a long struggle involving the British and the American colonies and both were determined to win. This paper therefore, shall explain why it is right to conclude that the American colonies actually won the battle. It will also explain whether at the end of the revolution the American colonies were able to achieve what they wanted.

The American Revolution, which began in the year 1763, constituted of thirteen colonies and their leader was General George Washington. The main aim of this revolution was to enable these colonies have their freedom and enable them to control their government since each State had already established its own government. At this particular time, they were independent of England as their economic system was well developed.

According Schultz (pp.96), the continued conflicts between the American colonies and the uncompromising British eventually led to the revolution. The revolution was divided into two phases the phase before the war and the phase of the real war. Although the American colonies started the revolution, their army could not be compared to the British army, as it lacked in many things including good weapons.

Despite the fact that the British had the most powerful army at that time, it was still possible for the colonies to defeat it because the army had major weaknesses. Further studies of the same reveal that, during the revolution war, Britain was not in a position to continue supplying its troops adequately, secondly, they were not used to the guerilla warfare that Washington engaged them in. The American colonies were also supported by European nations like France and this increased their chances of victory.  The desire for France to weaken the British Empire, as well as the desire to trade was the main cause of being in opposition.

Although it was possible for the Americans to loose hope during the revolution war, the small success they achieved kept them moving especially the victory at Trenton.  As a result of this victory, the British had to let it go although it was only for a short time. Consequently, in the year 1777, British planned another invasion thinking that after the invasion, the war would eventually come to an end. However, the invasion was not successful because Americans attacked them unexpectedly as they were waiting for reinforcement. Due to this, they had to surrender and the Americans enjoyed the victory.

The victory at Saratoga was a clear indication that it was almost impossible for the British to win the revolution war, and if they won, then it was going to be a major struggle. It was not only the French alliance that really helped the colonies to win the battle but also the fact that Marquis de Lafayette became the leader of the Americans army and as a result, the French government increased its support (Schultz, 2009 pp.103).

After the British realized that they were almost loosing the battle, they tried to buy the American leaders. They managed to buy General Benedict Almond but this did not take them far as it was still impossible for them to win. Even if the British had some victories, in the very end, it was the American colonies who won the battle. Studies of Carr reveal that in 1871 October, the revolution war came to an end.

After the revolution war, the American colonies were able to achieve what they were fighting for. They benefited not only politically but also socially. Politically speaking, the church and the state were now separated meaning that it was possible for them to enjoy the right of worship. After the revolution war, women as well as the African American could now access the ballot. The revolution also had great impact on the American Nationalism as they could now consider themselves as the Americans having a unique culture.
The revolution had a very great impact on women because it was after the revolution that women started to vote although this was only in New Jersey. Schultz argues that the greatest achievement that the colonies were able to achieve is the right to control those who governed them.

After the revolution, the United States of America were properly established. Each state developed its own constitution having bills of rights, Limits of participation, and the separation powers. The bill of rights was to protect the Americans basic rights like the freedom of worship. The limits of participation described those people that were eligible to participate in the government and lastly the separation of powers ensured that the government was divided to different sectors each having its own responsibility.

In conclusion, it is evident that the American colonies won the revolution war. Although the British had a very powerful army, it was possible for the American colonies to battle and win the war. Despite the fact that Americans were helped by other countries that were against the British, like France, it was still their victory. Moreover, these colonies enjoyed the outcome especially after the establishment of the United States of America. As Carr notes, it was possible for the colonies to enjoy the republican rights.