Patriot, Loyalist, or Neutral?

[sparkey]

Patriot. The complaints that the colonists had were much more than just about taxation and representation, it also extended to trade, debt, religion, and more. Some of these things were quite severe if you look into it, like how London took every opportunity to line the pockets of merchants in England at the expense of the colonists. There's a reason that all 13 colonial governments became Patriot so rapidly at the beginning.

Patriots who were militarily active may have been a minority, but Loyalists who were militarily active were always a smaller minority everywhere, and they were generally less effective. Quick, name some famous Loyalist commanders! You probably can't, because they were almost all terrible. (Kudos if you said "Thomas Brown" or "David Fanning" though--they were actually pretty good commanders. And if you said "Benedict Arnold"--let's just say that he isn't famous for his quality as a Loyalist officer.)

A question for all of you who say that you would have been Loyalists, then. When would you have stopped? Whenever your region was effectively won by the Patriots? When the war was effectively over (Yorktown)? When the war was official over? After that, perhaps moving to Canada and cursing the Rebels every step of the way?

[RINO Tom]

Patriot. The complaints that the colonists had were much more than just about taxation and representation, it also extended to trade, debt, religion, and more. Some of these things were quite severe if you look into it, like how London took every opportunity to line the pockets of merchants in England at the expense of the colonists. There's a reason that all 13 colonial governments became Patriot so rapidly at the beginning.

Patriots who were militarily active may have been a minority, but Loyalists who were militarily active were always a smaller minority everywhere, and they were generally less effective. Quick, name some famous Loyalist commanders! You probably can't, because they were almost all terrible. (Kudos if you said "Thomas Brown" or "David Fanning" though--they were actually pretty good commanders. And if you said "Benedict Arnold"--let's just say that he isn't famous for his quality as a Loyalist officer.)

A question for all of you who say that you would have been Loyalists, then. When would you have stopped? Whenever your region was effectively won by the Patriots? When the war was effectively over (Yorktown)? When the war was official over? After that, perhaps moving to Canada and cursing the Rebels every step of the way?

Like I said, I like to think I would have been a patriot, and I imagine being of German descent, that would have been the case.  But in 2016, being of Western European descent and a "nominal" Christian religion pretty much carries the same "privileged" status as being a WASP in the Eighteenth Century, so I easily could have seen myself thinking along the lines of, "Hey, we actually have it pretty good with the British, let's slow our rolls here."  I'd imagine by the time WAR broke out, I would at least stay quiet about things and definitely accept the result/move forward as a proud "American."

[Kingpoleon]

As a Methodist with heritage including Irish, Scottish, Cherokee, German, Russian(relative of Nicholas I, actually), and Mediterranean/possibly Middle Eastern blood, my heritage makes it unlikely I'd be alive at the time. I'd probably be a German Methodist if anything.

[nolesfan2011]

anti-monarchy, so I would have backed the revolution.

[RaphaelDLG]

Patriot, because I firmly believe that Tom Brady was innocent of all charges

[White Trash]

I can totally see myself being one of the few patriots that died at Kings Mountain. It'd be just my luck to bleed out in some mud puddle on the side of a hill. Illiterate, toothless, and forgotten.

[politicallefty]

I agree with the causes of the Patriots, but I probably would have been a Loyalist (and considering my ancestry, they would have been vehemently so residing in England).

[Mike67]

Patriot

[Kingpoleon]

anti-monarchy, so I would have backed the revolution.

That makes sense...

[Beet]

Ashamedly, if I'm honest with myself I have to admit I probably would have started out as a Loyalist because they were the more "reasonable" status quo side, but eventually I would have joined the revolution.

[Person Man]

These polls are basically worthless.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

These polls are basically worthless.

Yeah, the methodology is garbage!

[Associate Justice PiT]

It's overwhelmingly likely that, like 90% of the colonial population at the time, everyone in this thread would have been a neutral bystander.

As a Tory and lover of lost causes, my heart at least would have been with the Crown.

     This forum is a very opinionated bunch, so I could see its members being disproportionately partisan in this matter. Probably still not at the numbers we see here, though.

[Young Conservative]

My ancestors were dirt poor and early settlers with no attachment to Britain, so I would be a patriot.

[Sumner 1868]

Patriot, though I would have identified more with Thomas Paine than the "Founders", and would have supported Daniel Shays and Thomas Dorr's uprisings.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I really hate people (from the left, right and centre) being edgy and trying to reinterpret the Revolution as between two equally bad forces or whatever, or even (vomit) argue that the British tyranny was somehow the better force. Undoubtedly the American Revolution was an amazing thing, and even if some of the Founders were ultimately hypocritical (and shortsighted in some cases); it became a rallying call for what we would now refer to as the "left". Ignore the legacy of the men of the Enlightenment at your peril, leftists.

[HisGrace]

I'm probably too chicken to be a patriot so I would have sat it out and hoped they won. So I guess neutral.

[Lechasseur]

Loyalist.

For starters, my ancestors were predominantly British settlers. I also don't exactly see how the colonies were treated poorly compared to British subjects in Great Britain itself. And the ideals of the Revolution weren't exactly stellar compared to the Brits: GB did end slavery 3 decades before the states did. And this country was founded on genociding an indigenous people.

Oh and a parliamentary system sounds REALLY good in comparison to whatever our founders came up with. Yeah I'm not going Mel Gibson on this one.

[Arturo Belano]

Patriot, though I would have identified more with Thomas Paine than the "Founders", and would have supported Daniel Shays and Thomas Dorr's uprisings.

I'd be probably be this as well.

[Mr. Illini]

Irish, Polish, Catholic, anti-imperialist, anti-monarchy, etc...

Patriot.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I really hate people (from the left, right and centre) being edgy and trying to reinterpret the Revolution as between two equally bad forces or whatever, or even (vomit) argue that the British tyranny was somehow the better force. Undoubtedly the American Revolution was an amazing thing, and even if some of the Founders were ultimately hypocritical (and shortsighted in some cases); it became a rallying call for what we would now refer to as the "left". Ignore the legacy of the men of the Enlightenment at your peril, leftists.

This, a thousand times over. Suffice to say, any narrative that portrays a mercantilist, imperialist monarchy as some sort of force for 'progressive social equity' in the eighteenth century is at best derived from a woefully incomplete understanding of this period of history.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Patriot. Let's crush the imperialist, autocratic scum!