This tells us that he had firm control of the country, and was allowing change in the safest of manors. On the other hand the lack of rebellions may have been due to Northumberland’s ruthless nature during previous rebellions making people afraid of repeating the same outcome. The movement to Protestantism can be attributed more to the Kings wishes, and not represent what Northumberland himself wanted. Northumberland’s social and economic ideas were primarily aiming towards getting the government’s finances back to stability. After Henry VIII’s erratic spending the crown and country were in financial crisis and this systematic and logical approach made by Northumberland towards the crisis shows his ability in this area of ruling.
Many countries and people probably did as well. On paper it appears that England would win without a doubt; they had all the means necessary for a victorious win over the colonists. When people come together to fight over a common cause, it is amazing what can happen. This is proven true by the outcome of the War for Independence. America won not because they had better soldiers, more supplies and weapons, or better fighting styles.
How successful was Edward IV management of the Royal Finances? Edward IV inherited the throne from Henry VI who had left the Crown in serious debt, therefore it was up to Ed to right this by earning not only enough to run the country, but also to pay back the debt. Furthermore a medieval king was expected to “live of their own” which meant that they should be able to afford the running of the country through their own lands and not need to ask parliament for tax which leads onto my next point in which the king should not rely on Parliamentary grants too much. I think that to a large extent, Ed was successful in managing the Royal Finances because I think that he fulfilled all of the criteria. Firstly, he was successful in managing the royal finances by innovatively using the Royal Chamber to efficiently manage the royal income.
Antifederalist leaders, including Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry, typically enjoyed more wealth and power than the people they led.I am sure these seemed like legitimate claims at the time, however, they are really fears unfounded by any proof. They thought that a government would do all these things but how could they be certain if they didn’t give it a chance? The Federalists, on the other hand, had answers to all of the Anti-Federalist complaints. Among them; the separation of powers into three independent branches protected the rights of the people. Each branch represents a different aspect of the people, and because all three branches are equal, no one group can assume control over another.
The statement "Throughout the Colonial period, economic concerns had more to do with the settling of British North America than did religious concerns" is true in that the settling of the British was important but the religious concerns during the colonial period was very adamant as well. The settling of British North America reflected and equal amount of economic and religious concerns. The colonies that were founded mainly based on religious concerns were also founded with thoughts of making money and becoming a greater threat to the world. The colonies of New England, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Connecticut were all founded mainly for religious reasons. Plymouth was founded but the Separatist Puritans who wanted to begin their own Church without the interference of the British government.
The challenge of leadership is to be strong, but not rude; be kind, but not weak; be bold, but not bully; be thoughtful, but not lazy; be humble, but not timid; be proud, but not arrogant; have humor, but without folly.”- Jim Rhon. A good leader should allow there people to be secure, and allow the people to grow financially, and he/she should be able to represent there peoples values. Philip II didn’t do any of that. Philip was a murderous oppressor, who acquired large debts from his military actions, and imposed high taxes on his citizens which evidently led to his ultimate failure. Philip is called close minded and said to be selfish with his money.
America intervenes in many wars that it should not have. America has a past of fighting for freedom and wanting to prove itself to powerful European countries. Ever since gaining their independence in 1776, Americans have felt the need to prove themselves in the world stage and feel important to the rest of the world. Americans are power hungry, and want to help others just for the selfish need of wanting to appear like good samaritans. They donate to other countries and the needy in hopes of getting recognized and applauded for good deeds, never simply just for the good feeling of helping another human
In the 1700s, Europeans saw numerous opportunities in the New World. They envisioned the colonization as a chance for them to live a free and prosperous life, but, in reality, the American colonists faced many setbacks. The tension between Great Britain and the New England colonies led to American Revolution. In Transcript of Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson acknowledged how the act of force was a rational option in order to obtain liberty from Great Britain; however, in The Rise and Fall of the Newburgh Conspiracy, George Marshall depicted how there is a more reasonable alternative to resolving problems within the new independent country. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson explained how governments should not be overthrown for petty reasons, but he believed the King of Great Britain had taken the situation too far.
The stamp act, sugar act and the Townshend act are all examples of unfair taxing. The colonists were taxed without proper representation in the British parliament. The colonist had every right to fight for their freedom. Even though the continental army was not well-equipped or trained, they still had a chance after Bunker Hill. The continental
Defense of the Loyalists “I affirm that it would be most excellent policy in those who wish for true liberty to submit by an advantageous reconciliation to the authority of Great Britain” Great Britain was not only a powerful nation, one of the strongest military powers, but also one of the worst groups of people to be on bad terms with in the 18th century, not to mention the financial stability maintained by that nation. For all the colonists knew, going to war was just setting themselves up for disaster. Also, being the number one economic power, England was the prime buyer of American raw materials and agricultural products. So not only did they have a reign on their economy, but also the colonies’ as well. The overall impracticality of