The Boston Massacre Analysis

1075 Words5 Pages
Walter Staples HIST-1301-171 February 14, 2012 Paul Revere A simple definition of the word propaganda is to manipulate the public opinion in a biased or misleading way, usually to promote a political cause or point of view. According to Paul Revere’s painting of the Boston Massacre, the actual event in 1770 was a slaughter, with Americans having no ability to defend themselves. The British appear to have simply fired on the crowd without provocation and in an orderly fashion. They are portrayed to be tyrannical monsters that would kill without reason. In reports from the trial of the eight soldiers however, we learn that the massacre was chaos. The crowds taunted the soldiers and were armed with clubs. In the words of the Captain, they…show more content…
Many ports throughout the Middle Atlantic colonies and South Carolina enjoyed a huge boost to their economies by trading with Britain. In exchange for back country products, they received manufactured goods from England. Many of the merchants in Philadelphia and New York also had political influence and argued that security and safety was in staying with the mother country. Many of them also relied on insurance provided from England’s banks and as stated that independence would be unprofitable. This might be particularly true considering that many of the merchants were enjoying as much as a ten percent profit. There were also fears. Some feared that to wage war with Britain would require foreign aid, and would lead to yet another distant country trying to run American affairs. There was the fear of the unknown. Nobody knew what would happen with independence, or whether their situations would become worst or better with independence. There was fear of losing the war for independence, of the consequences and loss of freedoms that liberty would bring. The primary leader of the reconcilationists, John Dickinson, warned of the loss of American lives, and of the possible destruction that a war for independence might bring. John Adams on the other hand, argued that the very idea of reconciliation was “naïve.” He defended the ideas that many of the independent party had, including that after the hostilities had broken out, nothing but a true break from Britain would suffice for American freedom. He reemphasized this point after the failed invasion of Canada, stating that there was now “no Prospect, no Probability, no Possibility” of reconciling with
Open Document