[Naga]

The American Revolution isn't nearly as clear cut as that. It wasn't anti-taxation, it was anti-taxation without representation. The colonists were objecting to being taxed without having a say in the levying of the taxes. There were many colonial Americans who would have been happy returning Members to Parliament without independence.

The core of the issue really was that Britain defended the American colonies from French invasion during the Seven Year's War and the British taxpayer bore the brunt of the taxation (I can't remember exact figures, but Britons were taxed much, much heavier than Americans, even after the stamp duties and tea taxes). After the war, Parliament came looking for payback, understandably. So Britain wasn't using taxation to control the colonies, it was looking to recoup the costs of defending them.

On a sidenote, this is actually quite interesting in today's context over NATO military spending, where now it is Britain freeloading on American military spending.

[dvdhnt]

I really appreciate your response; you're correct. I was wrong to offer the ideal I did. I had hoped to posit that taxation is often abused, used as a tool to accomplish something other than to generally fund the government or improve society; as a control over the people.

My argument wasn't sound - I'm glad you provided historically accurate facts that were both enjoyable and informative!

Your sidenote is also interesting - and on another note (albeit silly) - have you heard of the AMC drama TURN: Washington's Spies? I've started watching it and have quite enjoyed it so far.

[eponeponepon]

> The American Revolution isn't nearly as clear cut as that.

This is an entirely legitimate statement.

> ...now it is Britain freeloading on American military spending.

...but this you're really going to have to back up. Can you point to a specific example and explain why it's 'freeloading'?

[KekDemaga]

The US has a significant presence in the UK: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/unknown-terri...