• MortUS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    To get out from under The British Empire, which is pretty understandable during the time period.

    • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not very understandable. Britain had become a new and particularly liberal democracy by this point. The colonists were paying much less tax than their cousins back home, and “The Empire” didn’t really get started until after the Americans had revolted anyway.

      • MortUS@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        All of this is bullshit.

        What made them “particularly liberal”? They were exporting their “prisoners” to the American colonies. They were still colonizing other territories, extending their reach. They were still selling African slaves via slave trade through The East India Trading Company. The Empire was in full swing by the 1600s, through the 1700s, well into the 1800s where they started to lose steam through the century.

        • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          It was almost the only place in the world with a free press in the 18th century, and even enjoyed a healthy satire industry. Religious freedom was effectively the rule, and there was no lese majesty law that was effectively enforced.

          The Empire didn’t “lose steam” in the 19th century. That was where it went into overdrive with rapid expansion, the biggest addition being India in the 1850s. It was only in the 1920s when it peaked.