/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Dropping this ITT. It's kinda Trot but he also wrote a book on the subject called "How Bourgeois Were the Bourgeois Revolutions." I haven't read it but it's on my list which I'll get around to eventually… heh heh *looks at giant pile of unread books*

"How Revolutionary Were the Bourgeois Revolutions" that is. We should track this book down.

>>404232
It seems kinda meh overall, as it didn't really change the social structure of the colonies very much. There was slavery before the revolution, and slavery after the revolution. There was dispossession of natives before, and dispossession of natives afterwards. Suffrage was limited to landowning white men before, and it was limited to landing owning white men after. It wasn't like the French Revolution where the revolutionaries radically altered the social order and cut off their ruling class's heads.

One could argue that it was bad because it birthed the Evil Empire, but, if America hadn't become independent, it may have just made for an even more powerful British Empire. What would have been interesting would have been for Britain to give parliamentary representation to America and perhaps other colonies. Over time it's possible that the center of power would have shifted to the colonies as the population and economy grew there.

Sorry, every time I see George Washington I immediately think about what Maupin said about his penis.

>>404232
Same as Simon Bolivar, rich class of rulers-to-be wanted to hold onto their wealth and influence rather than share it with a far-off empire
Tho I'd kill to be a privateer shooting down the brits tbh

>>404232
>Was it a reactionary attempt by the ruling slave class to protect the institution of slavery and the expansion of colonialism, as many others claim?
WSWS soyed out over this claim and wrote a long article on why Gerald Horne sucks. Decent article imo
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/03/18/horn-m18.html

There never was an "American revolution," though there could have been. I'd still argue that American independence was slightly progressive though, people who side with the British just strike me as contrarian and blinded by liberal ideology.

>>404287
Is that a pseudo name writer? I can't find any other articles written by " Fred Schleger" or an online presence by them yet they wrote that super long review

Weird

WASHINGTON
WASHING-TON
SIX FOOT EIGHT
WEIGHS A FUCKING TON

you can tell a lot about a revolution from the constitution that resulted.
there's a reason cromwell's chopchop yielded a constitution of amazing pragmatism, while the americans birthed a constitution of ungovernability. a constitutional model that has ensured coups and misery everywhere it has been attempted - except the US.

The American revolution was a split in the liberal party. Read Losurdo.

Any good Marxist books on US history in general?

I've read some recent liberal books on the US revolution and they stress the property relations; US lust for Indian land, which was being held back by the British. And the tax system/mercantilism of the Empire was hurting the colonies economically.