Counters for the above are in order: All local town councils etc are subservient to Parliament, and there are no powers reserved to the local communities as stated in the Constitution and the Article of Confederation. After the Articles failed due to being too weak, the Constitution established checks and balances including an independent judiciary, something unheard of at the time. At worst and most likely they would have been executed for treason.
Would you like to merge this question into it?
MERGE already exists as an alternate of this question. Would you like to make it the primary and merge this question into it? MERGE exists and is an alternate of. Merge this question into Split and merge into it SAVE CANCEL The whole "Conservative vs Liberal" concept can be interpreted whatever way you like, but in general, "conservative" has historically been assigned to people, political parties and actions that are in their very nature resistant political, social or moral change.
On the other hand, the term "Liberal" has been used to describe people, political parties and actions that embrace change. Generally, the conservatives will argue that a free market economy will provide more opportunity for growth and allows anyone to succeed or fail, based on their own ability and motivation.
Generally Liberals will argue that the masses are unable to adequately provide for themselves and must have the aid of the government to provide for their medical, shelter and food.
Of course, dedicated Liberals would want to force everyone into the same system. King George and all of England were trying to maintain the existing system when the Patriots of the New World decided that they wanted to change their political system.
The fact that they wanted to bring about change means that by one definition, they were Liberal. On the other hand, the fact that they were trying to conquer the new world with the aid of the Crown was an example of moral or social change, which would have been considered more Liberal, and the CROWN would have been considered the Liberal political movement.
Which side was more Liberal and which was more conservative?
You get to make that determination depending on your side of the argument.Following the American Revolution, Americans rejected the core ideals of European conservatism; those ideals were based on the landed aristocracy, established churches, and powerful armies.
Conservatism in the United States is not a single school of thought. Barry Goldwater in the s spoke for a "free enterprise" conservatism. One problem with naming the revolution as ANY kind of movement is that it depends on whose side you were on and what year you are talking about.
Those things determine what the definition of conservative and radical is at the time. The American Revolution was considered both conservative andradical. The results of the revolution were radical while themovement itself was conservative.
The American Revolution is called a “conservative” revolution because, unlike most revolutions of its kind, it wasn’t an attempt to make fundamental changes to the society it occurred in. Most of the laws and social institutions remained virtually unchanged. Russell Kirk in The Conservative Mind argued that the American Revolution was "a conservative reaction, in the English political tradition, against royal innovation".
Believed the Revolution was a conservative movement, and believed it was based on a political aspect rather than social. Howard Zinn also believed it was a conservative movement. No social change therefore conservative.