Californian Guy Reacts to How Do They Teach the AMERICAN REVOLUTION in Britain?

In the U.S. we cover the revolution fairly heavily at different times throughout school and more so on the East Coast. How does it differ in the U.K. compared to the U.S.? Lets find out!

#AmericanRevolution #1776 #Britain

[californianreacts]

This makes sense! Basically, why would Britain focus on the American Revolution when they have had such a vast history? 1776 is only one small part of the British Empire and what they have accomplished over many hundreds of years before.

For me to learn more, I would like to know from you if what this video covered was generally your learning experience as well? What do you remember learning about the American Revolution? This being said, if you have any questions for me on how we learn about the American Revolution and any aspect about this event, ask away!

As always, thanks for watching and joining in discussion! That's what this is all about :)

[SMlFFY]

What happened to the Britian after the loss of its American colonies? Its empire got bigger and more powerful, became it the first industrialised nation and created the modern world.

[mickh]

The American Revolution, or as it’s also known “The time we decided we’d rather keep India instead”

[generaladvance]

For you, it was the greatest day of your life. For me, it was tuesday.

[pittarak]

It’s disturbing that many US Americans seem to get their version of historical facts from movies such as ‘The Patriot’

[TheNakedWombat]

Here's how we saw the American Revolution from here in Australia....

Teacher: Americans took up guns and shot each other.

Students: Wow, the American Revolution never stopped.

[billydonaldson]

A lot of what is taught in the US is from a poem by Longfellow. Paul Revere was one of three men sent to warn about the British on the March, he was actually captured and imprisoned by the Brits yet there is a statue of him on horseback warning of the British Army. . The Liberty Bell was never rang as it wasn’t installed at that time.
When you read books by American historians then you realise the war had very little to do with taxation and more about grabbing more land from the Indians. The Brits had signed a treaty with the Indians that meant they would not infringe on their lands west of the Appalachians. This didn’t suit the large land owners such as Washington so they contrived events to try to cause an uprising. It was only by promising land to their tenant farmers that they were able to raise a militia.
Even after the Yorktown surrender there was a large British Army stationed in both New York and Boston. It makes you wonder who really won when the American States had to pay reparations for British property that was damaged.
The BBC series ‘American history’s biggest fibs with Lucy Worsely’ is well worth watching’ gives a little taster of how the facts have been altered by politicians etc.

[leehanson]

The British taxed America to pay for their protection during the 7 year war, they were actually taxed much less than the British themselves. Just thought I'd throw that omitted bit of info in there.

[timphillips]

The Brits were far more worried about the major world powers of the time France Spain Portugal and the Netherlands.

[martingibbs]

The English Civil war that removed the monarchy happened long before the American revolution so the trend started in Britain. The only real difference is that our republic system ended up worse than the monarchy before it, so we reverted back to a monarchy.

[thomasferguson]

I don’t remember much about America being taught full stop pre 1st world war. I remember covering slavery and the empire but most history I remember covering was about other empires. Greek, Roman, Egyptian.

[Alucard-gtzf]

Americans seem to think that they fought the British empire but in fact they basically fought the reserves of the empire
The majority of the British fleet never even went to America because of the siege of Gibraltar

[timphillips]

Don't forget America was a very insignificant or even a backwater in those day's

[HankD]

Europe and the European powers tended to be the important focus for Britain. From the Spanish Armada to the Napoleonic Wars, that was where the threat lay. French colonies in the Americas were a direct threat to Britain and its trade. 8500 British, 7000 Germans and 7000 loyalists died in the War of Independence. The war was not popular in Britain, and the tiny (by European standards) British Army had no hope of controlling the US without enough local support, it was decided not to continue. The common folk in Britain were probably less prosperous, less educated, and less represented than the American colonists - and equally taxed. The Seven Years War cost Britain 130, 000 casualties. The Napoleonic wars list over 300, 000 British deaths. Canada became an independent country in 1867 without any rebellion. Same as Australia and New Zealand - and most colonies. Bill Bryson wrote a great book "Made in America" that really sheds great light on the mythology of this period.

[MackerelCat]

It was actually parliament that taxed the colonies not the king, by that point the power of the British monarchs had already been curtailed. So it’s a more a case of how good the prime minister was rather than how good the king was.

[peterjackson]

I wasn't talk about the American Revolution at all at school. I wasn't even taught about the Civil War (English) or Glorious Revolution when the British monarch was overthrown, twice, before the US revolution.
Of course taxes were just an excuse for the revolution, given that the colonists were paying less than a tenth of what the English were paying.

[stewartkingsley]

France heavily helped the US to fight the British, because they spent so much helping the Americans they caused a financial crisis which precipitated the desire to limit the power of the French royalty. This would lead to the first revolution which culminated in Napoleon and then returned to pseudo royal government before eventually becoming a full republic.

[DK-cymt]

Guerilla tactics didn't actually form a significant part of the American victory, it's often forgotten that the British adopted similar tactics with a great deal of success. Militia ranks often broke in open battle and their members ran, or simply went home when they didn't want to fight anymore. The Continental Army did the bulk of the fighting and still managed to lose a lot of battles against the British. If the French and Spanish hadn't intervened on the side of the Americans with weapons, money and training, the Americans most likely would have lost and their leaders executed

[Robr]

1:49, America didn't overthrow or get rid of the monarchy ( as in physically removing) , they rejected colonial rule, so in Britain we would call it more of a skirmish rather than a revolution. 😄😄😄

[johndillon]

You have to understand the mindset of the average working class kid in a comprehensive school system. If I recall, we would have around 8 periods (4hrs) of history a week. Skimming over thousands of years of British history, with dates, names and places, is pretty mind numbing for the average hormonal kid. Not only were you bombarded with the history of the UK itself, but the British empire also. So did we learn of the War of Independence? Yes we did, and it was given the same attention to detail as the English Civil War, the industrial Revolution and any other historical connection with the UK....a teacher skimming over pages of facts and dates, while the class struggled to stay awake.