Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

King George, the tyrant?

suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2013 1:28:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I feel a bit curious as to why within the American Revolution context, King George of England has always been portrayed as a tyrant king and a symbol of British oppression her colony in north America.

My understanding is that British king, as constitutional monarch, would have a very limit power over the executive power of the nation (even though the royal influence would be rather high by modern standard). Thus the oppression that the the colonist felt would largely be the responsibility of his first minister, not King George himself.

I am quite confuse on how the actual opinion at the time and the modern popular belief now a day, would rather hold King George responsible for the action of the British during that time and not government itself (I hardly remember who is the British PM at the time of revolution, but absolutely remember that the King is George).

any input?
TheYummyCod
Posts: 14
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2013 3:36:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
He was mostly to blame for a few reasons. First, by standards even of that time, the powers of the monarchy in Great Britain were very high. The parliament could pass anything unanimously, and it could be immediately vetoed by the king, under any circumstance.

He had the power to create his own laws, too.

The primary reason why the Colonists viewed him as a tyrant, was because he imposed several taxes and tariffs upon them that, by their standards, seemed extremely high. Surprisingly, these taxes only accounted for 1% of the colonists' income.

However, the thing that we note Mr. George the Third for the most, is the fact that he did not listen to the Colonies' petitions and letters.

I acknowledge that in his personal life, King George the III was a good husband and father, and a very moral man. However, his position on the colonies marked him forever as a tyrant, and an example on how we should not let a lot of power get into the hands of one person.
"Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong." ~Calvin Coolidge
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2013 7:41:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/24/2013 3:36:21 PM, TheYummyCod wrote:
He was mostly to blame for a few reasons. First, by standards even of that time, the powers of the monarchy in Great Britain were very high. The parliament could pass anything unanimously, and it could be immediately vetoed by the king, under any circumstance.

He had the power to create his own laws, too.

The primary reason why the Colonists viewed him as a tyrant, was because he imposed several taxes and tariffs upon them that, by their standards, seemed extremely high. Surprisingly, these taxes only accounted for 1% of the colonists' income.

However, the thing that we note Mr. George the Third for the most, is the fact that he did not listen to the Colonies' petitions and letters.

I acknowledge that in his personal life, King George the III was a good husband and father, and a very moral man. However, his position on the colonies marked him forever as a tyrant, and an example on how we should not let a lot of power get into the hands of one person.

Too bad for him, to lose all his name just for a 1 percent tax.... -_-

Anyway, did he personally made those taxes? I knew that we could have move the parliament if he choose so but isn't all the letters and demand should be going to the parliament and his ministers who directly responsible for executive power? It it a bit absurd to demand a constitutional king who are suppose to avoid meddling in lower politic?

It is like you are asking the country to be ruled by the king while it is currently not.