Debate: Terrorist or Revolutionary?

Off-Topic (Thronepass)
#1

I was thinking, what is a difference between a terrorist or revolutionary?

In creating an answer to this response I would like to strongly refer to the American Revolutinary War.

Were the colonists terrorist who committed acts of treason against the British Government?

Or

Were the colonist revolutionaries who committed acts of patriotism in response to the harsh treatment of the British taxes?

In answering the question POV is essential because both answers are right if you can support the Arguement.

@Icibalus @Marcus_Doodalee @Margaret yoooo brits. I don’t know what they teach in your classes but I want to know the British point of view on the scenario. It will probs be the first one but i want to understand the different point of views.

I would like to show one example to support the treason one. The colonists tard and feathered British tax collectors who were just doing their jobs and following orders. Additionally, tar on the skin may lead to death and burns on the skin. The colonists committed treason against the British government for the purpose of showing their point of views and to enforce their point of view of the repealing of taxes

#2

Patriotism maybe

#3

Difference between them is revolutionaries won, and therefore, wrote the history. Terroists did not win.

8 Likes
#4

Why patriotism? And why maybe why the uncertainty?

#5

I’m not white

#6

I consider a terrorist someone who commits domestic acts of violence with the aim to hurt citizens of said country for a set of beliefs.
A revolutionary to me is a violent fighter who believes in change abd fights fur days change with minimal harm to civilians

3 Likes
#7

Couldn’t tell you that as I’m not actually British, I’m a kiwi. Although New Zealands history with Britain is summed up by Colonisation which I think is different to American/British history.

#8

bye bye

#9

Also the fact that terroists flew planes into a couple of towers and the american revolutionaries did not

#10

I actually agree with that. The victors write history and thus the colonists wrote that they were revolutionaries.

#11

Counter-Terrorists Win

2 Likes
#12

Mhm yes let’s add fuel a very out of hand fire

2 Likes
#13

The fire has been quenched

1 Like
#14

This topic is going to spiral out of control in 1.2 seconds.

#15

Tar and feathering is patriotism then? But couldn’t the spark of the revolution be a major act of violence?

#16

Also Americans are very wasteful.

Change my mind. I realized this is calling me wasteful but it’s true

#17

But Luxy has a point

the victors write the books

that’s why everyone says Napoleon was bad

because the English and Austrians who beat him wrote the books

4 Likes
#18

specifically at the council of Vienna

#19

Hmmm, but you are comparing different time periods though. Maybe if you were in the 17th century what would be the terrorist acts of the time. Now a days terrorism is clearly different than what I am referring to in the OP

#20

The tar and feathering had a set of justifications behind it, the colonists were pissed af they couldn’t vote on their taxes and took it on the easiest British official, the tax collector