and......Hancocks PRIMARY source of income stream is from BellNhand foray's long into good nite.......or.....something else?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:12 pmHave you brought up the Boston Tea Party before ABV? I seem to have a recollection of you or someone else doing so.ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:36 pmLet's see about that first rate schooling.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:30 pmI'm an old guy, but I took a look at some of my old textbooks from elementary and middle school (yes, my parents saved that stuff!) and nope, scarcely a word on slavery until moving into the latter part of the first half of the 1800's.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 3:55 pmI am the product of a terrible school system. But really most American History is 1492, Jamestown and then a lead up to Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine, American revolution and then off to the races. I didn’t say the lead up to 1776 wasn’t covered at all. A lot of what happened in between is left out. A lot of good history. Not an airing of grievances type of history...
Plenty on the Pilgrims, etc, (and yes I recall that as pretty darn tedious...though understanding that many who first came here were fleeing religious persecution in their home country did stick) but mum about slavery.
And my schooling was first rate.
Fortunately, by the latter part of middle school and into high school, we were getting exposed by excellent teachers to the full play of of history, not just the sanitized portions that fed the mythology of 'American Exceptionalism' without recognizing the mistakes made along the way.
I was lucky, but lots in my generation didn't get that exposure at all.
Why was Ben Franklin ticked at John Hancock ? Making him, Hancock, reimburse the EastIndia Co. for some "fake news" historic event.
Old Ben was far less radical than some of those involved in either the mob who raided the East India company ship or afterwards defended the action. He was trying to avoid a war, whereas some were trying to incite it. Franklin argued that the East India Company wasn't the enemy of the colonists, it was the actions of the government, so he argued for reimbursement for the losses. Hancock was on the other side of that debate as was Adams.
The British doubled down in response, and war became all the more probable.
I don't recall what you are referring to as 'fake news'. That some of the mob dressed as Indians? or are you questioning whether it happened at all?
Here's what we really do know that was 'fake' and that's the Tea Party of present times actually giving a hoot about fiscal responsibility. Yikes, what happened to their beliefs?
Nothing about taxes, first US government bailout........