Thanks for posting this Jamie. Yes there is a lot of mythology about the 'tyranny' of British rule, which is complete rubbish. There was no tyranny at all (Britain was most liberal government in the world), but people grow up believing the British were doing everything from seizing colonial lands to repressing their religious liberties and other nonsense. They ignore the fact that a large number of people remained loyal, and these loyalists were terrorized and ultimately expelled.
One of the main grievances of the colonists was the Quebec Act, which gave religious liberty to Catholics and curbed westward expansion. So in essence, the colonists were fighting for expansionism and to prevent increased Catholic influence in their largely Protestant country.
The colonists had no problem with taxation without representation, and consented to a wide variety of external taxes and duties that the British implemented (not to mention criminal and other laws). They agreed with the principle of 'virtual representation', since their own governments were such that only a select group of property owners could vote, not all voters agreed, and yet everybody had to submit to the laws. The right to 'reject' taxation necessarily implied that the Crown had no right to govern at all, since why wouldn't the logic of taxation be applied to other laws?
The colonists wanted English rights without being subject to English laws. They thought by virtue of emigration, that they could enjoy the privileges of both being in England and being a colonist. The colonists voluntarily left a country where they had little in property but perhaps a vote in the parliament, for a place where they had lots of property but little vote. Since their ancestors were subjects to English law, so were the colonists. The fact that they emigrated means that they thought the prospects of prosperity in the new country outweighed whatever privileges they might maintain by remaining in England.
)
On the Proper Usage of Fleets
)
)
)
)
)