Why did the Sons of Liberty dress as Indians for the Boston Tea Party?

[jobycom]

[bananas]

1. Amazing how many people have given wrong answers.

[jobycom]

4. Depends on what your definition of "wrong" is...

They are probably remembering what their teachers told them, and giving the answer that their teachers would have counted as right.

[Bucky]

2. IIRC, the "disguises" were pro-forma and not really convincing.

It was a gesture imitating and honoring the freedom of the New World natives. Their play acting was an embrace of the Englightenment ideals of man in his natural state and the nobility of the Indians. No one was supposed to be fooled by the disguises, which amounted to little more than removing their tricorns hats and slapping on a little war paint. There was damn little "secret" about this act of nearly nonviolent protest.

[Swamp Rat]

3. America’s First Anti-Globalization Protest: The Boston Tea Party

by Thom Hartmann

(snip)

Most Americans today believe that the colonists were only upset that they didn’t have a legislature they’d elected that would pass the laws under which they were taxed: “taxation without representation” was their rallying cry. And while that was true, Hewes points out, the needle in their side, the pinprick that was really driving their rage, was that England was passing tax laws solely for the benefit of the transnational East India Company corporation, and at the expense of the average American worker and America’s small business owners.

Thus, “Taxation without representation” also meant hitting the average person and small business with taxes, while letting the richest and most powerful corporation in the world off the hook for its taxes. It was government sponsorship of one corporation over all competitors, plain and simple.

(snip)

Among the reasons cited in the 1776 Declaration of Independence for separating America from Britain are: “For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.” The British had used tax and anti-smuggling laws to make it nearly impossible for American small businesses to compete against the huge multinational East India Company, and the Tea Act of 1773 was the final straw.

Thus, the group assembled in Boston responded to Josiah Quiney’s comment by calling for a vote. The next paragraph in Hewes’ book says: “The question was then immediately put whether the landing of the tea should be opposed and carried in the affirmative unanimously. Rotch , to whom the cargo of tea had been consigned, was then requested to demand of the governor to permit to pass the castle . The latter answered haughtily, that for the honor of the laws, and from duty towards the king, he could not grant the permit, until the vessel was regularly cleared. A violent commotion immediately ensued; and it is related by one historian of that scene, that a person disguised after the manner of the Indians, who was in the gallery, shouted at this juncture, the cry of war; and that the meeting dissolved in the twinkling of an eye, and the multitude rushed in a mass to Griffin’s wharf.”

A first person account of the Tea Party

cont:

http://www.unequalprotection.com/teaparty.shtml