美国独立战争论文题目

美国似乎永远是国际问题的焦点。近来国内媒体又开始流传曾经一度影响人们判断的“战争造就了美国”一说。其中的一些论点和论据，却难以经得起历史事实的推敲。关于美国的崛起和强大，有诸多原因。如果请教法律学者，他们一般会指出法制的因素；如果向政治学者求解，又会得到政治制度方面的答案；如果求教于经济学家，便会觉得经济成长是美国发展的主要动力。换言之，美国之崛起，是很多因素综合作用的结果。因此“战争造就了美国”这一论点有失公允客观。 一 可以说，战争在许多国家的历史上都是存在的，包括我们中国。但是，战争对于一个国家发展的影响，尤其是对于美国历史的推动作用，还应具体情况，具体分析。 18世纪晚期的美国独立战争，是美国立国的开始，无疑是美国在当时和未来发展的一个前提条件。但是，同样身为殖民地的众多拉美国家，后来也通过独立战争先后摆脱了欧洲列强的殖民统治，却始终没有走上富强之路。可见，战争可以开创一个新国家，但建设一个新国家，包括美国，却需要种种其他因素。这样的例子，古今中外不胜枚举。 美国建国初时国土面积十分狭小。到19世纪中、晚期以后，美国国土范围从东部大西洋沿岸，向西部延伸，横跨美洲大陆，直达加利弗尼亚、俄勒冈、华盛顿等西部海岸，覆盖了除加拿大、墨西哥之外的整个北美大陆。毋庸置疑，领土扩张在美国历史上客观存在。19世纪美国领土扩张的途径有多种，包括外交手段（1794年的美-英《杰依条约》），出资购买（1803年路易斯安娜购买案，1867年阿拉斯加购买案），以及战争（1846-48年，美国-墨西哥战争，以及对印第安人的战争）等。可见，战争及军事只是美国领土扩张的途径和手段之一。更为重要和根本的是，19世纪美国的西部扩张运动。19世纪初，美国内陆及西部大多数地区依然是人烟稀少，甚至是荒无人迹尚未开发的处女地。到19世纪末20世纪初，经过近百年经济大开发，美国已经成为世界上首屈一指的农业、工业和商业强国。建设，而非战争，才是美国崛起和强大的源泉与主流。 记得二十多年前在国内读大学时，曾经流行一种观点，即美国的强大，是在一战和二战中大发战争财的结果。其实，早在第一次世界大战爆发之前，美国的经济实力已经开始超越英、法等欧洲列强，跃居世界首位。在20世纪两次世界大战中，除了直接遭受战火蹂躏的国家和地区，有实力满足战争时期巨大的工、农业产品以及军火需求的国家，除了美国以外，别无它国。一旦世界燃起战争烽火，只有美国具备足够的经济实力，满足战争的需要，同时利用战争，化干戈为经济发展的机会。所谓“机会偏爱有准备之人”，不虚言也。概言之，美国在两次世界大战中拥有的足以制胜的军事实力，都是以战前美国已经形成的经济实力为基石。经济实力形成在先，战场制胜于后，不可因果倒置。 至于冷战时期，以美国为首的北约与以前苏联为主的华约曾经大搞军备竞赛。苏联在核武器，常规武器装备，军队人员数量等方面，都不亚于美国，且拥有一个庞大的军工体系。最后，华约解体，前苏联分崩离析，国民经济的烂摊子原形毕露。可见，军事、战争决不是一个现代国家发展的决定性因素。“战争造就了美国”，言过其实。 二 有文章认为，美国文明的基因是军事，美国历史的中心性是战争。战争“不仅是美国对外政策的工具，也是美国对外政策的目的”。以此推知，美国在历史上应该屡屡挑起对外战争才是。众所周知，战争有正义和非正义之分。1775年爆发的美国独立战争，是殖民地人民反抗殖民统治的正义之战。1812年的“美-英第二次战争”，是捍卫美国独立的战争。在美国内战中，林肯领导的联邦政府和军队，维护了国家统一，并废除了南部的奴隶制度。具有争议的是1846-1848年的“美国-墨西哥战争”，交战双方对德克萨斯的归属各执一词，最后以墨西哥丧权失地了结。19世纪美国的最后一场主要战争“美国-西班牙战争（1898）”，起因于古巴等地反抗殖民统治的独立运动。美国乘机插手，赶走了西班牙，控制了菲律宾、关岛、波多黎各等地。这是美国历史上并不多见的直接争夺并建立海外殖民地的战争。毋庸置疑，美国参与第二次鸦片战争、八国联军对中国的战争，都是不光彩的侵略行为。19世纪美国本土扩张中最为不幸的军事行动是对印第安人的战争。以上美国19世纪及其以前历次主要战争和军事行动，不论其是非如何，都是特定历史环境中，国内外各种因素作用下的产物，是美国历史的一部分，但不足以代表美国历史发展的主题及基本内容。 话说人类进入20世纪，第一次世界大战打到第三年，第二次世界大战进行了两年，美国才迟迟参战。如果说一战是帝国主义列强之间的不义之战，在二战时期，美国则站在正义的一方，和中国人民，还有世界反法西斯人民一道，共同抗击日寇、德国法西斯。断言“军事是美国文明的基因……战争对于美国历史具有中心性……”，使人联想到曾经穷兵黩武，挑起战争灾难的日本军国主义和法西斯德国，这不是客观公允的历史态度。近年来，美国的一些军事行动引起国际社会（包括美国内部）极大的反对。尤其是2003年以来的伊拉克战争，是美国历史上最为错误和愚蠢的一场战争。但是，综观美国历史，不应恶其现在，攻其一生，轻易下“战争对于美国历史具有中心性”这样的结论。 三 受19世纪中晚期欧洲列强“炮舰政策”的影响，人们很容易把美国的海外商业扩张和武力扩张挂钩，认为商业利益必以“武力开路，借助武力实现”。这是对于美国海外商业扩张的片面认识。事实上，在19世纪整整一百年间，美国对外经济活动以对英国、欧洲的农业贸易为支柱。内战前，依靠棉花等农产品出口；其后，粮食产品（小麦等谷物），牛、猪肉类产品成为主要农业出口商品。可以肯定地说，19世纪美国对外商业支柱，外汇收入主要来源是农业出口贸易，与海外军事行动毫无关系。 19世纪晚期，美国工业力量上升，一些工业企业开始向海外寻求商业机会。最初是产品出口，进而直接投资设厂。到20世纪初，美国新兴的跨国公司在英国、欧洲及加拿大等较为发达的国家和地区都设有工厂和销售部门。用一位美国公司在英国代理人的说法，就是“和平地工作（意指工商业贸易）以征服世界”。武力开路，“贸易跟着旗帜走”，在美国与拉美、亚洲等不发达地区交往时的确存在，但不代表美国对外商业史的全貌和主流方面。 至于战争对于美国企业管理制度形成与成长的影响，更不应该随意夸大，乱加联系。美国现代企业管理制度起源于19世纪的铁路公司。19世纪晚期，大型工商业企业开始出现，独具特色的美国现代工业研发机制应运而生并逐步制度化，现代管理制度也逐步形成。工业技术革命和企业管理革命同步进行，是当时工业革命的一大特色。根据企业/公司发展战略和需要而设立的相适应的现代管理结构和机制，到20世纪20年代，得到进一步完善并规范化。关于这一点，美国企业史专家阿尔弗莱德·钱德勒有极为详尽系统地论述。美国现代企业管理制度，后为美国政府机构，大学、工会等组织广为采用。过分夸大军事、战争的影响力，极易误导我们对国家发展道路的正确认识。 四 古人云：兵者，凶器也。战争曾经给人类带来无尽的灾难，美国也不例外。无论是美国内战，还是一战和二战，多少生灵死于非命。20世纪60-70年代初的越南战争，除了人员伤亡外，更造成美国内部动荡，社会分裂。70年代居高不下的通货膨胀，“滞胀”的尴尬，日益上升的国家财政赤字，都与漫长的越战相关。上世纪90年代美元的强势地位，并非如一些文章所言是美国对外军事行动的结果，而是日本经济长期萎靡不振，东西德合并后德国经济陷于低迷状态，1994-1995年墨西哥货币恐慌，1997-1998年亚洲金融危机，以及美国国内新经济发展等诸多因素综合影响而成。如果说1990年代美国对外军事行动对其经济繁荣有积极影响的话，主要在于维持了一个有利于经济发展，相对稳定的国际秩序。这一点，和全球经济一体化的趋势是一致的。几年前，笔者曾撰文指出由于布什政府的国内外政策，美国似乎又在走越战时期“枪炮和黄油都要”的老路，势必给美国经济造成沉重负担。伊拉克战争以来，美国消耗了巨大的财力、物力和人力，且债台高筑，国际声望更是一落千丈。在风声鹤唳的反恐声中，美国人不是感觉更安全，而是更危险。对于美国而言，军事与战争，并不总是“意味着扩张和繁荣”。 以美国一贯的经济创新能力，维持现有的、相对稳定的国际秩序和商业环境，对于美国的重要性，远远高于“用武力实现扩张并攫取经济利益”。人类经过上世纪两次世界战争后，在处理国与国之间经济利益方面成熟了许多。以武力攫取经济利益和势力范围的行为，虽未绝迹，但已为国际社会绝大多数国家所唾弃。美国之实力，运用得好，有利于世界和平与稳定；运用失当，轻易便可给世界带来灾难。遗憾的是，美国政府近年来的许多对外政策和军事行动，增加了国际社会中不确定、不稳定，甚至进一步敌对的因素。一超独大的傲慢心态，单边主义，“先发制人，预先打击”等霸权作风，少数人头脑中挥之不去的冷战思维，在国际事务中日趋依赖武力的倾向，皆令人深感不安。美国政府能否像越来越多的美国民众一样，意识到伊拉克战争的错误，吸取教训，从而以合作、外交、平等的方式，促进国际社会的协作、稳定、和平与发展，还需拭目以待。 五 中美关系，至关重要。客观认识美国的历史进程，正确理解美国之现状，有助于我们更加理性地、建设性地处理中美两个大国之间的关系。宣扬美国的本质、目的、历史中心就是战争，只能进一步鼓动中美对抗的情绪，于己于人皆不利。夸大战争在美国崛起中的作用，混淆国家富强的主要原因，岂不是要把国家的发展道路引入歧途。深入理解一个国家成长和发展的真实源泉和道路，更能坚定我们以建设为中心，和平崛起的信心。人类在21世纪内和平与发展的重担，仍将由中国、美国、欧盟，俄罗斯等少数几个大国共同承担。担子挑得好，是人类之福；担子挑砸了，这个世界，其实很脆弱。

法国大革命：1789年7月14日，起义群众攻占了关押政治犯的巴士底监狱，掀开了轰轰烈烈的法国大革命。革命形势迅速发展，资产阶级掌握了政权，不久颁布了《人权宣言》。1794年7月，罗伯斯庇尔等人在政变中被送上了断头台，法国大革命高潮结束。法国大革命摧毁了法国的封建统治，传播了资产阶级自由民主的进步思想，对世界历史的人民生活没有摆脱困境，政局动荡。在这种情况下，拿破仑登上了法国历史舞台。拿破仑在滑铁卢战役失利后，路易十八在外国军队保护下复辟了波旁王朝。恢复了国王的权利，并且大肆血洗革命者。1830年7月巴黎人民发动七月革命，经过3天战斗，攻下王宫，国王查理十世逃往英国，建立了以路易•菲利浦为首的七月王朝，至此法国大革命彻底结束。法国大革命是一次广泛而深刻的政治革命和社会革命，它摧毁了法国的封建专制制度，建立起资产阶级的政治统治，促进了资本主义经济的发展。它是一次欧洲范围的革命，推动了欧洲的反封建斗争，并为欧洲的民主制度奠定了基础。期间所颁布的《人权宣言》和《拿破仑法典》在世界历史上产生了深远的影响。美国独立战争： 美国独立战争是世界史上第一次大规模的殖民地争取民族独立的战争，它的胜利，给大英帝国的殖民体系打开了一个缺口，为殖民地民族解放战争树立了范例。独立战争又是一次资产阶级革命，它推翻了英国的殖民统治，创造了美利坚合众国，同时又铲除了殖民时期封建残余的长子继承法、续嗣限定法和代役税，奴隶制契约也基本上废除。从而解放了生产力，为美国资本主义的发展开辟了宽广的道路。正如列宁所说：“现代的文明的美国的历史，是由一次伟大的、真正解放的、真正革命的战争开始的。” 美国独立战争的胜利，对欧洲及拉丁美洲的资产阶级革命起了推动作用。它结束了英国的殖民统治，实现了国家的独立，确立了比较民主的资产阶级政治体制，有利于美国资本主义的发展，对以后欧洲和拉丁美洲的革命也起了推动作用。 美国独立战争没有解决土地问题，也没有解决奴隶制问题，使得独立后的美国南北方朝着两种不同的经济道路发展，最终导致美国内战（南北战争）的爆发。独立战争的胜利，使美国摆脱了英国的殖民统治，实现了国家的独立，为美国的资本主义的发展扫除了障碍，并为拉丁美洲各国人民的民族独立运动树立了榜样，推动了18世纪的欧洲革命。《独立宣言》、1787年宪法及其所确立的新型政治体制，是人类文明的可贵遗产。

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION 美国独立战争 The American Revolution, the conflict by whichthe American colonists won their independence fromGreat Britain and created the United States ofAmerica,was an upheaval(大变动)of profound(深刻的)significance in world history. It occurred in thesecond half of the 18th century, in an"Age ofDemocratic Revolution, "when philosophers andpolitical theorists in Europe were criticallyexamining the institutions of their own societiesand the notions(观念) that lay behind them.Yet theAmerican Revolution first put to the test ideasand theories that had seldom if ever been workedout in practice in the Old World--separation ofchurch and state, sovereignty(主权) of the people,written constitutions, and effective checks andbalances in government. A struggle to preserve and later to expand thedimensions (限度) of human freedom, the AmericanRevolution was also an anticolonial movement, thefirst in modern history. Before then,countries hadusually come into existence through evolutionary(进化论) processes, the result of tradition andhistory, geography and circumstance. The UnitedStates, on the other hand,had a birth date,1776;itwas"the first new nation, "a republic born inrevolution and war, a pattern (模式) followed byscores of fledgling (初出茅庐者）states since thattime,especially in the so-called Third World areasof the globe since 1945. For many nation-makers the American rebellionhas been a relevant revolution, offering insights（洞察力） and parallels that have aided them intheir quest for self-determination. Therevolutionists of 1776 themselves accuratelypredicted that the American Revolution wouldinspire men elsewhere to secure freedom andnational identity in their own lands. As ThomasJefferson assured John Adams, "the Flames kindled（点火） on the fourth of July"had spread over toomuch of the globe ever to be extinguished by theforces of despotism(独裁)and reaction（反动）. THE COLONIES IN 1763 No revolution,of course,can be fully exported.A vast array of factors that include the politicaland social backgrounds of a people will shape theprecise（正确的）course of any and all revolutions.So it was in America, where the colonists were notan alien people with a culture very different fromthat of the motherland.They were for the most partBritish in origin,English-speaking,Protestant(新教徒),rural,and agrarian（土地的）in their principalcharacteristics. They were proud of their Anglo-Saxon heritage and of the empire of which theywere a part--proud,too,of the role they had playedin helping to seize Canada and to crush Frenchpower in North America in the French and IndianWar(known as the Seven Years' War in Europe),whichended in 1763. At that time the colonists gave little thoughtto cutting loose from their imperial moorings （停泊处） . They considered the British politicalsystem the best in Europe, noted for itsequilibrium between King, Lords, and Commonsassembled in Parliament. They imported Britishbooks, furniture,and clothing;wealthy planters andmerchants imitated the manners of the Englisharistocracy (贵族) . Even with the restrictionsimposed on their external trade by the NavigationActs--or perhaps because of them--they hadprospered in their direct economic intercoursewith Britain, the most industrialized country inEurope. Nor was their trade rigidly confined（分娩）; they were also permitted to sell an assortment(各色)of valuable products such as grain,flour,andrice on non-British markets in the West Indies andin southern Europe. In 1763 the colonists were an expanding andmaturing（成熟）people;their numbers had reached amillion and a half, and they were doubling everyquarter of a century--multiplying likerattlesnakes（响尾蛇）, as Benjamin Franklin said.If most provincials were sons of the soil,Americans could nonetheless boast of five urbancenters, "cities in the wilderness"--Philadelphia,Boston, New York,Charleston,and Newport.The citiesserved as filters through which new ideas of theEuropean Enlightenment（启蒙）entered the colonies,helping to generate an inquisitive（求知的）spiritabout humankind and the total environment.Newspapers and colleges in the cities and townsserved as disseminators(传播者) of the thought andculture of what was truly an Atlantic civilization.A new mobility, together with a receptivity(接受能力)to new ideas,was a hallmark(纯度检验证明印记)ofAmerican society. It came about because of highwages,cheap land,and an absence of legal privilege.Americans were--except for their African slaves--one of the freest people in the world.Another signof that freedom was their almost complete controlover their internal political and domestic affairs,exercised largely through their popularly electedlower houses of assembly (集会) , which in turnserved as nurturing ground for such futureRevolutionary leaders as John Adams,John Dickinson,Thomas Jefferson,and George Washington. Although the colonists had reached a highlevel of maturity, there was not at mid-century ameaningful American nationalism. The life andinstitutions of the parent state continued toprovide the central focus of colonial culture. Theword American appeared infrequently; people weremore likely to describe themselves as English orBritish,or as Virginians or Pennsylvanians.Nor didthe provincials display a marked degree ofintercolonial (殖民地间的) cooperation; their ownrivalries and jealousies over boundaries, westernland claims, and military contributions in theimperial wars all tended to retard(使减缓)Americannational feeling, as may be seen in the rejectionof the Plan of Union presented by BenjaminFranklin to the Albany(美国NEW YORK州首府)Congressin 1754. Nothing, however, unites a people like acommonly perceived (察觉) threat to their way oflife; and after 1763 the colonists felt endangeredwithin the empire.There is a real irony in the waythe American Revolution began, for the veryelements that had wedded the colonists to themother country--especially their political andeconomic freedoms--were viewed in London as signsthat Britain had lost control of its transatlanticdominions, that the colonists were fast headingdown the road to full autonomy or absoluteindependence. Those sentiments,growing steadily inthe 18th century, crystallized (结晶) during theFrench and Indian War when British officialscomplained that Americans cooperated poorly inraising men and supplies and in providing quartersfor British troops, to say nothing of tradingillegally with the enemy and generating friction(摩擦) with western Indians over land and tradegoods. Whatever the truth of these charges--and theywere partly true, if exaggerated--it was notunreasonable after 1763 for Britain to ask more ofits prosperous dependencies. Britain's heavynational debt and concurrent tax burdens stemmed(阻止) partly at least from a series of 18th-century wars that were fought to some extent forthe defense of the colonies. Nor was it wrong toargue that a measure of reorganization in Americanadministration would lead to greater economy andefficiency in imperial management. But Britainembarked upon this course with a lack ofsensitivity, ignoring the concerns of its maturingsubjects, who were scarcely the children they hadonce been. In short, Britain's state of mind(meaning thatof its rulers and the parliamentary(议会)majority)corresponded to its lofty status as the superpowerof Europe in 1763. It was said that the Pax Romanawould pale in comparison with the Pax Britannica,which would bring a"prosperity and glory unknownto any former age. "Britain no longer felt a needfor its former allies in Europe. For what nationcould now threaten it? It no longer required thegoodwill of its colonies, for France had ceased tobe a threat to the thirteen colonies,whose men andother resources--although Britain scarcelyadmitted it--had in fact aided the British victoryin 1763. Britain's was a mentality unable to appreciatethe aims and aspirations (热望) of its colonialpeople. Superpowers, all too often, are not muchgiven to introspection(内省) ,to questioning theirvalues and assumptions.And it had been a long timesince the British themselves had felt theirliberties threatened,either by a foreign danger orby internal menace (恐吓) from a tyrannical ruler.Thus, when Britain adopted a new imperial program,the colonists were never meaningfully consulted.Furthermore, Britain's tactics (策略) could hardlyavoid arousing the Americans. Having left thecolonies virtually alone for decades with a defacto attitude of"salutary neglect, "the Londongovernment now attempted too much too quickly. THE GROWING FERMENT Even before the termination of the French andIndian War, visible indications had appeared of anew direction in colonial affairs. Beginning in1759, small-scale disputes broke out betweenBritain and the colonies over disallowance(拒绝)ofmeasures passed by the popular assemblies, overwrits of assistance empowering the royal customsofficials to break into homes and stores, and overjudicial tenure (保有条件) in the colonial courts.Subsequent decisions made in London forbade"forthe time being"western settlement beyond theAppalachian divide (the Proclamation of 1763) ,eliminated provincial paper currency as legaltender, bolstered(支持) the customs department,andenlarged the authority of the vice-admiraltycourts in relation to enforcement (实行) of theNavigation Acts. Taxation Without Representation When theseunpopular measures were followed almostimmediately by Parliament's placing taxes onAmericans for the first time in their history, theresult was an explosion that shook the empire toits foundations. George Grenville, chief ministerfrom 1763 to 1765, did not father the idea ofAmerican taxation; it had been"in the air"forseveral years. But it was he who pushed thecontroversial (争论的) bills through Parliament in1764 and 1765. The Sugar Act of 1764, actually adownward revision of an earlier Molasses(糖蜜)Act,cut the duty on imported foreign molasses fromsixpence to threepence a gallon; but it was to bevigorously enforced, and it was now called arevenue measure rather than a law designed merelyto regulate trade. The next year Grenville securedpassage of the so-called Stamp Act, placing taxeson all legal documents and on newspapers, almanacs(矿石),and other items.Soon afterward came a thirdlaw,the Quartering(宿舍分配)Act,a form of indirecttaxation that required American assemblies toprovide British troops passing through theircolonies with temporary housing and an assortmentof provisions."Taxation without representation"wasthe central issue in the imperial rupture(破裂).Itraised a fundamental question concerning thelimits of parliamentary power that was debatedthroughout the dozen or so years before thedeclaration of American independence. Although Americans complained about the streamof British acts and regulations after 1759, theynow agreed that the constitutional issue oftaxation posed(出难题)the gravest threat of all totheir freedom as individuals. If it was legal totake a man's property without his consent, as thephilosopher John Locke wrote in defense of theGlorious Revolution of 1688 in England, then a mancould scarcely have any liberty remaining, sinceproperty gave one a stake in society and enabledone to vote. Americans felt confident that Lockewould have approved when they wrote in almostcountless documents and petitions (请愿) thatEnglishmen--in England, in Virginia, or anywhereelse-- could be taxed only by their own directlyelected representatives. When Parliament retreated in 1766,reducing theSugar Act to the level of a trade duty andrepealing(废止) the Stamp Act,it was responding toretaliatory colonial boycotts(联合抵制) on Britishtrade goods, not to the justness of Americanconstitutional pronouncements. In 1767, Chancellor(长官) of the Exchequer (国库) Charles Townshendpersuaded a Parliament already antagonistic (敌对)toward the colonies to pass the Townshend Acts.These levied (征收) new and different taxes on theAmerican colonists: duties to be collected at theports on incoming lead, paper,tea,paint,and glass.Besides meeting other imperial expenses such asthe upkeep (维持) of the army in America, theseTownshend duties might go to pay the salaries ofroyal governors and other crown(皇室)officials whopreviously had been paid by the colonialassemblies, which had used this power of the purseto make the king's appointees (被任命者) somewhatresponsive(共鸣的,易感动的)to their wishes.A finalTownshend scheme reorganized the customs servicein America,establishing its headquarters in Boston,where mounting friction between collectors andtownspeople led to the dispatch (派遣) of regulartroops to the city to keep order in 1768. Resistance and Retaliation(复仇) The new tensions subsided (平息) into a three-year period of calm beginning in 1770, but onlybecause a second round of American reprisals(报复)against English trade prompted the removal(解除)ofall the Townshend duties save the one on tea,whichwas retained (保留) to show symbolically thatParliament had not renounced its right to taxAmerica. Additionally,the British troops,popularlyknown as"redcoats (从前的美国军人) , "had beenwithdrawn from Boston following the embarrassingand unplanned Boston Massacre (大屠杀) (1770) .Unfortunately for the empire, those years were notused to bring about permanent agreements betweenAmericans and Britons on such subjects as theconstitutional relationship between the coloniesand the mother country and what might be areasonable way for the provinces to share thecosts of imperial administration. In an atmosphereof continuing suspicion and distrust, each sidelooked for the worst from the other. Instead ofrescinding (废止) the remaining Townshend tax andexploring inoffensive (无恶意的) methods of aidingthe financially troubled British East IndiaCompany, Parliament enacted(法律制定的)the Tea Actof 1773,designed to allow the company to bypass(绕过) middlemen and sell directly to Americanretailers (零售商) . It was hardly a plot(企图) topersuade Americans to drink taxed tea at a lowprice, but the colonists interpreted it in thatfashion.Everywhere there was opposition to landingthe dutied brew, and in the Massachusetts capitalthe famous Boston Tea Party resulted in thedestruction by patriots (爱国者) of 340 tea chestson ships in the harbor. Parliament's retaliation against Massachusettswas swift and severe: the so-called Intolerable(无法忍受的)Acts closed the port of Boston,altered(改变) town and provincial government,permitted royalofficials and functionaries(官员, 公务员) to go toBritain for trial for any alleged (所谓的) crimes,and provided for the quartering of troops onceagain in Boston.The other colonies rallied(恢复)tothe defense of Massachusetts in a ContinentalCongress that met in Philadelphia in September1774 and denounced(公开抨击) the acts.Already somecolonial leaders were arguing that the old federalconception of the empire would no longer protectAmerican rights and liberties, for Britain haddemonstrated(表示) its unwillingness(不情愿)to letthe colonists manage their own internal, domesticaffairs. Now,Thomas Jefferson,John Adams,and otherwriters claimed that the empire should properly beviewed as one in which each colony was the equalof England in all respects, that the only tie withBritain was through the king. Here, in sum,was theCommonwealth idea of the 20th century, which nowunites such nations as New Zealand, Canada, andAustralia with Britain,an idea then rejected(拒绝,驳回)by England. Lexington and Concord War clouds were gathering rapidly. The sendingof more than 3,000 British army regulars under Maj.Gen.Thomas Gage to Boston further exacerbated(恶化)the imperial rift (裂口) . When a column of thesetroops under Lt. Col. Francis Smith moved into thecountryside to collect arms and munitions (弹药)gathered by the patriot militia (义勇军) ,hostilities (敌对) erupted (爆发) at Lexington andConcord on Apr.19,1775. Soon afterward militiacontingents (分谴队) from places throughout NewEngland took up positions outside Boston, puttingthe city under siege(围攻) . Forts Ticonderoga andCrown Point in upstate(离海岸较远的) New York fellto other rebel parties. The misnamed (起错名字的)Battle of Bunker Hill was fought on Breed's Hillacross from Boston(June 17,1775) . Although Gage'sunits dislodged (逐出) the rebels from theiradvanced positions threatening the city, theBritish casualties(意外) came to 42 percent of the2,500 redcoats engaged, their heaviest losses ofthe war. The Second Continental Congress, thenmeeting at Philadelphia, took control of the NewEngland forces opposing Gage. The lawmakers choseas commander of this"Continental Army"GeorgeWashington, a 43-year-old delegate from Virginia,aplanter (拓荒者) and a ranking militia officer inthe French and Indian Wars. RESOURCES OF THE OPPONENTS Britain seemingly (表面上) had enormousadvantages in a war against its colonies. Itpossessed(疯狂的) a well-established government, asizable(相当大的)treasury,a competent(能干的)army,the most powerful navy in the world, and a largeLoyalist population in the colonies. By contrast,the American rebels had no chief executive such asthe king, nor a cabinet whose members had assignedresponsibilities. In fact, the Americans had noseparate or independent departments of governmentsuch as war, treasury, and foreign affairs untilnear the end of the conflict. The ContinentalCongress itself had as its rivals the 13 statelegislatures, which often chose not to cooperatewith their delegates in Philadelphia. Indeed,Congress was an extralegal body, existing at thepleasure of the states before the Articles ofConfederation (同盟, 联合者) were ratified in 1781. American Advantages The Americans, however,

正义的。因为①、它是在有英国殖民统治的情况下进行的世界史上第一次大规模的殖民地争取民族独立的战争。②它又是一次资产阶级革命。美国摆脱了英国的殖民统治，实现了国家的独立，为美国的资本主义的发展扫除了障碍，并为拉丁美洲各国人民的民族独立运动树立了榜样，推动了18世纪的欧洲革命。