Ah, thanks. I know the Boston Tea Party started the American revolution and that people threw boxes with tea from ships, but I never quite understood why.

Really wish more people understood the American Revolution was the American bourgeoisie deceiving American proletariats into fighting for the bourgeoisie’s right to make more money. There’s all this talk of a mythical “rebel American spirit” which is just pure bullshit. People here like the boot on their neck.

Quite the opposite

How is any of what you said the opposite of what claims are being made?

TITLE OF LEMMY POST April 16, 2025: “instead clowns around on social machines since year 2014 and elects Entertainers as leaders”

People upvote and accept anything off Lemmy, Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, YouTube, etc. The more it is anonymous source and no-identity bullshit, the more they throw-away sound education in favor of the latest freshest hot garbage to consume. A clown population of media consumers who clowns around and avoids providing citations and fact-checking.

“The Tea Act, passed by Parliament on May 10, 1773, granted the British East India Company Tea a monopoly on tea sales in the American colonies. This was what ultimately compelled a group of Sons of Liberty members on the night of December 16, 1773 to disguise themselves as Mohawk Indians, board three ships moored in Boston Harbor, and destroy over 92,000 pounds of tea. The Tea Act was the final straw in a series of unpopular policies and taxes imposed by Britain on her American colonies.”

…

“A glut of tea and a diminished American market had left the company with tons of tea leaves rotting in its warehouses. In an effort to save the troubled enterprise, the British Parliament passed the Tea Act in 1773. The act granted the company the right to ship its tea directly to the colonies without first landing it in England, and to commission agents who would have the sole right to sell tea in the colonies. The act retained the duty on imported tea at its existing rate”

::: ___________
“Public education does not serve a public. It creates a public. And in creating the right kind of public, the schools contribute toward strengthening the spiritual basis of the American Creed. That is how Jefferson understood it, how Horace Mann understood it, how John Dewey understood it, and in fact, there is no other way to understand it. The question is not, Does or doesn’t public schooling create a public? The question is, What kind of public does it create? A conglomerate of self-indulgent consumers? Angry, soulless, directionless masses? Indifferent, confused citizens? Or a public imbued with confidence, a sense of purpose, a respect for learning, and tolerance? The answer to this question has nothing whatever to do with computers, with testing, with teacher accountability, with class size, and with the other details of managing schools. The right answer depends on two things, and two things alone: the existence of shared narratives and the capacity of such narratives to provide an inspired reason for schooling.” ― Neil Postman, The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School, September 1995