The public customarily possesses 20/20 vision in hindsight. Textbooks of today often affirm the opinion of one side. It makes it much clearer to support one side when the dust has settled and a winner has been declared. It is easy to say that the US’ involvement in WWI and WWII was necessary because the US won the wars. The opposite can be said the Vietnam War: the US lost so therefore it was a reckless decision. In the moment however, the line that separates the two is non-existent, especially when life & liberty is at stake. The American Revolution exemplifies this divide between those for the revolution and the opposition. While a good plurality of the white population strongly supported the fight for independence, many white loyalists opposed the revolution. A majority of blacks and Native Americans also disapproved of the American Revolution. Today, any person can easily criticize these groups, because the war was a success. However, those groups of people had real issues on the agenda; their beliefs, liberty and freedom were at risk. Some inhabitants of the colonies opposed the revolution, because war conflicted with their beliefs, delayed their path to freedom, and prevented autonomy.
War was and will always be one of the most difficult decisions a country can make. However, the decision becomes much harder when one’s religion contradicts every aspect of war and the reason behind the revolution. In the case of the Quakers, the pacifist ideology conflicted with fighting for the revolution. The Quakers typically resided in New York and Pennsylvania. These two states were key battleground areas in the fight for independence, therefore, the Quakers often caught themselves in the center of the conflict. The Quakers opposed war of all kind. However, it was being debated about their true stance on the war and whether they were completely neutral. In Joseph S. Tiedemann’s article, Queens County, New York Quakers in The American Revolution: Loyalists or Neutrals?, historical accounts reveal their actual reason of opposition. “The Friends were, of course, pacifists whose testimony against war flowed out of their ideal of ‘love to all our Fellow Christians.’ Since the Bible demanded that a Christian love his enemy, he obviously could not aspire to this goal by waging war (Joseph S. Tiedmann, 218).” The Quakers simply could not participate in any asset of war if they wanted to remain faithful to their religion.
Pacifism is not the only religious rule that would be violated if they were to fight for independence. “Quakers were enjoined by their religious principles to give their active obedience to the civil government except in those circumstances where its laws demanded that a Friend commit an immoral act. Overthrowing a secular government, therefore, was God’s responsibility not that of an otherworldly people of the Quakers (Joseph S. Tiedmann, 219).” This rule made contradicted directly with those seeking a revolution and made it very hard to even determine if Quakers were truly neutral or non-violent loyalists. When Tiedemann reviewed voting poll data he concluded that the Quakers were “neutrals who avoided taking any action that might favor or give encouragement to one side or the other.” The Quakers were lucky enough to not be put in a tougher position where they would have their freedoms at stake.
For minorities like blacks, an American Revolution would have no positive impact on their life at all. In fact, an American victory meant that freedom would be delayed. There reasons were valid. Why take the side of their oppressors when a win secures the oppressors unquestioned dominance? Generally, slaves knew that there was not a good reason at all to do so. Author of When Freedom Wore A Red Coat, Gregory J. W. Urwin, explained that there were losers on American soil even though America won the Battle of Yorktown. “Yorktown meant liberty and independence for the majority of the young republic’s white citizens, but it signified something else for the 500,000 blacks who lived in the United States in 1781. For most African Americans, Yorktown meant another eighty years of chattel slavery (George J. W. Urwin, 7).” Many blacks rightfully disapproved of supporting the colonists, because the colonists failed to address slavery, a system that contradicted the very motives fueling the revolution. Blacks did not only oppose the war; they took it a step further. “Of the 500,000 blacks who inhabited the thirteen colonies during the War of Independence, as many as 80,000 to 100,000 flocked to the king’s forces. Their reason was simple, but compelling. …, blacks ‘secretly wished that the British army might win, for then all Negro slaves will gain their freedom.’ (George J. W. Urwin, 13).” This belief was widely held among most blacks. As the British Army marched through the south, freed slaves would join them. Slaves thought of the British as the flag-bearers of the freedom they had searched for so long. Slaves had no obligation to a country that viewed them as inferior. When the Brits retreated, the hopes of freedom that the slaves longed for sailed right back to Europe. Slaves did not obtain their “inalienable rights” until midway through the next century. Native Americans at the time also struggled with the idea of the war.
For thousands of years before the arrival of Christopher Columbus, Native Americans lived undisturbed in the Americas. Their complex way of life allowed for them to live without the fear of losing their homeland. As settlers began to “colonize” the already inhabited lands of America, the natives were pushed farther and farther back into America. The Iroquois, to preserve their autonomy, initially used neutrality to maintain their way of living. According to Caitlin A. Fitz’s article Suspected on Both Sides, “Mohawk chief Little Abraham told an assembly of New York Whigs in 1775. ’Not to take any part, but, as it is a family affair, to sit still and see you fight it out . . . for we bear as much affection for the King of England’s subjects, upon the other side of the water, as we do for you, born upon this island.’ (Caitlin A. Fitz, 299).” While the natives did eventually fight near the end of the war, it was only to protect their homeland that was becoming increasingly encroached upon. They had lived there for centuries only to become victims of colonization and prejudice. The war created a dangerous atmosphere that threatened the livelihood of many Native American tribes.
Even though American colonists were fighting for independence, many opposed the war, because it conflicted with their ideals, halted their path to freedom, and prevented autonomy. The Quakers, slaves, and Native Americans were among many Americans who disagreed with the revolution. Looking back on it, one can easily say that their reasons were insignificant. However, some of the effects of the Revolutionary War lasted for years. Slavery went on for years after the war and Native Americans were continually pushed farther into the country. So, while America as whole won the war, many Americans absorbed most of the harmful effects of war. Some paid the costs of war with their homes and freedom. Today, the Revolution is universally accepted as a great war. However, critics cannot ignore the issues that the opposition faced when confronted with war.