Did he dindu nuffin wrong?

>>Be king george the third

>>fought against France in the first world war in the seven years war

>>rightfully taxed the free loading american colonialists to replenish the exausted military while protected the colonists from spain, france, and the natives

>>colonialists acted like niggers and chimoed out due to taxes and attacked british guards and the british guards defended themselves from the terrorist at boston

>>colonialists stole privately owned tea and dumped it into the boston harbor dishuised as natives

>>had to spend another years of civil war against the colonialists just to end up losing to them over taxes

Was he really a dindu nuffin king and were the colinialists acting like alabama niggers and was the american revolution illigitimate and unjustified?

Other urls found in this thread:

americainclass.org/sources/makingrevolution/rebellion/text8/decindep.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord
ouramericanrevolution.org/index.cfm/people/view/pp0022
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

That faggot portrait alone would justify a revolution.

> (OP) (You)
>That faggot portrait alone would justify a revolution.

I dont know... he looks rather chad to be quite honest.

>Was he really a dindu nuffin king
Yes
>were the colinialists acting like alabama niggers
Yes
>was the american revolution illigitimate and unjustified
Yes
Welcome user.

Literally all he had to do was give them representation in the house of lords and parliament. It didnt even need to be full representation. Fuckin inbred kike.

Except that his taxes were blatantly unfair towards the Americans and showed pure favoritism towards the british east india company. The dude was a swindler who got BTFO and wasn't happy about it.

He had multiple chances to come to some agreement with the colonies, multiple efforts were made on our part to do something about it and he refused anything short of "Pay your taxes so other people don't have to" (that is some amazing kikery). No one should be impressed that the British defended their empire, they were making ass loads of cash from North America.

>unfair
Literally how?
It was a lower tax than anywhere else at the time.
>showed pure favoritism towards the british east india company
Ie. The people who were doing well and making England money with minimal fuss?

Also:
>He had
Not how that works. Parliament were the jews responsible for taxation and shit.

>Literally how?
>It was a lower tax than anywhere else at the time.
That's what he meant. It was unfair to American shippers and shops and even the smugglers since it undercut the entire American market.

But muh Republic!
Muh Tyranny!

Unironically tho, this Aussie has it right.

>wanting to be ruled by another country
absolutely pathetic. You're a faggot.
Learn to greentext too you dumb nigger

>small tax
>on tea
>undercut entire American market
You've lost me.

>another country
Wasn't another country at the time.

If I recall it was only a 3% tax. Nowadays most Americans get taxed 30% of their income and they just accept their duty to be a good goy.

> (OP) (You)
>Literally all he had to do was give them representation in the house of lords and parliament. It didnt even need to be full representation. Fuckin inbred kike.

Representation for them to what? What were the colonists asking for the required reoresentation?

Unlike your prison colony full of sick cunts that just wanted to kill abbos, the united states started as colonists trying to make a lot of money off of the new world. You can't have self determination when a king with a gay ass robe is taking all your money and not even letting you make your own laws. Colonization is cuckery in its purest form and the only people that want it are either cucks or rulers.

essentially they wanted self government. They were paying tax and virtually not getting as much in return. That is what monarchy does in colonialism after all. I don't blame the british for doing it because it worked really well for them, but I'm glad we don't have to deal with that dumb shit anymore.

>You can't have self determination
Why not?
> taking all your money and not even letting you make your own laws
Again, that was (((parliament))), not the monarchy.
> Colonization is cuckery in its purest form
Except not. And if you don't like it, why not go back to Africa (or Mexico?) instead of complaining about the achievements of Britons you still benefit from?

>gay ass robe

It's very aesthetic to be honest. Maybe not something a king should wear though.

> (You)
>essentially they wanted self government. They were paying tax and virtually not getting as much in return. That is what monarchy does in colonialism after all. I don't blame the british for doing it because it worked really well for them, but I'm glad we don't have to deal with that dumb shit anymore.

So that was a reason for the colonialists to start behaving like african haitian style niggers and tar feather british troops?

>essentially they wanted self government.
And were clearly not ready for it.
>They were paying tax
On tea imports.
>and virtually not getting as much in return.
Except for protection in wars they started.
>That is what monarchy does in colonialism after all
What does monarchy have to do with it?

Nobility were pretty keen to flaunt their wealth back then.

>you don't have self detemination
because a king with a gay ass robe is taking all your money and not even letting you make your own law. Maybe stop huffing petrol and put a little effort into reading.
>g-go back to something something none europe
Why don't you go back to your grandfather's cell? He didn't pay his due for whatever he did

I don't have to go back because we own this land now and rightfully so. If you have the power to overthrow your rulers, they have no place to bitch about it.

>can't project power
>complain when population rebel
sorry sweetie if you can't hold down the fort it's destined to get trampled. That's just human nature.
>clearly weren't ready for it
where is Australia again? I only argue with relevant countries. I guess China can count as Australia though. You should speak your mother tongue, mandarin though.

>Again, that was (((parliament))), not the monarchy.
This. Colonists still pledged loyalty to the king early in the war. I'm glad we don't have a king but the war wasn't about monarchy.

That's pretty rich coming from a 56%er

King George was awesome, you are just some fat, gay, swarthy american mongrel.

You critiquing our king is like a nigger telling an astronaut how to fly the space shuttle.

The Americas were growing too fast and he should have let that go because the travel time in the 18th Century was a lot more difficult, O.P.

He was a good king. For Great Britain.

>dude just let the french have half the planet and all the inca gold plus tobacco

why didn't we think of that, pure genius thanx usa.

I can't imagine defending british colonization if I was an ex-prisoner. Maybe they'd let you go straight on parole instead of making you serve your sentence. Crime doesn't pay!
why is it that every non-united states colony is being dominated by chinks lately? This is getting out of hand.

Maybe because usa cried super hard and made us ban colonization and dismantled the empire. I'm sure south africa is thrilled with your ideas about freedom.

Thanks for everything sweetie.

I mean that by 1776 the 13 colonies were already self-sustaining. It didn't need to be war. France has nothing to do with it, lad.

>is taking all your money
No, just 3% tariff on tea.
>and not even letting you make your own law
What law can you make now?
>Maybe stop huffing petrol and put a little effort into reading.
Maybe you should put a little effort into understanding the facts?
> grandfather's cell
You've lost me again. But i guess you aren't aware of world history.
>I don't have to go back because we own this land now
You wuz kangz, you mean?
>If you have the power to overthrow your rulers, they have no place to bitch about it.
You also have the power to shit in your hands and clap, but don't expect the rest of the world to see this as a prudent course of action, or beneficial to anyone.

>where is Australia again?
Typical American """education"""

It is sadly ironic that they essentially gave themselves more of what they were rebelling against.

You are drying up and blowing away, leaf!

>I can't imagine defending british colonization
Yes, we've established you're an ungrateful nigger who doesn't understand history.
>if I was an ex-prisoner
>if

>this unaware of north american history

France was blocking "us" from expanding. I say "us" as in the british. Infact the loyalists and americans faught together against the french.

Duh.

We saved you, then you kicked us out and forced us to live with the remaining french. Lmao fucking traitorous faggot, I hope you get aids.

George was an idiot. He made William Pitt the elder resign from being PM when Pitt would have castrated France in the peace of the 7 years war. Instead George pussied out and signed the Peace of Paris in 1763, returning more than half of the land that the brits occupied. Also he returned most of the valuable sugar islands in the Caribbean, which would have helped pay off the debt that was accumulated. Instead George took New France which was a worthless piece of tundra and the French went laughing home and funded the revolution. George spoiled brat and a piece of work, his father was a genius compared to him. btw George was coronated in sept 1761 and sent peace makers practically as soon as he got power after his father died.

>using sodomite language while being the actual sodomite
Hell is for ever!

But only aristocracy can save 21st century people from the consequences of their democractic catastrophe, remember.

Yes, my point was that he was a shit king

>ungrateful
I'd say we paid them back twice now.
We have the power to shit in a bag, put them in bombs, load those bombs onto planes, put those planes on 1 (one) of our 10 (ten) aircraft carriers and those those shit bad bombs on the capital of your country in less than a week. When you have that much power, it doesn't matter what irrelevant countries think.
>thinking I support apartide
I don't think it went far enough. I think chinks like you shouldn't be able to drink from my water fountain either. Pretty sure you can blame the british's limpwristed populace for South Africa, Rhodesia, india, and hong kong. All the good ones died after world war 2. At least they still have the Falklands though!

>America
>Needing an excuse to slaughter things
We were just exercising our kill boners. He should have known better than to doubt our bloodlust. 10/10 would murder lobster backs again.

>and drop those shit bag bombs*

Better than no king at all. Better than a watered down British House of Lords.

>muh dik

You americans talk tough, I guess that's why muslims with bombs made of car parts and human shit killed so many of you. What was the death toll again? 15k dead americans?

Everybody knows your weakness, your patrols.

>I'd say we paid them back twice now.
How?
>When you have that much power
Is it power, though? To have a shit, but expansive military while your country is a 3rd world shithole tearing itself apart?

Precisely. England took the whole thing down to the balls. I get moist thinking about dead 18th and early 19th Century lobster backs and loyalists. Real moist.

>dresses like hindu and prays in ypur direction

Well if we hadn’t acted like niggers we wouldn’t be the most powerful nation on earth. That’s not propaganda, that’s actual fact. We’re losing that power because of multiculturalism and loss of our heritage. But The Founding Fathers Did Nothing Wrong.

If that happened in your country you'd claim that as a victory. If you kill your enemies, they win! So just be subservient!
By not letting them become enriched by strong aryan values. You realize that the british were having bi-daily air raids by the SS right? And they were losing in africa too. Hitler wasn't a brilliant strategist by any means but saying that western europe had any chance without america is absolute horseshit.
>is having 10 aircraft carriers really power
I don't expect an irrelevant country to understand power.

Colonists were British by blood too, they should've had representation if fucking parliament was gonna tax their tea and molasses to shit.

And then you'd have to give all the niggers and street shitters representation.

>eats tacos, talks like a nigger, military is owned by jews, puts aborted fetus parts in chewing gum and pepsi.

Lol fuck off you abomination. sage.

>literally a nigger mexican

Yes I heard mexican niggers are brilliant tacticians. What a joke. Bye.

>literally a chink
where'd all the gold go, leaf???

Was he really a dindu nuffin king and were the colinialists acting like alabama niggers and was the american revolution illigitimate and unjustified?

If america would become a shitty nigger place after kicking the brits out, that would be just nigger chimpout. But america since the independence to vietnam, was the top country on the world. So... they did it right. Is a shame that after kicking out the king they started sucking kike dick

English and the Commonwealth are gay. Yes the revolution should've happened.

Probably went to bribe the jews so we don't end up 56% white like you.

How is the murder rate coming along? Better slow down on the school shootings. Maybe you wouldn't have so many if your kids weren't repressed homosexual mexicans.

>literally every kid in florida has a jewish / mexican name

Magnific

God damn this is one angry Canadian. It's okay man, you burned down the White House to prove your loyalty to the King. Now you just suckle that delicious prosperity milk from pur Ameritit. I love you, friend.

>since the independence of vietnam
ummmmmm no. World war 2 solidified our place as a superpower.

>crying about a murder rate that consists of mostly minorities
very Canadian of you to worry about that. Didn't someone say canada might as well disband their military and pay us rent? You can either pay debts or buy our f35s. Pick one

This. We were pretty average and at times second and third rate until we got them nukebux.

yeah, that was what i was trying to say, but i tiped "of" instead "to".

From independence to the vietnam bullshit, america was number one, now they are a kike franchise.

>american asking me for money

what a kike you are

lmao I was just in Toronto. I saw more brown/yellow ppl than I saw whites you faggot leaf

Looks like a Soyboy version of Washington.

>loss of our heritage
Aye, 1776 was an irreparable mistake.

>By not letting them become enriched by strong aryan values
Oh, you're Russian now?
> And they were losing in africa too.
Hardly. That prick Montgomery turtled until Hitler forced Rommel to overextend.
>but saying that western europe had any chance without america is absolute-
-ly true, when you actually look at the USA contributions to the war.
>I don't expect an irrelevant country to understand power.
I wouldn't expect an African idiot to understand it either. Even when faced with the fact that this "mighty power" has never won a war, and is regularly beaten by peasants.
Not to mention that all that money fueling your lousy military is taken away from doing anything useful in your 56% shithole.

Yea I hear Chicago is way better. Yawn.

>You americans talk tough
>proceeds to say "I guess that's why muslims with bombs made of car parts and human shit killed so many of you. What was the death toll again? 15k dead americans?
hurr durr talk tuff i am dried leaf
>at least america is dying more slowly than canada

hmmm? Are you still mad and stomping your feat? I'm sorry, I cant hear you over the crowd of stomping niggers.

>all this non-American jealousy
Bring it in famm, there's plenty of freedom for all.

>asking
This thread is about colonialism. King George didn't ask for taxes and we won't either. Pay us taxes or buy our planes. Pick one before we collect.
>russians won ww2
hahahaahahaha you're definitely a chink. Why do you think stalingrad happened? Because Nazi oil reserves dried up. Where was their oil????
>montgomery was anything but a showman
he was losing in africa until we showed up sweetie. Who do you think did the bombing?
everything else is blatantly false or trolling. Denying american dominance is like denying water is wet. You're not worth my time if you're just gonna play dumb. Looking forward to the PLA taking your internet away so I don't have to see your shitposts.

nigger babies crying about muh britoshness and taxes.

hahahahhaha

Of course the Russians did. How could anyone think otherwise? Unless you don't know the facts, i guess.
> you're definitely a chink
I thought they hated Russians?
>Why do you think stalingrad happened?
Because Hitler was a retard who couldn't accept that a renewed push was better than getting mired in a Russian winter. Then threw more men at it.
>he was losing in africa until we showed up sweetie.
Of course he was. He was a shit quartermaster who got lucky because of German incompetence.
And "we"? Were you there now?
>everything else is blatantly false or trolling.
Well that's incorrect. But i wouldn't expect an African American to recognise the truth.
>Denying american dominance is like denying water is wet
That's a philosophical point, but still no. America has market dominance second to China thanks to (((bankers))). But militarily? It's not really worth a pinch of salt.
>Looking forward to the PLA taking your internet away so I don't have to see your shitposts
Assuming your banks don't do the same to you first when next they fuck up and rob you blind.

>freedom
How would an American even know what that means?

>angry peasant noises
remember when Australia got literally invaded by the japanese? We had the wrong allies, the japanese should have finished you off
>cries in forclosure
Your cuckshed belongs to Mao now, racist.

>No response to historical facts
Must be hard to be from such a shitty country. You have my sympathy.
>remember when Australia got literally invaded by the japanese?
Nope. Australia beat the Japs back while the Japs were pushing the Americans back.
>cries in forclosure
Those in glass houses?

they aren't facts though. Denying american involvement in the african campaign which lead to stalingrad being the first soviet victory can't be done with facts, so I won't waste my time talking to you. You're just too dumb to argue with, or you're being intentionally false out of jealousy. It doesn't matter, neither are worth my time.

>Denying american involvement
I wasn't denying it, though. Just pointing out it's "usefulness."
>in the african campaign which lead to stalingrad
Yea no. Look up Operation Barbarossa, my historically illiterate friend.
>so I won't waste my time talking to you
Translates to: "Shit, he knows too much, so i'll pretend to take the highground before getting btfo further."
>intentionally false
Why would i need to? Facts are on my side, dear puppet.

How do bongs cope with the fact that everything in their high culture is a cheap plagiarition of the French?

Not to mention the US military kindly donated boots to the soviets because they couldn't even afford to make them. Thinking that the soviet union had a chance without us is irrational.
>operation Barbarossa lead to the battle of stalingrad
I see you're too autistic to realize that the american success of the african campaign lead to the nazis running out of oil, which brought their greatest strengths, their mechanized divisions and airforce, to a grinding halt.

But you don't know what you're talking about so I'm not going to concern myself with your rambling. We all know who came out on top. Your country has practically been licking our boots until trump got elected.

>Thinking that the soviet union had a chance without us is irrational.
Thinking the USSR wouldn't have sent their hordes to fight without boots and still won via zerg rush is just as irrational.
>that the american success of the african
Lol. Didn't realise Hitler was American.
>campaign lead to the nazis running out of oil, which brought their greatest strengths, their mechanized divisions and airforce, to a grinding halt.
Not sure what grinding halt you're referring to, unless it was the after they sacrificed multiple armies to the Russian snow.
>But you don't know what you're talking about
Irony.
>so I'm not going to concern myself with your rambling
Ie. You know you can't refute historical fact.
>We all know who came out on top
Yea, Russia.
>Your country has practically been licking our boots until trump got elected
Of course. Still are. But that's not unique for America. Our (((politicians))) are just as bad and sycophantic as yours and everyone elses.

>yea russia
lmao that's the petrol talking

No, it's not having only 56% "white" population talking.

I honest to God cannot believe some Brits actually believe he dindu nuffin as if he was actually a good person. Fucker may have been a good king to Britain but he was fucking evil to the colonies. Probably learned to treat Canada better after having to watch us break off. Read the Declaration of Independence for the crimes committed.
americainclass.org/sources/makingrevolution/rebellion/text8/decindep.pdf

>but he was fucking evil to the colonie
In what way? And remember, talking about the King, not parliament.

I just told you, read the Declaration of Independence, it lists everything the Colonists suffered through. It was more than tea and taxes like some Brits seem to think

>Give them
>Give
He couldn't give shit. Parliament was all uppity and wanted their power or they'd make an example out of him like they did with Charles I. What could have been.

>to them over taxes
It was about them coming after our guns

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord

Also the let Canada remain papist

>read the Declaration of Independence
I have. It doesn't get a whole lot right, and like i said ascribes parliamentary deeds to the monarch. Besides, i was asking what you think these crimes were.
> It was more than tea and taxes
Aye, like taking care of soldiers who were defending them. So evil.

>It doesn't get a whole lot right

Our Declaration of Independence is infallible. Don't you ever try to say otherwise you kangaroo-fucking FAGGOT.

>infallible
Lol.

We started the 7 years war desu, and we were willing to pay our due penance but King Faggot had an ego trip and wouldn't allow us to establish a Parliament like fucking Ireland had

Whigs sided with us lad, it was the fucking Tory bootlickers

Still doesn't answer the question.

>wouldn't allow us
You mean parliament didn't. And honestly, Ireland was a bit more established at that point than the colonies.

Nigger, the King had the final say in most of the laws passed by Parliament basically making any law null and void.

That's not how parliament has worked ever. Or at least, since the Magna Carta established it, certainly not since the Civil War, and then absolutely not after the Glorious Revolution.
Politicians were in charge, caused all those grievances, and were then invited to multiply in the Colonies as they turned traitor.

That was largely the fault of parliament, and even thought George III was more involved in governance than is the norm today he certainly didn't act beyond the norm, certainly no worse than usual for the time. He was also very popular with his own subjects in England and here, until the tax issues were blown out of proportion and a stupidly ham-fisted response by the government in England exacerbated the problem.

>Doesn't answer the question
It wasn't chiefly his fault, but he was certainly against giving us our due rights. We participated in the Glorious Revolution, and countless other wars for the United Kingdom. Really though during the War of Jenkin's Ear we were treated like dirt by British-born commanding officers and that's when the rift began. Though here's a quote about the King in the Revolution
>George III also personally influenced the character of the transatlantic conflict after news of the Boston Tea Party reached London in early 1774. Convinced that the troubles with America derived from the lenience of British policies (and not shifting British ministries), the King argued for strong, coercive measures against the recalcitrant colonials.

ouramericanrevolution.org/index.cfm/people/view/pp0022

>You mean parliament didn't. And honestly, Ireland was a bit more established at that point than the colonies.
Pic related, you can't think of "the colonies" as a singular entity since there were ~20 each with their own Assembly, which they feared would lose autonomy over time. Google the Dominion of New England and Britain's policy toward governing the colonies to understand why we were weary of Imperial oversight. The Revolution was bound to happen when Parliament tried to restrict us from settling the land we conquered from France; it was the straw that broke the camel's back desu. Sea to shining sea wasn't a 19th century invention, most of the colonies considered their territory to extend to the Pacific

(((We))) couldn't sell manufactured goods to Europe. So (((we))) conspired to kill our father. Just like (((You))) did with King Henry. Just as the (((Catholic Church))) did with the Orthodox

The tea revolt wasn't about a tax. That's deliberate obfuscation on the part of the system trying to keep people blind to parallels today. Sure, the tax was an annoyance and a burden imposed on the colonies absent political representation, but it wasn't the primary cause of outrage. The real issue was the monopoly on tea granted to the British East India company by Parliament in 1773. American shippers and merchants were now forbidden by law from getting their tea from anyone but the BEI company. Men like John Hancock actually made a fortune during this period by smuggling less expensive contraband tea into the colonies. This is the real cause of the inflammatory event known as the Boston Tea Party. Angry Bostoners forced to pay higher prices and put out of business by government edict took revenge against the monopolists by destroying their cargo. Imagine if Anheuser-Busch was granted the exclusive right by Congress to supply beer to the U.S.? Tar and feathering might just make a comeback.

The point being: we still struggle today against the same forces our forefathers struggled against in the early days of America. Political tyrants abuse the power of government to violate natural rights and enrich special interests. Today billions are transferred from American taxpayers to corporations as subsidies and incentives. Legislators and policy makers put taxpayers on the line for millions and billions of dollars at a time. How about cash for clunkers? A monumental transfer of wealth from taxpayers to private corporations via government fiat. State mandated monopolies and cartels exist in many forms and have proliferated across the country (check out the bizarre alcohol distribution and sale laws in some states; forced unionism is another example of monopolistic creations of the state). It's a continued battle between government founded in belief in natural rights and one founded in belief in positive law. Man vs state. At its core, makers versus takers.

>our due
Why was it due?
>rights
Lol.
>We participated in the Glorious Revolution
Well no. No one really did, that's the point. Just a couple of small skirmishes.
>we were treated like dirt by British-born commanding officers
Duh. But that's just a status thing.
>George III also personally influenced the character
Maybe. But if parliament didn't want to act that way, they wouldn't have. Hell, he wasn't wrong either. Just didn't go far enough.
>you can't think of "the colonies" as a singular entity
Which is also a key point, like you say. And led to the American Civil War.
> Parliament tried to restrict us from settling the land we conquered from France;
With Home Countries help. But i won't pretend to know enough about settlement issue afterwards.

No taxation without representation. If dumb fuck King George didn't want to lose the American colonies he should have listened to them.