No Affiliation Alliance

Who Was Behind the American Revolution?

I am a writer – simply, I’m a glorified researcher. Nothing satisfies me more than to find a document that reveals the hidden agenda behind some event in history. This is not as hard as some think. The secret discussions over diner or drink in the shadows of a dingy back alley tavern may only prove to be merely assumption to intrigue, but when plans to act finalize and the events begin to sprout – there is always a trail of paper.

One truth my research has revealed to me is this; that all through American history there has always been some sort of conspiracy and many of those conspiracy can be followed straight back to their source – Europe – now that’s a place that swelters in conspiracy and has since maintained consistent interlinks with American history.

American history proud in its beginnings – standing up to the most powerful army in the world – severing the ties with King George II, becoming the model of revolution that spread around the world. Truthfully even though we believe at the end of the revolution we became free and sovereign – I can not help in getting that feeling; Europe has ever given up on the intention of taking back control over American territory.

So let us begin the journey with the ultimate product of conspiracy – the American Revolution and who was behind it!


If there could ever be a more convincing argument to corporate regulation this is it. The largest corporation in the 17th century that thrived on corruption, deception and greed; that inspired the conception of the first corporate system of government and from it the design to end the monarchy; was the motivator of the American revolution.

Created in 1600 by Queen Elizabeth I on a charter to establish a trade link with India and by the 18th century the trade organization changed its primary from trade to land acquisition growing into a self sustaining government that answered not even to the monarchy. After decades the company became a military post with its own government and army. The charter clause that would relinquish the trade company after three years should the organization not show a profit became an issue after a pandemic took the lives of ¾ of the population of India.

If the company failed, the organization’s accounts books would need to be surrendered to the Kings Accountant and nearly fifty years of embezzlement and theft would become the fate of the CEO’s of the trade company.

It was then the plan was conceived by the executives that before the charter were terminated; that the members of the corporation would buy seats in the Parliament and as they gradually took over power, the parliament soon fell to the corruption of these thugs.

Europe then became a victim of unscrupulous acts that caused protest and riots in England and to cover up their improprieties the Parliament now under control of the former CEO’s of the East India Trade Company took control of the trade charter placing it under parliamentary authority and this became the first act of forming a nationalized corporate government.

The failing East India Trade Company was determined to be a company having too great of an impact on the European economy that it could not be allowed to fail – parallel to the concept of the United States that have continuously bailed out defunct companies with tax payers money. The idea that a company like General Motors is too large to fail is a corporate misconception that was consumed and nationalized under the Federal Government. When a large enterprise fails in a free enterprise economy – the workers start their own companies and instead of the economy failing completely; the hands of small enterprise bring the economy back developing new concepts and products. Corporations on the other hand tend to protect their golden goose and will covert new discoveries.

This is the danger when profit becomes the deciding factor in domestic and foreign enterprise; when to make war and against who will sometimes come into conflict with ethics and moral principals – corporations rely on nether. Profit is the goal and when careers depend on making profit the ends will always justify the means. Since the 1990’s the United States of America federal system has become a nationalized corporation and has in many respects become similar to the East India Trade Company.

Back in 1763 the East India Trade Company became the influence of failure in the English economy in the same way the federal government has currently influenced the potential failure of the states.

By 1768 the Parliament took focus on the America’s as being a new source of natural resources. The population of the colonies was sparse in comparison to India so labor was not an interest to English manufacturers. So the interest in the colonies was primarily for resources and the idea of fair trade ended when the first Royal Governors were implanted into the colonies. These Royal Governors were in partnership with members of Parliament and contracted to act as agents in procuring commodities and resources for England.

Because the governors received a royalty percentage per ton of cargo the Royal Governors – not the King of England or Parliament – began to make laws that prevented the colonist from shipping cargo to England on colonial ships – very much affecting the personal enterprises of John Hancock – Samuel Adams (the father of the revolution) lost his business because of the over taxation and regulations imposed by the Royal Governors. Samuel Adams and John Hancock – rich man – poor man had a common enemy. Adams willing to do the unscrupulous deeds of conjuring up the masses and Hancock secretly funding the events and rallying merchants and wealthy participants – so began the root of the revolution.


Being assigned to the colonies was viewed more the exile than a commission which brought the most unsavory types to be assigned the position of Royal Governor. The men were arbitrary in their handling of colonial affairs and began to replace the established forms of colonial government.

Until the arrival of the Royal Governors colonials were left to run their townships according to their own necessity. Most townships depended upon popular democracy and councils of selectmen. The Royal Governors subordinated these simple forms and mandated policy under the direct authority of the King of England that rarely knew anything about these laws being 3,000 miles away.

The King of England – being very young when he took his vows as King (21) – was pretty much kept in the dark about the affairs of Parliament in the America’s. It was not until the reactionary efforts of colonial merchants in the refusal of paying taxes (Sugar Act of 1764) (The stamp act of 1765) and the (Townshend Duties of 1767) did the King become aware of the problems in the colonies. Not fully understanding the cause of the insurrection he began to make proclamations that proved only to escalate the problems in the colonies. The final act in the demise of the monarchy in the colonies was the arrival of General Gage (1773) and his over zealous policies to gain control over the colonial insurrection. Gage’s heavy handed policies turned more colonials against the King and the first implications of separation from England arose.


Samuel Adams argued the colonies were being taxed without their consent and became the rallying call to merchants throughout the colonies. Since the arrival of the Royal Governors into the colonies the introduction of new taxes became the means of the tax collectors to increase their own salaries. Parliament saw these taxes as a means to alleviate the economic stress in England caused by the failure of the East India Trade Company.

Parliaments excuse to impose these new taxes was instead implied that the new taxes were to repay the English crown for the expense of the French and Indian war, but King George I had already negotiated a settlement for that endeavor that was paid in shipments of natural resources during the course of the war. The colonies did not owe England such debt.

Natural resources were now being confiscated in justification of maintaining a standing army in the Colonies left over from the war – an army that was virtually abandoned by the crown to save the expensed of transporting those troops back to England. The colonies natural resources were being ravaged for the benefit of England and any attempt to correspond with the King resulted in contempt by the King against the colonials that came in the form of proclamation.

King George embargoed the port of Massachusetts with the Boston Port Act that was significant in cause to the failures of most businesses in the once charmed city of Boston and her sister city Charlestown. The status of wealthy community fell to ruin to include the prominent bookshop of retired artillery captain Henry Knox.

The Massachusetts Government Act eliminated the ability of citizens to hold town meetings. This began a cat and mouse game between Gage and the provincial governments that held secret assemblies and the town of Salem Massachusetts almost became the first armed confrontation between Regular army and colonial militia almost a month earlier than at Lexington/Concord in April 1775.

The Quartering Act forced inhabitants of Boston and Charlestown to quarter and feed regular army troops upon demand.

The Administration of Justice Act invalidated the authority of colonial courts and placed the Royal Governor’s and other appointed officials from Parliament above the American court jurisdiction.

In essence the revolutionary war was not fought to gain new liberty but to regain the liberties the colonies already enjoyed before the Royal Governors were implanted by Parliament that maliciously circumvented the charters of the colonies. The corrupt gang of former East India Trade Company CEO’s in the attempts to cover up their illegal acts and conspiracy against the monarchy; enforced these unfair trade acts in attempt to control the resources of America by installing their own system of government to replace the existing colonial systems – colonies all having their own separate systems of government at that time.

The colonials saw themselves as loyal subjects of the King and expected to be treated equally under English law and this is where King George II failed to understand the conditions of malcontent of the American colonies. The Royal Governors were thugs working for members of Parliament and Parliament was now sending over merchants loyal to Parliament to undermine colonial enterprise.

This further antagonized the colonial merchants that found themselves in competition with royal merchants and because of the Administration of Justice Act, found them in legal disadvantage when claims came into conflict. This prompted merchants to form groups and from those groups a colonial embargo was set against the sale of all products coming from England with imported Tea becoming the focused target.

The two countries moved to an economic stalemate and the insurrection escalated to containing the colonies by making them defenseless – General Gage plan was set to confiscate the townships stores of weapons and ammo in purpose to subjugate the colonies to accept the protection of the regular army. When open conflict occurred April 19, 1775 the colonies became a potential grab bag not only for other nations but to groups and trade unions – The Free Mason Society becoming the most predominant.


Filed Under: Issues and Articles

RSSComments (0)

Trackback URL

Comments are closed.