Answer:
I believe the pioneers were justified in revolting against the British, because of the vituperative king and British congress, the levies without representation, the laws without the concurrence of pioneers ( similar as the Quartering Act), and the death of the pioneers in brutal events, similar as the Boston. All these events combined caused outrage throughout the colonies ( similar to the Boston Tea Party, and tarring and oaring of British officers), and sparked a rebellion that would change the history of the colonies ever.
The taxes were also mainly used to pay for the French-Indian War, which seems like it justifies the British taxing, except for the fact that it was taxes without representation, which can be labeled as tyranny. This supports my argument, as the American colonists didn’t like having to pay for the war and let Britain take money away from them for profit.
Most of the goods that were brought to the colonists for trade were heavily regulated by the British government and priced much higher than usual. In exchange for these overpriced goods, the colonies bartered a wealth of products such as whale oil, timber, and tobacco.
The uneven weight of trade value between the colonies and Britain caused a negative flow of economy between the two, one that could only be fixed through loans from British banks. While this greatly boosted the British economy, the setup would lead to an eventual crash and a large colonial debt. When the colonists realized this, they began to boycott British goods, they hoped for the British to lift the heavy taxation and to equalize the cost of goods.
The fact that the colonists had to take action to achieve what they felt were only their basic rights angered even many British
Step-by-step explanation:
hope this helps