Final answer:
The justification of Shays' Rebellion varies on perspective. Farmers, burdened with heavy debts and unpaid taxes, believed they were wronged by their own government. From the government and more wealthy perspective, the rebellion disrupted peace and security and was considered an act of lawlessness.
Step-by-step explanation:
The justification for Shays' Rebellion can be seen from multiple perspectives. Farmers in western Massachusetts, including Daniel Shays, were burdened with heavy debts and facing the harsh reality of imprisonment and loss of their lands due to unpaid taxes. They had served in the American Revolution and believed that they were wronged by the state, which, despite their service, had failed to assist them in their economic hardships and was primarily serving the interests of the wealthy.
On the other hand, the rebellion led to a period of unrest and was viewed as a symptom of lawlessness and disorder. From the perspective of individuals in power, and particularly the Massachusetts government, the rebellion disrupted peace and security and was viewed as an illegal act. This contrasting viewpoint led them to take strong measures to quell the rebellion, including calling for assistance from the national government and raising a private army.
Shays' Rebellion had significant impacts on the United States, prompting reconsideration of the Articles of Confederation and convincing George Washington and others to take action towards providing greater stability to the nation. Therefore, whether Shays' Rebellion was justified is a matter of perspective and depends heavily on how one views the economic and social contexts at the time of the rebellion.
Learn more about Shays' Rebellion