The Boston Tea Party: Freedom Fighters or Vandals?
In 1773, a group of colonists in Boston dressed up as Native Americans and dumped 342 chests of tea into the harbour. Americans call it the Boston Tea Party — a brave act of resistance against tyranny.
The British called it criminal destruction of property.
Who was right?
The American Version
The colonists were being taxed by a government in London — 3,000 miles away — in which they had no elected representatives. "No taxation without representation!" They had petitioned peacefully. They had boycotted. Nothing worked. The Tea Party was a last resort — a defiant stand against oppression.
In American schools today, this is taught as a founding moment of democracy.
The British Version
The colonists benefited enormously from British protection, trade networks, and military defence (especially during the French and Indian War, which cost Britain a fortune). The taxes were modest — actually lower than what British citizens paid at home. The Tea Act of 1773 actually reduced the price of tea. The "protest" was destruction of private property worth approximately £10,000 (over $1.5 million today).
In British schools at the time, this was taught as ungrateful colonial rebellion.
The Perspective Nobody Mentions
The colonists disguised themselves as Mohawk Indians. Why? Partly to hide their identities. But also to symbolically claim they were "Americans, not British." This appropriation of Native American identity — by colonists who were simultaneously taking Native American land — is a perspective rarely discussed in either version.
The Native Americans themselves had their own view: both the British and the colonists were occupiers of their land.
What Can We Learn?
Every historical event has at least three sides. The version you learn depends on where you were born, what language you speak, and which nation's textbook you read.
Tonight's Question
"If someone destroyed $1.5 million of property today as a political protest, would we call them freedom fighters or criminals?"
The answer often depends on whether we agree with their cause. Discuss: is that fair?
The Three Perspectives Exercise
- Pick any historical event (a war, a revolution, a colonisation).
- Each family member takes a different perspective: the "winners," the "losers," and the "bystanders."
- Each person writes a 2-minute speech explaining the event from their perspective.
- Present the speeches.
- Discuss: which perspective had you never considered before?
Go Further
- Research: How is the American Revolution taught in British schools vs American schools?
- Book: Lies My Teacher Told Me by James W. Loewen (1995) — how American textbooks distort history.
- Question: When does "protest" become "terrorism"? Who gets to decide?
- Comparison: Research the Eureka Stockade (1854) — Australia's own rebellion against unfair taxation.
What We Simplified
- The causes were complex. The Tea Party wasn't just about taxes — it involved trade monopolies, colonial identity, and complex political relationships.
- Not all colonists agreed. Many colonists (Loyalists) opposed the rebellion and remained loyal to Britain.
- The Native American perspective is even more complex. Different tribes had different relationships with both the British and the colonists.
Sources
- Carp, B.L. (2010). Defiance of the Patriots: The Boston Tea Party and the Making of America. Yale University Press.
- Loewen, J.W. (1995). Lies My Teacher Told Me. New Press.
- Labaree, B.W. (1979). The Boston Tea Party. Northeastern University Press.
- Dunbar-Ortiz, R. (2014). An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States. Beacon Press.
Want to track progress and save lessons?
Create a free family account. No credit card, no catch — just a place to keep track of what your family is learning.
Create Free Account