# Why was there no "Reign of Terror" in the US revolution? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 20, 2011, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528 "2011-11-20T06:31:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 8:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/21 "2011-11-21T08:46:07Z")
How many colonial government officials were chased out of their jobs due to the American War of Independence? Every colony had a governor, someone who managed things there and reported to the Crown, correct? ---
**Author:** ![Sizzles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e480ec/32.png) [@Sizzles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sizzles)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/22 "2011-11-21T09:12:36Z")
> [@bardos](#): > > …, it was a war for independence. No, it was a war for representation, which resulted in independence ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/23 "2011-11-21T13:47:15Z")
[gross oversimplification]Dutch sociologist Geert Hofstede, in his book “Cultures and Organizations” tried to classify countries/national cultures based on certain characteristics or dimensions. One of these, he called “Power Distance” – the way that cultures handle inequality in society. There is inequality in every society: some people have more power than others, more status, more wealth. The differences between cultures are the extent to which this is accepted and expected. Quick (relevant) example: in low-power distance countries (like the US), power is conferred by position, the person who holds the office has the power. In high power distance countries (like France), power is conferred by family, by history, by social status. Thus, during the American Revolutions, simply replacing the office-holders was sufficient to bring about change. In the French Revolution, the king and his family and everyone else had to be beheaded; otherwise, they’d still hold power (even if they didn’t officially hold office.) ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/24 "2011-11-21T14:04:00Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > [gross oversimplification]Dutch sociologist Geert Hofstede, in his book “Cultures and Organizations” tried to classify countries/national cultures based on certain characteristics or dimensions. One of these, he called “Power Distance” – the way that cultures handle inequality in society. There is inequality in every society: some people have more power than others, more status, more wealth. The differences between cultures are the extent to which this is accepted and expected. Quick (relevant) example: in low-power distance countries (like the US), power is conferred by position, the person who holds the office has the power. In high power distance countries (like France), power is conferred by family, by history, by social status. Thus, during the American Revolutions, simply replacing the office-holders was sufficient to bring about change. In the French Revolution, the king and his family and everyone else had to be beheaded; otherwise, they’d still hold power (even if they didn’t officially hold office.) This is probably one of the keys - the problem with the Americans was that the British gave them a certain amount of self-government, actually quite a bit, and they wanted more. So, the tradition of democracy was relatively established before the revolution. Places that descended into anarchy and terror generally seem to be where the people are still sheep, and the only change is who’s the top wolf. But yes, the locals did drive out a lot of “United Empire Loyalists” over the 1780’s who generally helped populate Ontario. This was more of a local mob action against “collaborators”, considering that much of the revolution was ebb and flow of freedom fighters and occupying army. Many of the colonists were second generation plus with no direct ties to Britain, or refugees from moderately oppresive government policies, especially in regard to religion. This was more a case of throwing off outside oppression than rotating the ruling class, like the French or Russian or many other revolutions. (Probably having a German occupying force didn’t help matters) Note too that it succeeded in some part because of assistance by England’s enemy France. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/25 "2011-11-21T14:19:17Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > Who said there wasn’t? Loyalists during and after the Revolution were treated pretty terribly…tarring and feathering, confiscation of property, blackmail, harassment, and even murder. There’s a reason Canada saw a large influx of population from the USA after the Treaty of Paris was signed. > > That gets glossed over in primary and secondary school history classes…the Revolution is taught in the USA as an unobscured good thing, and that kind of treatment doesn’t look very good. I do remember tarring and feathering being mentioned in my high school history classes (mid- to late-80s), but mostly in a way that gave it an air of pranks and games. As Richard Shenkman says in _Legends, Lies, and Cherished Myths of American History_, > [@](#): > > There was more of a touch of the Reign of Terror in the American Revolution so he agrees with you. In France there was a resident aristocracy that was a pretty obvious, visible, and tangible symbol of oppression. In America, the system they were rebelling against was less personal (taxes and onerous requirements, like quartering troops in homes) and the perpetrators were on the other side of the Atlantic. Not surprisingly, the people who took the direct assault were British troops (attacked in actions like the Boston Massacre, then the combatants in the Revolution) and the Tories, many of whom fled. It’s notable that many families had both Loyalists and rebels – I’ve found such divided families in the history of my NJ home town. One historian suggested that, far from being evidence of strong divisions within families, this was really a pragmatic way of being sure that someone had a claim on the family holdings, regardless of which side won. ---
**Author:** ![Capitaine\_Zombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@Capitaine\_Zombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capitaine_Zombie)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/26 "2011-11-21T14:57:27Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > In the French Revolution, the king and his family and everyone else had to be beheaded; otherwise, they’d still hold power (even if they didn’t officially hold office.) The goal of the Revolution was not to slay the King. It could have totally become a Constitutional monarchy. It didnt happen because: > [@handsomeharry](#): > > Also, the Terrors of the States that had them were put in place because there was a great danger of the new government being overthrown. Other nations were going to invade, huge sectors of the nation were against the Revolutions: Russian=Civil War, France=Invasion from Austria(?). > Not quite so in the US. Mostly, the citizens didn’t care too vigorously about what form of government they had. Or, if they were against the Revolution, they weren’t going/planning to do much about it. > > hh The US doing a Revolution/War of Independence in their little corner did not have huge repercussions (at the time). France going revolutionary was not. And, as noted, the social struggle that should normally be attached to a revolution (and why the American Revolution is refered to as War of Independence outside of the US) was not very present in the American Revolution. It was quite present in the French and Soviet ones. You take out what makes revolutions bloody, that is severe civil war and hostile and invading foreign powers, and it becomes less bloody. The question is less why the American Revolution was less bloody than all other recorded revolutions, but more why is it even called a revolution. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/27 "2011-11-21T15:07:33Z")
> [@Capitaine\_Zombie](#): > > The question is less why the American Revolution was less bloody than all other recorded revolutions, but more why is it even called a revolution. I’m assuming that you did not grow up in the US. American children are taught that there had never been anything like the infant American government since the days of the ancient Greeks, basically. Or were, I suppose I should say, since my school days were 30-some years ago now and I don’t know what they’re taught today. But we were taught that the American revolution was an actual REVOLUTION! That the American Founding Fathers turned the world upside down (illustrated by the unsubstantiated legend that the British band at Yorktown played a song called “The World Turned Upside Down” during the surrender), giving power to the people and dethroning kings. We’re taught that it was incredibly significant and the world shook with the implications. Some of us got over that. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/28 "2011-11-21T15:21:30Z")
We had Washington, they had Robespierre. I really don’t think there is anything different. Had Washington ordered mass reprisals, including murder, of the loyalists, most would have readily agreed. We just had a greater man leading us. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/29 "2011-11-21T15:34:27Z")
> [@Capitaine\_Zombie](#): > > The US doing a Revolution/War of Independence in their little corner did not have huge repercussions (at the time). To be fair, the American Revolution/War of Independence was a huge inspiration to the original revolutionaries in France (not to mention the fact that the financial crisis created by French support for the Americans helped precipitate the Revolution). ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/30 "2011-11-21T15:34:54Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > But we were taught that the American revolution was an actual REVOLUTION! That the American Founding Fathers turned the world upside down (illustrated by the unsubstantiated legend that the British band at Yorktown played a song called “The World Turned Upside Down” during the surrender), giving power to the people and dethroning kings. We’re taught that it was incredibly significant and the world shook with the implications. And they taught you correctly. It changed the political direction fo the entire Western Hemisphere. It’s unlikely there would have been a French Revolution as it was without it, and certainly not the form it took. Not everybody liked either Revolution, and some leaders brought counter-revolutions to the table, such as Austria and Russia. Furthermore, it encouraged local and democratic experiments and revolts across Latin America (which in those days was no less wealthy and successful than the nascent USA). They may have simplified it, but they did not exaggerate the impact. You might be surprised at the numbers of Frenchmen involved in the Americn Revolution who then got involved in the French. Of course, the French Revolution then devoured them. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/31 "2011-11-21T17:31:06Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > I know this is a huge question. Could anyone brief me? There was. Where you think the term [Lynch Mob](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lynch_%28jurist%29) comes from ? ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/32 "2011-11-21T22:21:31Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Why would that make any difference–aside from some legacy feelings to avoid repeating the terrors of the Roundheads and the Royals or the earlier Tudors from previous generations? > > This is just silly. Whats that sound I hear ? No, no don’t tell me, it begins with a Wuh and ends with an OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsh ! ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/33 "2011-11-21T22:31:40Z")
> [@Lust4Life](#): > > Whats that sound I hear ? > > No, no don’t tell me, it begins with a Wuh and ends with an OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsh ! There really wasn’t anything about your post that indicated it was intended as a joke. ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/34 "2011-11-21T22:37:01Z")
In many ways the American Revolution was actually pretty conservative. The Colonies already enjoyed a substantive degree of self-governance and a firm tradition of constitutional government. Independence was only declared when address of grievances with the mother country were impossible and the choice was between submission or death. The fact that they were so slow and reluctant to declare independence shows how much freedom they feared they stood to lose if they made the wrong choice. The American constitution which developed was essentially the British one with stricter separation of powers, and elections across the board. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/35 "2011-11-22T11:53:41Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > There really wasn’t anything about your post that indicated it was intended as a joke. Yes I know, I don’t explain the punchlines to jokes either. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/36 "2011-11-22T13:41:47Z")
> [@Malden\_Capell](#): > > The American constitution which developed was essentially the British one with stricter separation of powers, and elections across the board. There was, and is, no British Constritution. Even the “unwritten Constritution” didn’t really exist back then, and the government of the United States looked very little like the British crown and Parliament. Structurally, it differs greatly, and the powers of the respective bodies are quite reversed. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/37 "2011-11-22T15:10:31Z")
> [@Lust4Life](#): > > Yes I know, I don’t explain the punchlines to jokes either. Then you can’t count a whoosh if people take your posts at face value. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/38 "2011-11-22T16:06:25Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Then you can’t count a whoosh if people take your posts at face value. Slow day eh ? ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/39 "2011-11-22T16:14:59Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Then you can’t count a whoosh if people take your posts at face value. I always thought that was the very definition of a whoooosh. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528/40 "2011-11-22T16:19:31Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > I do remember tarring and feathering being mentioned in my high school history classes (mid- to late-80s), but mostly in a way that gave it an air of pranks and games. It is kinda “pranks and games”. Compared to the deadly seriousness of a guillotine. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-there-no-reign-of-terror-in-the-us-revolution/603528.md?page=3)