Explain Why The Colonies Are The Neutral Against The King And Parliament In The 16th Century

Words: 368
Pages: 2

The colonies should remain neutral against the King and Parliament in the 16th century because rebellion causes violence that would go against the colonies’ religious beliefs and did not bring anything beneficial for enslaved people and native people, it causes unrelatable and innocent colonies isolate themselves economically in the war instead. Peaceful negotiations are more effective, practical in dealing with the conflict regarding to the colonies’ religious beliefs and assumptions. Many of the colonists are pacifist and Quakers who go against all plotters and fighters in the world, believing that war is against their faith. They also deliberate that God is the only one who has power in Heaven and Earth for everyone according to a Mennonite Petition to the Pennsylvania Assembly in 1775. The …show more content…
Both the British and the colonists continually and excessively abuse them and force them to toil. Due to how the economic and social system are overly reliant upon the labor, which proves that neither the British nor the colonist have any interest in granting freedom to enslaved people and military involvement will not help anything for them in this case. Additionally, native people also have the same perspectively as the enslaved people that they also argue about the idea that they don’t have anything beneficial of choosing side.The native people think the conflict is not related to them since it is in between Britain and the colonists. Furthermore, choosing sides will likely to isolate the native people from some important economic partners and their power over the land. “I say you are so and they are wise for you want you to destroy ourselves in your War and they advise us to live in peace.” stated by head war chief of the Allegheny Senecas. It summarizes the main ideas and benefits of being neutral so in my opinion the colonies should definitely remain neutral against the Britain and the