Defiant loyalists paid dearly for choosing wrong side in the American Revolution
144 comments
·June 9, 2025ben7799
I have always thought the fact Boston was a hotbed of revolution and New York city was a loyalist stronghold (as the article mentions) has had some small subconscious effect on the ongoing rivalry between the two cities all the way to the present day.
We joke about the Red Sox and the Yankees but deep down there is this smidgen of it that goes all the way back.
Also from the article, amazing how William Franklin has been almost erased by history even though Benjamin Franklin is endlessly discussed in elementary history in the US. A fascinating addition to the story. I'm sure historians are familiar with this, but it's likely something every day Americans should all know about. I know it was not mentioned in my education through high school, including AP history. There was scant discussion of loyalists, the Tories were definitely mentioned but it was not covered in the same way the community & family divisions of the Civil War were.
moogleii
Recently learned that one of Ben Franklin's sons was a loyalist. He fled to England after the war.
runako
Sharp contrast here with the aftermath of our bloodiest war.
null
disposition2
Thanks for sharing, I’ve always enjoyed the Smithsonian magazine and its articles, hope to visit some day.
I’m hoping all the RIFs, reductions / eradication of IMLS, etc. don’t reduce the gains in & sharing of knowledge from these institutions, but if I am being honest it kind of feels like it’s purposeful destruction.
So I’ll enjoy it while we have it.
mcphage
I’m planning to take my kids to Washington this summer to see the Smithsonian museums. It doesn’t seem like a great time to go to Washington, but I don’t know if they’ll be there, or in what state, next summer or the summer after.
null
FridayoLeary
>What’s more, much of the population, “probably a statistical majority, [just] wanted to get on with their own lives without worrying about declaring their allegiance to one side or the other,”
Still the same today.
morkalork
The absolute truth right here. Just go on reddit to see it any time a roadway gets blocked on protest.
aaomidi
Reddit is one of the most as astroturfed platforms out there.
stormfather
Ghislaine Maxwell, for instance, was a mod on /r/worldnews and one of the most prolific posters.
null
komali2
[flagged]
ericmay
When Americans were “resisting authority” by not wearing masks and keeping their businesses opened despite lockdown orders did you feel the same pride in anti-authority behavior then?
One person’s freedom fighter is another person’s terrorist. Always has been and always will be that way. The winning side when there is one usually gets to write the history of who was what.
Do you still feel pride in American anti-authoritarianism today or do you think the US may have turned out to be governed more like the UK, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand complete with trust in government run healthcare had it not succeeded in rebellion?
Important to remember all of these things when you are being introspective of an issue like the protests ongoing in Los Angelas and elsewhere.
Anyway it’s hard to resist authority when you can’t find parking for the local protest.
antifa
> One person’s freedom fighter is another person’s terrorist.
Lol no, not even close. One person was asked nicely to wear masks and lock down and offered massive PPP loans, the other is resisting federal storm troopers kidnapping people at their place of work who are being sent to overseas concentration camps with their constitutional right to due process being violated.
alecst
Well the point of wearing a mask is mostly to protect vulnerable people, and to slow the spread of a disease. These protests are also about protecting vulnerable people. And, I would argue, to slow the spread of a disease.
dgfitz
Lest we all forget, the messaging coming out the the White House at the beginning was "masks are ineffective"
belorn
It is still an ongoing research topic if wearing masks against an airborne virus that primarily spread through aerosols does anything beyond a psychological effect of getting people to distance themselves and reducing spread that way. Airborne virus are notarial at spreading in places like planes, trains, busses, subway and buildings that recycle air. Meta studies looking at the effectiveness of early measures against covid pandemic points strongly towards shutdowns of mass transportation and borders, rather than masks, as being effective. Airports being particular problematic since travelers sits closely packed in a metal tube for hours.
bix6
They tear gassed patrons in a restaurant last week… not the same.
ta1243
They sent in riot police to clear out peaceful protesters in June 2020 so the president could have a photo-op, it's nothing new. The US population wanted this.
motorest
> When Americans were “resisting authority” by not wearing masks and keeping their businesses opened despite lockdown orders did you feel the same pride in anti-authority behavior then?
From an outsider's perspective, it's hard to see the people with a militant attitude against basic health and higiene measures as other than narcisist authoritarian fools, who believed their personal whims naturally took priority over anyone's interests and needs. There's a reason why they frequently resorted to attacking and outright assaulting anyone who dared not cater to their demands.
It's very hard to see these covid karens portrayed in the same light as the US founding father's revolutionaries or today's protesters.
I guess the point is to not be consistent or coherent with these remarks. The goal is cynicism. You see Trump's secret police kidnapping people off the streets in broad daylight and when people dare express concern or opposition then the cynical "but covid" remarks flow in to muddy the waters. No, your ICE agent throwing flashbangs into crowded restaurants while kidnapping US citizens is not Ruby Bridges. Why even pretend?
jeffbee
Anybody get tear-gassed for not wearing a mask?
roenxi
Yes. That is part of why the various COVID measures proved quite unpopular. In Australia for example we saw the standard crowd-control treatments [0] being used to break up protests of people who objected to the sudden spike in authoritarianism. There was also the internationally eyebrow-raising financial abuse that the Canadians were doling out that was a new low for anti-protest tactics and political repression.
[0] https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/coronavirus/victor...
alex43578
Equating not wearing a mask with assaulting federal agents, damaging federal property, or being part of an unlawful assembly doing the former is quite a stretch.
Be realistic about why the groups in LA are getting tear-gassed or pepperball’d.
dfxm12
Why didn't you wear you wear a mask while a deadly air-borne disease was going around the world? Was it just because your governor told you to? Was it because a governor from another state told you not to? Did you even think about it? Was it because you don't value your neighbor's lives? Do you not really value your own?
Not wearing a mask, not getting a vaccine in a global pandemic of a deadly airborne disease, and otherwise going out of your way to spread a deadly disease is not behavior of "resisting authority", it is the behavior of a death cult. This behavior may also shown by denying or ignoring climate change, cutting funding to health care, food assistance, child lunches, etc...
mcphage
the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron" —dril
itsanaccount
> When Americans were “resisting authority” by not wearing masks and keeping their businesses opened despite lockdown orders did you feel the same pride in anti-authority behavior then?
As someone who was wearing a mask, getting the vaccine, but living in a community full of those people, I thought they were dumb and harmful.
And I still admired the "don't tell me what to do" spirit because I have actual objective principles that go beyond what benefits me. And I made people angry arguing that the government was overreaching the law in what they could force people to do.
Because I'm not an authoritarian. Words mean things.
parpfish
I think early American settlers had a little extra moxie because there was excitement about how they were in a new world (to them, literally) and they were thinking big and creating something new.
It used to be that every American was basically frontiersman or explorer that was pushing boundaries, but things settled down and now people are largely content and nestled in place.
alex43578
Surely you recognize the same “representative government forms the core American value” you laud is both the mechanism by which the current administration was elected, as well as the same mechanism that passed the immigration laws that are being enforced, right?
hiddencost
ICE's actions are wildly illegal. None of this false equivalence nonsense.
anonfordays
>ICE's actions are wildly illegal.
No they're not. Deporting illegal aliens is not "wildly" illegal.
dfxm12
I don't know what happened to our values
Concentration of media has allowed conservative think tanks to shape people's values. Ten years ago [0], this meant all conservatives were getting marching orders from Fox News. Today, there is the illusion of choice among conservative media outlets (Fox News, X, Newsmax, etc.), but they all send the same message. Even traditionally more moderate outlets, like the WSJ, are being bought by the corporate class and shifting their message to the right.
0 - https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2014/10/21/political-...
ecshafer
And where do liberals get their marching orders? Or did this effect not happen there?
dfxm12
The polling data suggests they get their news from varied sources and tend to focus on issues moreso than parties or candidates.
bigfishrunning
CNN, MSNBC, HuffPo, NYT
malfist
Modern conservatism grew out of authoritarian monarchist philosophers of the French revolution. It's inherently tied to supporting an unquestionable social hierarchy with rulers at the top, be they kings, presidents or billionaires.
It's not so much as the philosophy is dead, but more that it's finally achieving it's goals. Anti authoritarianism is just a rhetoric device. Just like saying trans people shouldn't be allowed to use the bathroom is a rhetoric device for achieving the goal is forcing trans people out of existence, either by making their lives such hell that they take their own lives, or that they go back to the closet.
anonfordays
>Modern conservatism grew out of authoritarian monarchist philosophers
Not in the US. Modern conservatism in the US is tied to the individualistic self-reliance movement that rejects the concept of rulers at the top in favor of States' rights and local governance. It is classically liberal with special emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech.
You may be confusing it with conservativism in the UK/EU.
amanaplanacanal
I think you are a couple decades behind the times. The current Republican party doesn't share those values any more.
The current conservative movement is all in on monarchy, not what you are proposing. Look at Moldbug/Yarvin for their current philosophy.
ty6853
You're thinking of classical liberalism, which is something the dominating political factions are highly against. The contemporary meaning of conservatism has been hijacked by the Republican party which does not employ any of those goals.
ap99
Are there people in the US illegally? Should those people remain in the US?
Which laws do you want enforced and which are optional? If we're making some laws optional, let's I have a few in mind.
Come on. Grow up.
Replace "country" with "home" or "business" or "body" and then ask yourself how much you believe in laws that clearly define those boundaries.
pjc50
I think a lot of people believe that there ought to be a statute of limitations on immigration; if you've been peacefully living and working in the country for many years, what's the actual public purpose of deporting someone? Including breaking up a family?
alex43578
The purpose of deporting them is the same as punishing any other crime: to disincentivize committing it.
Immigration is arguably even more important to enforce in this manner because of the clear-cut legal alternative.
ty6853
[flagged]
francisofascii
Given the vastness of the US, there's a huge difference between intrusion within a country vs a home. You can't replace the two.
ty6853
We're constantly pitted against one another. Ammon Bundy used actual armed militias to check the power of unelected bureaucrats who were constantly changing up the regulations against ranchers, and it actually worked.
Anytime something actually works, the first thing the establishment does is tell you they are on the right, or the left, or they're your enemy. No matter that Bundy actually was on the side of immigrants rights, and stood against Trump, nah all the people that have employed effective strategies are right wing or left wing loons who should be discarded.
The establishment has us all divided. The true enemy of the people is the unelected bureaucrats that snatch people off the street and impose ever changing demands with the power of law, all while bypassing constitutional rights.
Unfortunately this divide and conquer strategy is highly effective. Most 'sides' seem to think their guy will do better the next time and they are just protesting until the power can be used appropriately. The problem is that anybody's guy had the ability to do so in the first place.
sQL_inject
"critical of people for defending the city from ICE stormtroopers. I see people justifying paper-checking, something I'm sure we roundly mocked the Soviets for doing - I thought gestapo agents checking the papers of people in the streets was commie shit?"
Truly curious, what methods are you suggesting we use to keep our immigrant population tracked and controlled? If the immigrants aren't leaving after being asked nicely, what steps can we use other than force to remove them? Surely you don't believe unchecked immigration in our modern Nation is good? If you do, then how much is too much, at what number, and what if those immigrants still collected benefits of your tax dollars while not themselves paying into the system? What if they voted for someone you don't like?
pjc50
> what methods are you suggesting we use to keep our immigrant population tracked and controlled?
You can't track and control only immigrants. Any such system would include tracking and controls of citizens, simply in order to sort them into the "not immigrant" category.
Hence all the "papers please".
(Not to mention the false positive problem!)
alex43578
Surprise, you’re already tracked in a dozen harmless ways that enable modern life: drivers license, Social Security number, birth certificate, etc; even before you get into quasi-public records like credit reporting, bank accounts, and insurance.
Acting like showing ID to an immigration official is some unprecedented intrusion is absurd. Fly domestically, shop at Costco, or buy a 6 pack of beer and you’ll end up showing more “papers” than a typical interaction with Customs/ICE, assuming you’re not illegal.
sethammons
the solution is trivial. It is easy. We've whitnessed it several times. Illegal immigration follows jobs. When the economy does poorly, less people come across. I recall a few years ago, they said it was negative immigration! More people were leaving because jobs were hard to get.
Instead of letting the economy do the work, simply enforce the laws we already have on the books. Don't let employers employ non-verified citizens.
The problem is that a common sense solution solves the problem and removes a platform for politicians to yell about and continue to do nothing over.
Step one: enforce labor laws. Step two, watch the system drain itself. Step three, look to naturalize and or remove those left behind.
AnimalMuppet
That is true, but it doesn't answer sQL_inject's point. You can't track and control only immigrants, therefore... what? Don't control immigrants at all, once they're here? Make it across the border and you're good forever? Or all, citizens or not, have to show papers to prove who they are?
I don't like either of those alternatives, but those seem to be the only options that are being advocated at the moment. Is there a better option?
And if not, are you really content to advocate for one of those two options? (Either of those two options? Because personally, no, I am not willing to advocate for either one.)
techpineapple
“Whay if they voted for someone you don't like?”
Not really a theoretical, but either way, I would love it if the current admins were making an impassioned plea to answer the questions your asking, and working with Congress to get the laws changed. I think we desperately need to have that discussion. As it stands they’re not, they’re just appealing to emotion with arguments like “they’re eating your cats and dogs”, and forcefully bypassing due process.
pjc50
[flagged]
bix6
[flagged]
saysjonathan
Now I want to see 'Tories' used derisively in modern American politics.
dontlaugh
Go ahead.
In the UK there’s regular Tories (Conservative Party), red Tories (Labour Party under Blair or Starmer), tartan Tories (SNP), etc.
In the US it seems like you only have red and blue Tories.
shortrounddev2
Actually there's a massive difference between Democrats and Republicans in the US, and that difference matters a lot
pwndByDeath
Under the lenses of a duopoly, American politics seems like a well oiled machine, oiled by the tears of the constituency, but they are working together. The orange tumor seems to be a new thing that for some reason smells like fundamentalist state.
SavageNoble
Yeah, no. The Overton window is so incredibly small in America that normal, run of the mill political positions - either left or right - in the rest of the world are deemed extremist and radical in America.
Your Corporate media is the problem.
dontlaugh
Is there? They seem only distinguishable aesthetically to me.
They’re much closer to each other than UK’s Tories and Labour, for sure.
null
FridayoLeary
Not as much as you'd think. It's remarkable how similar their tactics and rhetoric are.
taeric
This feels odd. Many people paid dearly for being involved, period? It isn't like we have any dynasties that survived through the era, did we?
Specifically, 46 people signed the declaration of independence. How many of those are remembered today? Do I expect that people on the "other side" had it worse? Yeah, but this framing implies a spoils system.
This always makes it odd to read about narratives that go about people's connection to family land. It is almost anti American in how we were founded and grew. I know we have a few estates that are named and known. Is that a larger number than I realize?
American descendants of loyalists often hide their roots.
I know this because my grandmother told me a few years before she passed that her father, a mason and devoted patriot, once confided a scandalous family secret: there are loyalists in our family tree.
Sadly, grandma's research never got her to the root of this claim despite much research, but thanks to online resources and some helpful Canadians, I discovered the truth.
Grandma's grandfather had emigrated from New Brunswick, Canada, during the Civil War, in which he served the Union.
It turns out his great-grandfather was a captain in the Queen's Guard during the American revolution, born in Connecticut. He and his wife and children had fled after the war with other loyalists to New Brunswick, Canada. They suffered many deprivations, although the loyalist commission board compensated them about half their worldly goods they lost in America.
This captain had married a woman whose brother fought for the Americans at Bunker Hill.
While researching my grandmother's grandfather from Canada, I discovered a telling white lie: he would tell the local busybody newspaper that he was visiting his sister in New York. Thing is, he had no sister in New York. Instead, I discovered the Canadian newspapers not long after were reporting he had arrived from America to visit his sister in New Brunswick.
I was blown away by all this rich history, but when I shared my discoveries with all the remaining family on that side, nobody expressed excitement. In fact, the one person who used to call me up to discuss family history, stopped calling me.