# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference between the two excerpts was the manner in which the author's described the rebellion against the act. Schweikart was more calm and generalized about the protest but Zinn was very to the point and listed in detail as to what happened  to go against the Stamp Act.
B) The Boston Tea party is an example of a historical event that could support Schweikart point of view, because they formed groups that disagreed with the taxes and conducted a rebellion similar to the one mentioned in his excerpt.
C) One event that could support Zinn's point of view was the Townshed Duties, because the colonies were very explicit and obvious in their rebellion and lit fires like Zinn discussed in rebellion to the Stamp Act.

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference was that while Zinn had this calm tone of what he was talking about. Zinn spoke of the people's point of view and how they felt. Schweikart was talking like the mob had been a "ever-expanding horde" and had more description words to intensify his bias.

B) A piece of evidence that was not explicitly used could be one of the reports from a colony official that details how awful the raiding hordes of colonists were.

C) This piece of evidence could have been a bystander's written documentation of what the people of the colonists were like after the Stamp Act was enacted and how they were after the raiding of "rich" people's houses.

# data[].attributes.body
a) The major difference between the two interpretations is that in Schweikart´s interpretation he explains how each organization was being affected and how the political aspect of the violence was greater than the economic aspect. In Zinnś response he describes how the rich peopleś homes were being pilaged and destroyed to eliminate the distinction between the rich and poor.
b) Because Schweikart knew that the retaliation from the people would be brutal and impactful, an example of this retaliation is shown in the Boston Tea Party. They did this because the tea was heavily taxed by the British government and they wanted to get their message across.
c) To support Zinnś response to the Stamp Act the Boston Massacre was a result of the violence against the wealthy people.

# data[].attributes.body
thanks for sharing your work! clutched up fr

# data[].attributes.headline
from,hejkhgjvdsbzxjgfvxk,gnvk f,xnxkg,bvn fxckuhgnbvkxilkgbhn mojo mgn vim,hn vamp,nujvm hn umm ,hbvjdhcxbxjgvfgf cxbtg fvc

# data[].attributes.subject
from,hejkhgjvdsbzxjgfvxk,gnvk f,xnxkg,bvn fxckuhgnbvkxilkgbhn mojo mgn vim,hn vamp,nujvm hn umm ,hbvjdhcxbxjgvfgf cxbtg fvc

# data[].attributes.body
 Provide ONE event or development NOT included in the excerpts and briefly explain how it supports Zinn’s interpretation.

# data[].attributes.body
goobaginggongtukatasogeragter

# data[].attributes.body
nutsack lol

# data[].attributes.body
Briefly explain ONE difference between Zinn’s and Schweikart and Allen’s interpretations. 

# data[].attributes.body
hi

# data[].attributes.body
poop lol

# data[].attributes.body
A) A major difference between Schweikart and Zinn was that Schweikart was talking about the threat that the mob had and how they could be  dangerous, while Zinn was more mellow and was simply writing about what the mob did to rebel and serve justice
B) The Boston tea party was another way the colonists rebelled against unfairness and taxation of the British, it is similar because both events the colonists are resisting by taking away the British resources and their wealth
C) Another piece of evidence could be a diary or journal of a colonist or someone in the mob who rebelled and torn down the wealth peoples houses

# data[].attributes.body
Stop!!
Should you really be looking at this?
Are you cheating by doing this?
Would it be better to go outside and enjoy life rather than study for a class???
The answer is up to you

just be aware that you are being watched, whether by a fly or a dog or a cat, you are being watched.

You don't need to look at these answers to be great in life. Do what you do best. Enjoy doing the things your good at.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Schweikart and Zinn had similar but clashing views in a way. As Schweikart described the Sons of Liberty as a patriots organization Zinn called them a mob.
B) For example, the Boston Tea Party was an event done by the Sons of Liberty protesting the Tea Act basically saying they can't be taxed without proper representation in parliament and their reasoning makes them early patriots of the colonies supporting Schweikart's interpretation.
C) The Battle of Golden Hill was an altercation between the Sons of Liberty and British Soldiers, the battle supports Zinn because while it spreads a patriotic agenda it is non peaceful making them more like vigilantes or a mob.

# data[].attributes.body
A)  One major difference between the two are the was Zinn focuses more over about the violent acts between the rich and poor and Schweikarts the conflicts between Great Britain and the colonists.

B)The people of the colonies were tired of being as side-ways dirt like second rate trash while the rich were receiving all types of benefits that the poor are struggling to get what they need to provide for their families or just themselves  alone.
C)

# data[].attributes.body
(a) Zinn's interpretation was definitely more detailed and had a lot of charged phrases and words throughout the passage.
b)One piece of historical evidence not mentioned in Schweikart's interpretation is the fact that shoemaker Ebenezer Macintosh led the mob in the destroying of rich houses in Boston.
(c) A piece of historical evidence that could be used to support Zinn's interpretation is the fact that there were actual organizations that would get together in order to specifically harass stamp agents and cause havoc.

# data[].attributes.body
A) A major difference between the two interpretations can be seen through their interpretations of the rebellious acts. Schweikart appealed and sympathized more towards the colonies as he accounted for the reasons behind rebellion; on the other hand,  Zinn portrayed the colonists to be savage-like and almost criminals that wish to start more confrontation.
B) The Boston Massacre is a specific event that could support Schwekart's argument. This event shows how colonists taunted and threw rocks at the British guards (but ultimately paid the price of death).
C) The development of the Continental Congress can be used to support Zinn's argument. The Continental Congress mandated and planned colonial action (or rebellion).

# data[].attributes.body
A historical pice of evidence not exactly explained in the excerpts is what the actual appearance of the British army troops and what they were really in America for. Britain said they had placed troops in American colonies for protection, but colonists believed that they were there only to secure the dependence on Great Britain. Colonists started to wonder why the troops weren't positioned closer to the Indians if that was what they were in America to do; protect the colonies from Indians.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Some of the difference between the two was that Schweikart talks more about the violence that was going on and happening and Zinn talks more about the possitive effects it had.
B) The Boston Tea Party is an example  of how the colonists rebelled.

# data[].attributes.body
a) A major difference between Howard Zinn had discussed the more mellifluous

# data[].attributes.body
a) Schweikart gives a general description of what the Sons of the Liberty did, which doesn't seem as bad as in Zinn's description. Zinn is very descriptive and detailed in terms of the what the Sons of Liberty did which leads me to believe that he is biased for the British
b) Benjamin Franklin was a member of the Sons of Liberty and could verify Schweikart's interpretation. The Boston Tea Party could also verify Schweikart's interpretation because the Sons of Liberty was a big part of that.
c) Thomas Hutchinson

# data[].attributes.body
a) The major difference between the two interpretations is that in Schweikart´s interpretation he explains how each organization was being affected and how the political aspect of the violence was greater than the economic aspect. In Zinnś response he describes how the rich peopleś homes were being pilaged and destroyed to eliminate the distinction between the rich and poor.
b) Because Schweikart knew that the retaliation from the people would be brutal and impactful, an example of this retaliation is shown in the Boston Tea Party. They did this because the tea was heavily taxed by the British government and they wanted to get their message across.
c) To support Zinnś response to the Stamp Act the Boston Massacre was a result of the violence against the wealthy people.

# data[].attributes.body
a) One difference between Howard Zi

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference was that Schweikart interpretation was the people were acting violent for a reason that was not valid in his eyes, he believe the things that were taking place were for political reasons and the people should not have responded in that way. But Zinn on the other hand, thought that the people had a valid reason for doing what they were doing. Yes these acts were violent but that was the point. The people were trying to get their point across and trashing the hosues of rich people was the only way they saw most effective.

B) The people in the colonies were sick and tired of rich people getting all of the benefits while they were struggling to get basic needs. If they're so rich then why can they not help the poor people out a little.

C) The poor people in the colonies felt as though acting violent was the only way for the rich people to realize they wanted more out of life and they were either going to help them or suffer as well.

# data[].attributes.body
Zinn and Schweikart had extremely contrasting views of the results of the stamp act. Schweikart believed that these colonists were acting very violent for unnecessary reasons while Zinn knew that these protests were justified in order for the colonists to gain independence because the British now knew that the colonists were attempting to rid the British soldiers out of the colonies. Zinn most likely refer to the Continental Congress because this was the first time that the colonists decided to formally make their own opinions in an organized matter. It was used to resist Great Britain and the fact that they would not allow elected officials from the colonies serve in their government. Schweikart would use the Townshend Acts in his support that the colonists needed to be taxed in order to pay for the British soldiers in the colonies. Prior to this, British citizens were taxed 26 times more than colonists.

# data[].attributes.body
a) A major difference in the two excerpts is the point of view. The passage by Schweikart seemed to be more of a view against authorities and Zin's was more directed towards the rich folk living among them.
b)Due to a rise in taxation because of government affairs, the people committed and act known as the Boston Tea party.
c) Another reason might be that the rich white people had all of the rights and say whilst the other didn't have a say in anything, causing many biased responses.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Schweikart was very factual and simplistic with his writing. He doesn't seem to give a positive or negative connotation. Zinn seems more angry about it and he is more descriptive with the violence.
B) The Boston Tea Party was not stated in the passage however it supports Schweikart because it would cost those who made the colonists pay for the war expenses. Since, Schweikart was a patriot, the Boston Tea Party would be evidence to support him.
C) Evidence to support Zinn would be how the colonists were angry at England for placing all the war cost onto them, so any account from a colonist of that time, could support Zinn because he had been talking about the anger of the colonists and what it caused.

# data[].attributes.body
Zinn interprets uprisings following the Stamp Act of 1765 as an event influenced more by tension and resentment between the lower and middle class, whereas Schweikart attributes these uprisings more to colonial fear of indefinitely expanding taxation that they had no means to stop. In essence, Zinn focuses on the inter-colonial tension, while Schweikart focuses on the tension between the colonies and Britain. Schweikarts supports his interpretation with the actions of the Sons of Liberty at the time, and his interpretation can be further supported by other events of the time such as the Boston Tea Party. Colonists in this time period were clearly fed up with British taxation, and in revolt, disguised themselves as Indians and dumped a shipment from Britain of tea into the harbor. Zinn supports his interpretation with the burning of Thomas Hutchinson's house, and can be supported further by analyzing Enlightenment inspired views prevalent at the time, which can be seen in works such as John Locke's Two Treatises of Government. The general point of these views was that all men were equal, and so mistreated lower classes with these beliefs revolting is almost inevitable.

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference was that Schweikart who was an American Patriot wrote more about everything together as what both the colonist and the British did, and Zinn who was a "peoples historian" wrote about only what the colonists did through the destruction that was decided by the "sons of Liberty". Zinn seemed more biased towards the British as he only talked about the destruction over the British law enforcers, as Schweikart focused on both sides of the arguments and didn't seem to focus on one side more than the other as bad.
B) As Schweikart was a Patriot of the United States, he believed that because of the Stamp Act, which had cause many colonists anger, that it would be inevitable that they would show retaliation. One way they showed retaliation that wasn't mentioned against the British was the Boston Tea party, which happened because the British decided to tax the Tea which is the main form of drinking in the colonies, and they would put the money towards England instead of the colonies. In retaliation the colonies burned and destroyed all the British ships filled with the goods of Tea.
C)

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference between the two excerpts was that each author described the events differently. Schweikart wrote more about the violence of the event, say that they engaged in violence and intimidation of English officials, while Zinn's excerpt goes into more detail and explains more.
B) Schweikart was a patriot who thought that rebellion/resistance was bound to happen. During this time period the Boston tea party occurred.

# data[].attributes.body
a.) one major difference was that schweikart talks about the Great Britain and the colonists. He brought up the Sons of liberty and how the juries refused to convict members of the sons of liberty which revealed that the colonist  saw nothing wrong. The first one had less details and the second one had details against the colonist and their class level.
b.) the Boston tea party could help support his interpretation.
c.)

# data[].attributes.body
A)

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference between the two excerpts is that Zin focuses more on the idea that the Stamp Act led to retaliation on wealthy merchants, whereas Schweikart focused on the political impact that retaliations against the Stamp Act caused.

B) A piece of evidence that can support Schweikart's interpretation is the fact that this was one of many acts that attempted to tax the colonists even though they had no representation in Parliament, which spark most of the outrage against Britain

C) A piece of evidence that supports Zin's interpretation is the fact that colonist would purposely start conflicts with those who supported the British even pushing redcoats too far, which led to incidents such as the Boston Massacre.

# data[].attributes.body
a) A major difference in interpretations is that Schweikart was mainly describing the difference groups that started to take action and why they did so. Zinn's interpretation was based solely on the aspect of how violent and destructive these people were and what the did to the riches homes. He based his insight on the re-precautions taken upon the riches homes instead of focusing on the different groups and how their reactions stood apart fom other's.

# data[].attributes.body
a). One major difference is Schweikart's interpretation is very bias to one side and Zinn explained the point of view of the people from that time.
b). Evidence that is missing from Schweikart's interpretation is the reasons why the act were happening and what good it brought.
c). Zinn could have used the Boston massacre

# data[].attributes.body
A- One of the reasons there was a difference between Schweikart and Zinn is because Zinn was much calmer and didn't get scared or nervous

# data[].attributes.body
a) One difference is the Schweikart talks more about the violence side and Zinn talks about the more positive actions that were taken.
b)The Boston tea party when they threw all the tea into the harbor because the British were taxing so much.
c)Anything the could be documentation of this time period.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Howard Zin wrote a more violent view of the Stamp Act, Schweikart was more the forming of the Sons of Liberty. It was a violent outcome versus a formed protest against the stamp harassers.
B) "Sympathetic colonial juries then refused to convict members of the Sons of Liberty," which was basically they can't go against them but they can't harm their work either. This group was formed out of a protest.
C) While  Zin states what has happened because of this Act, "They smashed up his house with axes, drank the wine in his wine cellar, and looted the house of its furniture and other objects." He should the violent outcome of this through this piece of text.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Howard Zinn spoke of the protests of the colonists in a collected manner, as if giving a report of the damages caused. In contrast, Schweikart delves more into the causes of the events.
B) The colonists began boycotting heavily-taxed British imports. One of the most famous of these protests was the Boston Tea Party, as it is a prime example of the discontent the colonists felt.
C) Zinn's interpretation presented the protest as an organized attack. A less violent example of an organized protest from the colonists was the creation of documents declaring their rights, expressing political opinions that differed from Britain in the newspapers, and other organized "attacks" on the British government.

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference between the two was that Schweikart was trying to inflict fear by talking about how dangerous the mob was and how much of a threat they were to innocents, while Zinn was much calmer and was only stating what the people had done to rebel. Zinn also explains their thought process and their reasoning while Schweikart did not.
B) Since Schweikart was telling the patriot's side of the story, it would make sense that he was in favor or the acts that Britain was passing, such as the Stamp Act or the Navigation Act,  that were angering the colonists. Therefore, he wouldn't be able to tell what the rebels were thinking and he would naturally sound afraid because his people were being targeted.
C) Likewise, since Zinn is speaking for the people, he's going to be able to better explain the colonist's reasoning. The "rebels" were frustrated by the Acts the Britain was passing, so it makes sense that they would want to do something. The colonists would have been smart enough to plan these raids ahead of time so that the would be calm and collected. This explains why Zinn's article has a much more calm approach.

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference between the two excerpts was the manner in which the author's described the rebellion against the act. Schweikart was more calm and generalized about the protest but Zinn was very to the point and listed in detail as to what happened  to go against the Stamp Act.
B) The Boston Tea party is an example of a historical event that could support Schweikart point of view, because they formed groups that disagreed with the taxes and conducted a rebellion similar to the one mentioned in his excerpt.
C) One event that could support Zinn's point of view was the Townshed Duties, because the colonies were very explicit and obvious in their rebellion and lit fires like Zinn discussed in rebellion to the Stamp Act.

# data[].attributes.body
a). One major difference would be that Schweikart’s was describing how it affect other people like the main people "Colonists", not just the rich like Zinn was talking about. Zinn also talks about how this money from the act was used to pay for the French war while also showing how it affected Thomas Hutchinson's house.
b).
c). One other piece of evidence would be Enlightenment this state of time helped them think more towards others and themselves. This allowed others to  rethink options and ideas, think of their rights as a citizen, and think of how there governments were towards them. They were able to think clearer towards their ideas and such as citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
A) One major difference was that while Zinn had this calm tone of what he was talking about. Zinn spoke of the people's point of view and how they felt. Schweikart was talking like the mob had been a "ever-expanding horde" and had more description words to intensify his bias.

B) A piece of evidence that was not explicitly used could be one of the reports from a colony official that details how awful the raiding hordes of colonists were.

C) This piece of evidence could have been a bystander's written documentation of what the people of the colonists were like after the Stamp Act was enacted and how they were after the raiding of "rich" people's houses.

# data[].attributes.body
A) A major difference between the two excerpts was that Zinn's response focused more on the details of the violent acts. Schweikart, however, talked more about the different the tension between the British and Colonists.
B) An example of a historical event could be the Boston Tea party. It could support Schweikart's side because Schweikart thinks the Stamp act was more on British control.
C) An example of a historical event that could support Zinn's point of view is the Boston Massacre. Zinn's focuses on the violence that occurred, such as the raids.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Shweikart explained that the colonists viewed the stamp act as a system that is not needed for the success of their society, where as Zinn believed it was needed for economic growth however the colonists still disagreed.
B) The Introduction of parliament led the colonists to believe that they were not specifically classified as English citizens when they lived in the New World. Leading them to revolt to prove that they were English citizens and prove that the taxes were unethical.
C.) The actions of the colonial settlers began to show that they believed the rule England had over them was very improper especially when the colonies were mostly self functioning and only relied on England for certain unobtainable items.

# data[].attributes.body
A) A major difference between Schweikart and Zinn was that Schweikart was talking about the threat that the mob had and how they could be  dangerous, while Zinn was more mellow and was simply writing about what the mob did to rebel and serve justice
B) The Boston tea party was another way the colonists rebelled against unfairness and taxation of the British, it is similar because both events the colonists are resisting by taking away the British resources and their wealth
C) Another piece of evidence could be a diary or journal of a colonist or someone in the mob who rebelled and torn down the wealth peoples houses

# data[].attributes.body
a) One major difference between the two was that Zinn wrote more about  the protests and the destructiveness. Schweikart on the other hand talks more about the political side of it.
b) An example of a historical event that would support Schweikart is the Boston Tea Party. They colonists were being very heavily taxed for British goods such as tea. The Boston Tea Party was a situation similar to the Stamp act.