*R* The War of Independance Was a Social Revolution

Gordon Wood Argument Analysis

Gordon Wood’s viewpoint is obvious in his article the War for Independence Was a Social Revolution. This article is also very well written and thought out presenting its argument and attempting to persuade the readers of this article to change their own viewpoint on American History. But he did not persuade this reader. Although this piece is very well written with cited sources to support his argument he did not support his own overarching ideas with historical evidence.

One motif to his argument is that you cannot compare the American Revolution, to that of the French or Russian Revolution. His reason for this is basically because they are not the same type. It was to my understanding that when you compare things you compare apples to apples or in this case revolution to revolution. But what Gordon Wood is saying is that you cannot compare these because it would be like comparing red apples to green apples. A revolution is a revolution so comparing which is more radical than the other should not matter because the implications are different.

A simple analysis of his title could also bring a close to an argument. A social revolution is the same as a revolution of the society which means that something or many things radically changed to affect the social climate and hierarchy. Now let’s be honest even Gordon Wood states that those in power stayed in power. Gordon Wood says that class did not matter to the people in this time. He cited the likes of Algernon Sidney, Stephen Hopkins, and John Adams great American politicians. Who would give these wealthy citizens the right to distinguish if social hierarchy existed or not they were already near the top of the social ladder why would class matter to them?

His use of sources also very much benefits his argument as well. But consider his sources. Wealthy whites who could read and write. This shows distinct bias which leads me to question the validity of this article. But what truly turned my off from his argument was the excerpt from Edmund S. Morgan who supports Wood’s argument about the revolution. This is just telling me that Wood’s argument for why he is correct is because an important guy from Yale says he is right.

Now Gordon Wood’s article is very well written don’t get me wrong he just does not persuade me into believing in the Social Revolution. He does make a very good point that the American Revolution did bring people together under one identity as a society which they were all Americans. This was the focal point of his argument so if he changed the name of his article to The War for Independence Was a Revolution of Social Identity my point of view would be very much different.