The article “From Folklore to Revolution: Charivaris and the Lower Canada Rebellion of 1837”, written by Allan Greer, is what I chose to criticize. The thesis written by the author goes back to the same point, that is, that the charivaris were an apparatus used by the Canadians of the Lower to rebel against the colonial government of the time. The argument used by Greer to support his thesis was that the charivari were employed more or less to eradicate local government administration. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay "By the second week of November there was, for all intents and purposes, no official government presence in most of the populous rural parishes of the borough of Montreal, and an elective judiciary and militia began to operate at the its place.” This quote represents the power of the political charivari towards the end, but the first signs of this were explained earlier in the article. “The central development of this period, which led inexorably to armed conflict, was the collapse of the 'local administration in the countryside of western Lower Canada.' This quote explains how the political charivari were successful in their mission to overthrow local governments. It also shows the violent side of the political charivari. another statement in support of his thesis was: “The governor responded to this flagrant defiance by firing 'disloyal' magistrates and officials. Denouncing this move as further evidence of British tyranny, the patriots who held the Queen's office but who had been overlooked in the purge made a grand show of resignation. The actions committed by the charivaris led to the further disintegration of the local administration run by government officials. The political charivari rebelled to the point that government officials were asked to resign as the charivari were disrupting their lives to the point that that was the only option. This was supported in the article where he stated: “They were all appointed by the governor but they were definitely members of the communities they administered. Indeed, the inhabitants found various ways to “domesticate” officials who appeared in theory to be agents of an external power.” Another point in support of the author's thesis is that “There were many loyalists who tried to maintain their positions, even in areas where the population was mostly hostile to the government. From the patriots' point of view, these resisters were willing agents of despotism and rebels against emerging local regimes.” This shows that the political charivari were considered a strong rising power as there were not many officials left and those who did were seen as enemies by all. Returning to the author's thesis, the charivaris of 1837 were a tool used against the colonial government of Lower Canada and this was done by them by eradicating the local administration in great strides. The author's main argument is that the people of Lower Canada agreed with the use of charivari for political reasons. This point was not explored further by the author until he went on to explain the Rebellion of 1837. The first time he mentioned this event was on page 10 when he said “The Lower Canada Crisis of 1837, which culminated in the armed insurrection of November and December of that year, was born out of the campaign for colonial autonomy and democratic reform led by the middle-class radicals of the “Patriot Party.” Thanks above all to the substantial electoral support of the majority of the French-Canadian population, these liberal politicians succeeded in.
tags