you know, given the prevalence of these "free trade" agreements, which are of course consciously designed to enslave the rest of the world into producing good to import to america, it's ironic to consider the role that america's place as an import driven market played in the revolution. that is to say that a big part of the reason that the landholders revolted was that they were denied a local market by being forced to compete with imported goods from elsewhere in the empire.

it plays back into the narrative about the revolution being a civil war in the british empire. those local landowners are now transnationals that are integrated with their british counterparts. recreating that condition of local landowners seeking more power would require a redistribution of wealth that is itself revolutionary. for that reason, those conditions cannot recreate themselves.

just a reminder that, liberal rhetoric notwithstanding, this is the first thing the united states actually did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_Act_of_1789