Buying goods “made in USA” was not at all a recent
movement or concept, but has its roots as far back as the American Revolution.
As economic tyranny continued to increase through the British System of
economics or mercantilism, the cry rose near and far in the colonies to
purchase “homespun” goods produced domestically. Naturally, such encouragement
was spread between family members, neighbors, and friends, but it was also
proposed through the newspapers. On June 15, 1769, the South-Carolina Gazette printed that the “Societies of Gentlemen”
intended “to purchase no kind of British goods that could be manufactured in
America and to clothe themselves in homespun as soon as it could be got.”[1] The
purchasing of domestically manufactured products not only stimulated the
colonial economy, but it also encouraged women’s participation in the movement
for greater self-government in America.
This homespun movement was a boycott that not only unified
the wealthy and the poor together on a common cause, but it also assisted in empowering
the women in American society. The push for homespun goods brought women to the
forefront of a political movement, which helped to set the stage for future
reformist movements spearheaded by women’s groups throughout United States
history. This seed of democracy and self-government contributed to the
political and cultural change that helped to define America. The economic plan
to buy American manufactured products allowed women to play “a vital and
increasingly visible role, as both purchasers and producers of household
goods.”[2] As
women became more involved in the affairs of American government, and as the
spirit of liberty increased, so did their participation and influence in the
movement of independence.
[1]
E. Stanly Godbold and Robert Hilliard Woody, Christopher Gadsden and the American Revolution, (Knoxville:
University of Tennessee Press, 1982), 82.
[2]
Alfred Fabian Young and Gregory H. Nobles, Whose
American Revolution Was it? Historians Interpret the Founding, (New York:
New York University Press, 2011), 237.
No comments:
Post a Comment