TEXT C Some recent historians
have argued that life in the British colonies in America from approximately 1763
to 1789 was marked by internal conflicts among colonists. Inheritors of some of
the viewpoins of early twentieth century Progressive historians such as Beard
and Becker, these recent historians have put forward arguments that deserve
evaluation. The kind of conflict most emphasized by these
historians is class conflict. Yet with the Revolutionary War dominating these
years, how does one distinguish class conflict within that larger conflict
Certainly not by the side a person supported. Although many of these historians
have accepted the earlier assumption the Loyalists represented an upper class,
new evidence indicates that Loyalists, like rebels, were drawn from all
socioeconomic class. (It is nonetheless probably true that a larger percentage
of the well-to-de joined the Loyalists than joined the rebels.) Looking at the
rebels side, we find little evidence for the contention that lower-class rebels
were in conflict with upper-class rebels. Indeed, the war effort against Britain
tended to suppress class conflicts. Where it did not, the disputing rebels of
one or another class usually became Loyalists. Loyalism thus operated as a
safety valve to remove socioeconomic discontent that existed among the rebels.
Disputes occurred, of course, among those who remained on the rebel side, but
the extraordinary social mobility of eighteenth-century American society (with
the obvious exception of slaves) usually prevented such disputes from hardening
along class lines. Social structure was in fact so fluid thought recent
statistics suggest a narrowing of economic opportunity as the latter half of the
century progressed -- that to talk about social classes at all requires the use
of loose economic categories such as rich, poor, and middle class, or
eighteenth-century designations like "the better sort". Despite these vague
categories one should not claim unequivocally that hostility between
recognizable classes cannot be legitimately observed. Outside of New York,
however, there were very few instances of openly expressed class
antagonism. Having said this, however, one must add that there
is much evidence to support the further claim of recent historians that
sectional conflicts were common between 1763 and 1789. The "Paxton Boys"
incident and the Regulator movement arc representative examples the widespread,
and justified, discontent of western settlers against colonial or state
governments dominated by eastern interests. Although undertones of class
conflict existed beneath such hostility, the opposition was primarily
geographical. Sectional conflict -- which also existed between North and South
-- deserves further investigation. In summary, historians must
be careful about the kind of conflict they emphasize in eighteenth-century
America. Yet those who stress the achievement of a general consensus among the
colonists cannot fully understand the consensus without understanding the
conflicts that had to be overcome or repressed in order to reach it. The author considers the contentions made by the recent historians discussed in the ______.passage to be ______.
A.potentially verifiable B.partially justified C.logically contradictory D.ingenious but flawed