In the late 1600’s there was an issue between the upper class merchants and the lower class plebeians. Jacob Leisler a militia officer created a government amidst the protestant revolt. They assumed power and attempted to stop the merchants from receiving illegal profits from trade which they were not paying customs on. This group rioted and even attacked personal property of New York’s wealthiest Merchants.The royal governor arrived, Leisler had to forfeit the government. Leisler was arrested and found guilty for treason.
Although Leisler was unsuccessful in his attempt to change the unfair economic advantage the merchants had, he did change society in a different way. He brought the idea of rioting as a way to argue and oppose certain ideas. Riots still go on today, although in a more mild state, it is still an efficient and effective way of mobilizing and opposing “the man”. Gilje also speaks about rioting in the early stages of revolutionary New York.
I do agree with you. Jacob Leisler’s unsuccesfullness is overshawdowed by the fact that he paved the way for riots. The riot in New Amsterdam was a particularly important event in the American revolution. His effect was indirect but nonetheless relevant. I would rate it an 8