The American Revolution has been critical to world history as it helped shape the standard for world most renown systems of governance. While it marked the end of the British rule in their former colonies, it also laid the foundations of a strong Republic. Despite the generally assumed homogeneity among the social forces that fought the American Revolution and their advocacy for a just and equalitarian society, we have remained skeptical about the changes it potentially brought. The purpose of this study is to investigate radicalism of the American Revolution. To conduct this research, we have used a three-dimensional approach combining descriptive and qualitative research methodologies along with a theoretical framework based on power, interest and the realist theory. This unbiased work, taking a contrasting and comparative approach to track the so-called changes between pre- and post-revolutionary America, shows that the Founding Fathers had more in common with British aristocrats than the common men they pretended to defend. It also shows that Revolutionary America was in a state of civil war as it was divided between pro and anti-revolution factions. Thus, the assumption according to which this was a People’s Revolution is severely endangered. In contrast to orthodox knowledge, this study posits that the American Revolution was not radical as far as governance and the social make up are concerned. It approaches this uprising as part of a class struggle to change home rule for self-interest on the part of the Founding Fathers. It has never been People’s Revolution

Keywords: Founding Fathers, American Revolution, Monarchy, democracy, elite, corruption, interest, power, realist theory, equality, justice, aristocracy