Yeah lets forget about taxation without representation, being forced to quarter troops in your home, being controlled from thousands of miles away, and the Boston Massacre. It was all corporations. Got it.
The Boston Massacre was mostly propaganda to unite a bunch of colonists that weren't all that convinced that the King was such a bad guy... and it didn't work out that well as propaganda goes; most colonists (i.e. more than 50%) weren't convinced that war with England was the right thing to do.
The stories behind the other cases you cite are similarly murky. The US has been manufacturing consent since before it was born.
The common people of the colonies were likely in a situation very similar to where ordinary citizens today are when deciding between Google/FB/etc. and the NSA. Distrustful of both sides, but more inclined to go with the weaker of them, because then they'd be less fucked over.
> Distrustful of both sides, but more inclined to go with the weaker of them
Well, globally weaker and more locally powerful. Strength probably wasn't the decision criteria at all for those who chose the rebel side, it was probably perceived accountability: the local governments that were represented by the signers and which revolted were all accountable to the local population, the British government was not.
