1. What made the Filipino insurrection "far different than any conflict in which Americans had previously fought"?
The Filipino insurrection was "far different than any conflict in which Americans had previously fought" for many reasons. As the reading states, "Rather then confronting an organized army, as they had in Cuba, U.S soldiers faced a quick striking guerrilla movement. The rules of war that generally prevailed in battles involving western nations were largely ignored" So basically, our soldiers were suddenly using a completely different tactic then they were used to, so this easily could have been difficult to adapt to, never mind attempt to fight by.
2. Why were African-Americans among the strongest critics of the war against the Filipino nationalists?
African-Americans are among the strongest critics of the war against the Filipino nationalists because the Filipino nationalists recognized them as different then the White-Americans just as their own country did.The African-Americans wanted to be looked at as equals to the whites, so when "Filipino nationalists openly played on the racial divisions within the U.S. army" it made the African-American soldiers be reminded of how badly they were discriminated against by their own country.
3. Why did the United States lose its appetite for imperialism in the early 1900s?
The United States lost it's appetite for imperialism in the early 1900's for a lot of reasons. One of these reasons could simply be, Mark Twain. Mark Twain was a very popular writer in the early 1900's, he was pretty much, anti-imperialist. His works of literature could have swayed the views of some readers. More importantly, there were many complications when it came to creating an empire. People didn't know what rights the Filipinos had as being part of the United States, and other such complications. Even Roosevelt who originally was all for the empire said "the people of the United States were not prepared to accept the burdens of an empire" so the United States abandoned the idea of taking on this "burden"
4. How did the United States contribute to the development of Cuba and Puerto Rico?
The United States contributed to the development of Cuba and Puerto Rico by doing many different things. First of all, American technology was advancing, "and administrative expertise contributed to rapid development on the islands" For example, roads and telephone lines were built, which obviously helped with the development of these islands. In addition, in 1912 the United States granted Puerto Ricans U.S. citizenship. U.S. citizenship granted them numerous rights which could easily help development. Also in 1917, the U.S. made Puerto Rico a U.S. territory, which is advantageous because they would have the protection of our military and country, which can help them grow as a territory without fear of other countries.
5. why did many Cubans come to resent the U.S. presence on their island?
Many Cubans came to resent the U.S. presence on their island for a few reasons. The first reason being that "When Cuba's national assembly issued a call for immediate independence in1900, the McKinley administration sought to slow the momentum of Cuban nationalism" Another reason for their resentment is because Cuba could only have independence with a whole bunch of limitations, which wouldn't technically make them independent...Some of these limitations included overseeing Cuban economy and veto power over foreign policy.
6. Do you believe the United States was imperialist? why or why not?
I do believe the United States was imperialist. We may have said that we were giving up on the empire because of all of the complications and some other reasons, but we were still very much imperialist. When we took control over Purto Rico and Cuba, well that's just it, we were making an empire. Not only that but we were trying to control them and still had many complications which is the reason why we didn't want an empire in the first place ! Lastly, when we said we were giving independence to Cuba, for example, we weren't actually letting them be their own country, we still had many limitation on them and weren't letting them really be free.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Sunday, December 4, 2011
The Spanish-American War
1. How was the United States connected to Cuba in the 1890s?
The United States was connected to Cuba in the 1890's for multiple reasons. To start off, the United States has always been interested in taking Cuba in as part of the United States, to become a major slave territory; President Polk even tried to buy Cuba from Spain in 1848. But more recently, the United States is connected to Cuba in the 1890's because the United States removed the tariffs off of Cuban Sugar. As the reading says, " The United States was also by far the largest consumer of Cuban Sugar. In 1890, the United states removed tariffs on Cuban sugar, entering the American market, making it less expensive to buy the sugar in the united states. The legislation boosted the fortunes of both the overall Cuban economy and American investors on the island"
2. What were the main reasons the United States intervened in Cuba? (i.e. went to war) Which reason do you believe was most important? Explain your answer.
The main reasons the United States intervened in Cuba were that Cuba was revolting, this was posing a major threat to the Cuban economy because of so many orders for farmers, sugar growers, etc. were being ordered to not sell most of their products. "By 1898, Gomez had brought the Cuban economy to a standstill" Another reason why the United States intervened in Cuba is because the Spanish ambassador to the United States had accidentally gotten a letter published that was meant for only his friend. In the letter, it called the President of the United States at the time, McKinley, "weak" Lastly, there was the explosion of the "Maine" ship vessel that had been anchored in Havana harbor. The ship "was ripped apart by a tremendous explosion on the night of February 15" Eventually it was proven that this ship had been sunken by an underwater mine, but at the time, they believed it was the Spanish. The reason that I find most important is calling President McKinley weak. This is an insult to not only the president, but to the nation as a whole. If you insult the leader of something, you insult the followers as well. This easily could have made the United States actually feel weak if they decided to think the same as the Spanish, that their president was weak. This is easily the most important reason for the United States to intervene.
3. Why were many African-Americans eager to serve in the Spanish-American War?
So many African-Americans were eager to serve in the Spanish-American War because they simply wanted to try to show White-Americans that they were equal to them. According to the reading, "Many black leaders saw the war as an opportunity to elevate the status of blacks in the United States. They hoped the black participation in the fighting would win the African-American community new respect, and chip away the wall of discrimination" This is a very good quote to answer this question because it simply gives the exact answer to why African-Americans were so eager to serve in the Spanish- American war.
4. How did racial attitudes at the turn of the century shape American peceptions of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines?
Racial attitudes at the turn of the century helped shaped American perceptions of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, by there already being ideas of what the citizens of these islands were like. As the reading states, "in line with the racial stereotypes of the day, most American leaders had little hope for the blacks and Asians who lived in Cuba, Puerto rico, the Philippines, and Guam could be a force of progress. At the same time, the Spanish were thought of as backward and cruel." Because of the accusations made before even knowing of these people of these different islands, America thought that these people were not capable of having their own democracies, but were also in fear of having them as apart of the United States because they may have been a threat to the political system in America.
5. Why did Emilio Aguinaldo feel that the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence?
Emilio Aguinaldo felt that the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence because he pretty much planned to run a democracy. The United States was going to liberate the Philippines, but Emilio said that he was " the head of the temporary revolutionary government, and he planned to hold elections." Elections generally go along with the idea of democracy and that's what the United States was and still is run by politically. Also, seeing as the United States was planning on liberating the Philippines, Emilio being there as a leader would give the United States some peace at mind because there would be someone who is at least some what in charge in the Philippines, after they are no longer United States property.
6. Why do you think the Spanish-American War was called "a splendid little war" by an American diplomat at the time? Do you think we could have a "splendid little war" today? Explain your answer.
The Spanish-American war was called "a splendid little war" by an American diplomat at the time because it wasn't a really "bad" war. The war was rather short, in comparison to some other wars of our past and wars going on today, so the war being short, could make it "splendid" perhaps. Also, the United States weren't exactly forced into war. We weren't bombed or anything bad enough to make us go directly to war, but there were some reason as to why we did go to war. In addition, the United States pretty much got what they wanted. For example, when they liberated the Philippines, they had someone who was running to be a leader, so the Philippines would be free from the United States, but would also have some sense of authority. Overall, this was wasn't awful compared to many others and therefore could've been called "a splendid little war" Today, i don't think we could have "a splendid little war" because today we try to avoid war as much as possible, so we wouldn't go into war unless "forced to" unlike the Spanish-American war. Also, if the reason we went into war was pretty big, then the ending of the war would most likely not end anytime soon, meaning it couldn't be little or splendid.
The United States was connected to Cuba in the 1890's for multiple reasons. To start off, the United States has always been interested in taking Cuba in as part of the United States, to become a major slave territory; President Polk even tried to buy Cuba from Spain in 1848. But more recently, the United States is connected to Cuba in the 1890's because the United States removed the tariffs off of Cuban Sugar. As the reading says, " The United States was also by far the largest consumer of Cuban Sugar. In 1890, the United states removed tariffs on Cuban sugar, entering the American market, making it less expensive to buy the sugar in the united states. The legislation boosted the fortunes of both the overall Cuban economy and American investors on the island"
2. What were the main reasons the United States intervened in Cuba? (i.e. went to war) Which reason do you believe was most important? Explain your answer.
The main reasons the United States intervened in Cuba were that Cuba was revolting, this was posing a major threat to the Cuban economy because of so many orders for farmers, sugar growers, etc. were being ordered to not sell most of their products. "By 1898, Gomez had brought the Cuban economy to a standstill" Another reason why the United States intervened in Cuba is because the Spanish ambassador to the United States had accidentally gotten a letter published that was meant for only his friend. In the letter, it called the President of the United States at the time, McKinley, "weak" Lastly, there was the explosion of the "Maine" ship vessel that had been anchored in Havana harbor. The ship "was ripped apart by a tremendous explosion on the night of February 15" Eventually it was proven that this ship had been sunken by an underwater mine, but at the time, they believed it was the Spanish. The reason that I find most important is calling President McKinley weak. This is an insult to not only the president, but to the nation as a whole. If you insult the leader of something, you insult the followers as well. This easily could have made the United States actually feel weak if they decided to think the same as the Spanish, that their president was weak. This is easily the most important reason for the United States to intervene.
3. Why were many African-Americans eager to serve in the Spanish-American War?
So many African-Americans were eager to serve in the Spanish-American War because they simply wanted to try to show White-Americans that they were equal to them. According to the reading, "Many black leaders saw the war as an opportunity to elevate the status of blacks in the United States. They hoped the black participation in the fighting would win the African-American community new respect, and chip away the wall of discrimination" This is a very good quote to answer this question because it simply gives the exact answer to why African-Americans were so eager to serve in the Spanish- American war.
4. How did racial attitudes at the turn of the century shape American peceptions of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines?
Racial attitudes at the turn of the century helped shaped American perceptions of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, by there already being ideas of what the citizens of these islands were like. As the reading states, "in line with the racial stereotypes of the day, most American leaders had little hope for the blacks and Asians who lived in Cuba, Puerto rico, the Philippines, and Guam could be a force of progress. At the same time, the Spanish were thought of as backward and cruel." Because of the accusations made before even knowing of these people of these different islands, America thought that these people were not capable of having their own democracies, but were also in fear of having them as apart of the United States because they may have been a threat to the political system in America.
5. Why did Emilio Aguinaldo feel that the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence?
Emilio Aguinaldo felt that the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence because he pretty much planned to run a democracy. The United States was going to liberate the Philippines, but Emilio said that he was " the head of the temporary revolutionary government, and he planned to hold elections." Elections generally go along with the idea of democracy and that's what the United States was and still is run by politically. Also, seeing as the United States was planning on liberating the Philippines, Emilio being there as a leader would give the United States some peace at mind because there would be someone who is at least some what in charge in the Philippines, after they are no longer United States property.
6. Why do you think the Spanish-American War was called "a splendid little war" by an American diplomat at the time? Do you think we could have a "splendid little war" today? Explain your answer.
The Spanish-American war was called "a splendid little war" by an American diplomat at the time because it wasn't a really "bad" war. The war was rather short, in comparison to some other wars of our past and wars going on today, so the war being short, could make it "splendid" perhaps. Also, the United States weren't exactly forced into war. We weren't bombed or anything bad enough to make us go directly to war, but there were some reason as to why we did go to war. In addition, the United States pretty much got what they wanted. For example, when they liberated the Philippines, they had someone who was running to be a leader, so the Philippines would be free from the United States, but would also have some sense of authority. Overall, this was wasn't awful compared to many others and therefore could've been called "a splendid little war" Today, i don't think we could have "a splendid little war" because today we try to avoid war as much as possible, so we wouldn't go into war unless "forced to" unlike the Spanish-American war. Also, if the reason we went into war was pretty big, then the ending of the war would most likely not end anytime soon, meaning it couldn't be little or splendid.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Origins of America's Global Power
1. Identify five important changes that transformed America in the nineteenth century.
A. One of the first changes that transformed America in the 19th century was annexing Hawaii, Cuba, Guam, etc. This transformed America, not only physically because of new land mass, but also because it could've easily made us stronger as a nation. More land generally means more power, so these different lands being annexed could indirectly mean more power for America as a nation.
B. Another change that helped transform America in the 19th century was expanding in the westward region. These western lands held many natural resources that therefore provided great wealth to America. As the reading states, "and as a result the United States built up significant economic and political power" due to the resources we now had in the west.
C. A third change that helped transform America in the 19th century was immigration. Immigration obviously contributed to the large ethnic diversity that American began to develop as well as increasing the population of America.
D. A fourth chanfe that helped transform America in the 19th century was urban growth. Urban growth changed a lot of things in America. America was orginally populated by mostly farmers, and now, all of a sudden, it had tons of people living in cities and working in factories. This changed the lifestyles of the people of America because almost everyone had an occupation in a city and had given up agriculture.
E. Lastly, trade helped transform America in the 19th century. Trade helped America economically; with all the new advancements in manufacturing, farming became less and less necessary because products could be produced in new factories, more efficiently and most likely more cost efficient. So, not only did America exporting so many goods bring in money, but by producing goods through factories instead of old fashioned farming, it was also more cost efficient.
2. How did the economic depression that began in 1893 deepen the divisions in American society? Which groups suffered the most during the depression?
The economic depression that began in 1893 deepened the divisions in American society because it put many people who all had similar jobs, out of work. All of these people hada worked in manufactioning and facotries, and suddenly they were out of work because of the depression. This made people very worried and scared and "many saw labor strikes as one of the few ways they could gain recognition and control in their working lives" which generally only made things worse. All of these workers that once had a common job had to revert back to basics, to what they had before industilization. Most of all, the ones who were back to farming, or who had stayed in the occupation of farming, suffered so much during this depression. The farming market was already going downhill because so many people were depending on industry and factories, but when the depression hit, it became even worse then it already was.
3. What were the values many Americans attached to the frontier? Why did many Americans fear that the closing of the frontier would harm America's national character?
The values many Americans attached to the frontier were "resourcefullness, bravery, pragmatism, ingenuity, individualism, egalitrianism, and patriotism" according to the reading, were very closely realted values attached to the frontier. The closing of the frontier was a major concern, mostly to those from "old" families. Many people thought that without more land to explore, and without more resources to find that America would become a completely different place. Many thought that we would not be able to sustain our economic level without finding new resources in new lands, others thought that the values attached to the frontier would pretty much die out. They thought that values such as "resourcefulness" couldn't be kept alive if there were no new places with new resources.
4. Why did some Americans suggest greater involvement overseas?
Some Americans suggested greater involvement overseas, specifically in Chinese markets because of the large population and amount of consumers there. As the reading says, " Some buisnessmen and politicians believed that overseas expansion especially into Chinese markets would fuel economic growth" Simply, the amount of people overseas, could possibly be willing to buy American products and would obviously help the American economy. Also, Japan and Europe were starting to try to impose laws on China's trade, and Americans feared that if they didn't do the same then suddenly they would not be able to have any buissness in the Chinese markets which would not help the American economy at all.
5. How did the theories of social Darwinism and scientific racism lend support to the cause of American imperialism?
The theories of social Darwinism and scientific racism lended support to the cause of American imperialism because social Darwinism and scientific racism introduced the theory "survival of the fittest" This theory in supprt to the cause of social Darwinism was helpful because it simply stated that some people may have been born to rule and to be in control, while tohers who were inferior would die off. The theory of natural selection was involved in this, in the way that those who were meant to lead and had everything they needed to lead, would, while those whou didn't have the tools and advantages that others had, would not lead due to their lack of necessities. This is similar to natural selection because scientifically, natural selection states that those who are more suited to live will grow and reproduce with one who is also more suited to survive; therefore the population would easily become more "fit" while the less fit died off because they didn't have the advantages that some others had, just like social Darwinism.
6. Summarize why the United States became involved in Samoa, Hawaii, and several Latin American nations.
The united states became involved in Samoa, Hawaii, and several Latin American countries for a variety of reasons. These reasons were beneficial to the United States, take Hawaii for example. Hawaii was mainly occupied by the Japanese, and if we hadn't annexed it into the United States, we were worried that they would start demanding rights and perhaps take away our port at Pearl Harbor. Therefore, in order to avoid these inconvienences, the United States annexed Hawaii. Another reason why the United States became involved with many islands in the Pacific is because they were great pitstops. If Americans were on their way to Asia or Australlia, they had a place to stop if necessary. Also, these islands provided good resources to be sold by America to help increase American income and help our economy.
A. One of the first changes that transformed America in the 19th century was annexing Hawaii, Cuba, Guam, etc. This transformed America, not only physically because of new land mass, but also because it could've easily made us stronger as a nation. More land generally means more power, so these different lands being annexed could indirectly mean more power for America as a nation.
B. Another change that helped transform America in the 19th century was expanding in the westward region. These western lands held many natural resources that therefore provided great wealth to America. As the reading states, "and as a result the United States built up significant economic and political power" due to the resources we now had in the west.
C. A third change that helped transform America in the 19th century was immigration. Immigration obviously contributed to the large ethnic diversity that American began to develop as well as increasing the population of America.
D. A fourth chanfe that helped transform America in the 19th century was urban growth. Urban growth changed a lot of things in America. America was orginally populated by mostly farmers, and now, all of a sudden, it had tons of people living in cities and working in factories. This changed the lifestyles of the people of America because almost everyone had an occupation in a city and had given up agriculture.
E. Lastly, trade helped transform America in the 19th century. Trade helped America economically; with all the new advancements in manufacturing, farming became less and less necessary because products could be produced in new factories, more efficiently and most likely more cost efficient. So, not only did America exporting so many goods bring in money, but by producing goods through factories instead of old fashioned farming, it was also more cost efficient.
2. How did the economic depression that began in 1893 deepen the divisions in American society? Which groups suffered the most during the depression?
The economic depression that began in 1893 deepened the divisions in American society because it put many people who all had similar jobs, out of work. All of these people hada worked in manufactioning and facotries, and suddenly they were out of work because of the depression. This made people very worried and scared and "many saw labor strikes as one of the few ways they could gain recognition and control in their working lives" which generally only made things worse. All of these workers that once had a common job had to revert back to basics, to what they had before industilization. Most of all, the ones who were back to farming, or who had stayed in the occupation of farming, suffered so much during this depression. The farming market was already going downhill because so many people were depending on industry and factories, but when the depression hit, it became even worse then it already was.
3. What were the values many Americans attached to the frontier? Why did many Americans fear that the closing of the frontier would harm America's national character?
The values many Americans attached to the frontier were "resourcefullness, bravery, pragmatism, ingenuity, individualism, egalitrianism, and patriotism" according to the reading, were very closely realted values attached to the frontier. The closing of the frontier was a major concern, mostly to those from "old" families. Many people thought that without more land to explore, and without more resources to find that America would become a completely different place. Many thought that we would not be able to sustain our economic level without finding new resources in new lands, others thought that the values attached to the frontier would pretty much die out. They thought that values such as "resourcefulness" couldn't be kept alive if there were no new places with new resources.
4. Why did some Americans suggest greater involvement overseas?
Some Americans suggested greater involvement overseas, specifically in Chinese markets because of the large population and amount of consumers there. As the reading says, " Some buisnessmen and politicians believed that overseas expansion especially into Chinese markets would fuel economic growth" Simply, the amount of people overseas, could possibly be willing to buy American products and would obviously help the American economy. Also, Japan and Europe were starting to try to impose laws on China's trade, and Americans feared that if they didn't do the same then suddenly they would not be able to have any buissness in the Chinese markets which would not help the American economy at all.
5. How did the theories of social Darwinism and scientific racism lend support to the cause of American imperialism?
The theories of social Darwinism and scientific racism lended support to the cause of American imperialism because social Darwinism and scientific racism introduced the theory "survival of the fittest" This theory in supprt to the cause of social Darwinism was helpful because it simply stated that some people may have been born to rule and to be in control, while tohers who were inferior would die off. The theory of natural selection was involved in this, in the way that those who were meant to lead and had everything they needed to lead, would, while those whou didn't have the tools and advantages that others had, would not lead due to their lack of necessities. This is similar to natural selection because scientifically, natural selection states that those who are more suited to live will grow and reproduce with one who is also more suited to survive; therefore the population would easily become more "fit" while the less fit died off because they didn't have the advantages that some others had, just like social Darwinism.
6. Summarize why the United States became involved in Samoa, Hawaii, and several Latin American nations.
The united states became involved in Samoa, Hawaii, and several Latin American countries for a variety of reasons. These reasons were beneficial to the United States, take Hawaii for example. Hawaii was mainly occupied by the Japanese, and if we hadn't annexed it into the United States, we were worried that they would start demanding rights and perhaps take away our port at Pearl Harbor. Therefore, in order to avoid these inconvienences, the United States annexed Hawaii. Another reason why the United States became involved with many islands in the Pacific is because they were great pitstops. If Americans were on their way to Asia or Australlia, they had a place to stop if necessary. Also, these islands provided good resources to be sold by America to help increase American income and help our economy.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Teddy Roosevelt's Square Deal
1. 1902 COAL STRIKE
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem he found a way to peacefully settle the issue. He "called both sides to the White House to talk" The dispute ended up being settled and the miners received a 10% "pay-hike" compared to the 15% they were asking for, along with a shorter work day then 9 hours, which is even better than what they asked for.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
As the book said, Roosevelt called upon both sides of the White House to figure out what they could do to solve this problem. It started with Roosevelt, but the other but the other sides of the White House also had a role in the solving of the dispute.
2. TRUSTS
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem he first realised that the Sherman Antitrust act was so vague that it was hard to use against companies her were practically robbing the public. He also thought that not all trusts were bad, but that some of them should be regulated so that it is at least somewhat fair to the public. In 1902 he ordered the justice department to see to the Northern Securities Company, which had made a monopoly out of some northwestern railroads. By 1904, this company's monopoly had practically been destroyed.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
Seeing as Roosevelt called upon "the justice department" this would have to do with the judicial branch of government, things like the Supreme Court.
3. UNREGULATED BIG BUSINESS
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem Roosevelt set up the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) which was used to help enforce the dividing of business in a given area, so that wealthy people couldn't fix high prices for the public. The ICC didn't have much power though. Thus, Roosevelt urged congress to pass the Elkins Act in 1903 which "made it illegal for railroad officials to give, and shippers to receive, rebates for using particular railroads. The act also specified that railroads could not change set rates without notifying the public"
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
4. DANGEROUS FOODS AND MEDICINES
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem is that he first read "The Jungle" which although it is only a story, had true facts behind it. He had inspectors set out to the Meat Packing Factories and in 1906, he wanted the Meat Inspection Act packed, which "dictated strict cleanliness requirements for meat packers and created the program of federal meat inspection"
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
Again, Roosevelt started everything, basically. He sent out inspectors, but then he needed congress's help to pass the Meat Inspection Act. So this relied on the legislative and executive branch.
5. SHRINKING WILDERNESS AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem he set aside 148 acres of forest conservation, 1.5 million acres of water-power sites, and 80 million acres of land for geological survey and lastly 50 wildlife sanctuaries and many national parks. In addition, he named Gifford Pinchot, a professional conservationist, head of the U.S. forest service.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
The only legislation that seemed to be involved in this is the executive branch of government because Roosevelt is the one who basically did everything to help conserve the natural resources.
6. RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
Roosevelt didn't do very much to solve this problem, but he did appoint an African American as the head of the custom house in Charleston, South Carolina. In addition, he invited Booker T. Washington to dinner at the White House.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
What was done about racial discrimination was pretty much only done by the executive branch of government because it was only Roosevelt doing the little things that were done.
Explain the importance of each of the following:
7. Square Deal:
A term used to describe the various progressive reforms sponsored by the Roosevelt administration
8. The Jungle:
A book written by Sinclair to show what conditions were like in the meat packing industries, causing the passing of the Meat Inspection Act.
9. Upton Sinclair:
A journalist who researched things about the human conditions in the stock yard of Chicago. This research was done for his book "The Jungle" but people mostly focused on the conditions in the meat packing workplaces rather then the human conditions in the stock yard.
10. NAACP:
The National Association for the Advancement of Couloured People, which was an organization that was formed because many presidents didn't do much to contribute to the advancement in treatment of people who are discriminated against.
11. Meat Inspection Act:
The act passed by congress in 1906 that dictated strict cleanliness requirements for meat packers and created the program of federal meat inspection
12. Pure Food & Drug Act:
The act passed by congress in 1906 that halted the sale of contaminated foods and medicines as well as truth in the labeling of foods.
13. Significance of the 1902 Coal Miners’ Strike:
The actions Roosevelt took during this time proved that disputes could be settled in a peaceful manner, and basically set an example for the nation.
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem he found a way to peacefully settle the issue. He "called both sides to the White House to talk" The dispute ended up being settled and the miners received a 10% "pay-hike" compared to the 15% they were asking for, along with a shorter work day then 9 hours, which is even better than what they asked for.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
As the book said, Roosevelt called upon both sides of the White House to figure out what they could do to solve this problem. It started with Roosevelt, but the other but the other sides of the White House also had a role in the solving of the dispute.
2. TRUSTS
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem he first realised that the Sherman Antitrust act was so vague that it was hard to use against companies her were practically robbing the public. He also thought that not all trusts were bad, but that some of them should be regulated so that it is at least somewhat fair to the public. In 1902 he ordered the justice department to see to the Northern Securities Company, which had made a monopoly out of some northwestern railroads. By 1904, this company's monopoly had practically been destroyed.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
Seeing as Roosevelt called upon "the justice department" this would have to do with the judicial branch of government, things like the Supreme Court.
3. UNREGULATED BIG BUSINESS
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem Roosevelt set up the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) which was used to help enforce the dividing of business in a given area, so that wealthy people couldn't fix high prices for the public. The ICC didn't have much power though. Thus, Roosevelt urged congress to pass the Elkins Act in 1903 which "made it illegal for railroad officials to give, and shippers to receive, rebates for using particular railroads. The act also specified that railroads could not change set rates without notifying the public"
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
The legislation that helped solve this problem is the legislative branch along with the executive because Roosevelt wanted to regulate big business, but he needed congress to pass the Elkins Act.
4. DANGEROUS FOODS AND MEDICINES
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem is that he first read "The Jungle" which although it is only a story, had true facts behind it. He had inspectors set out to the Meat Packing Factories and in 1906, he wanted the Meat Inspection Act packed, which "dictated strict cleanliness requirements for meat packers and created the program of federal meat inspection"
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
Again, Roosevelt started everything, basically. He sent out inspectors, but then he needed congress's help to pass the Meat Inspection Act. So this relied on the legislative and executive branch.
5. SHRINKING WILDERNESS AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
In order for Roosevelt to solve this problem he set aside 148 acres of forest conservation, 1.5 million acres of water-power sites, and 80 million acres of land for geological survey and lastly 50 wildlife sanctuaries and many national parks. In addition, he named Gifford Pinchot, a professional conservationist, head of the U.S. forest service.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
The only legislation that seemed to be involved in this is the executive branch of government because Roosevelt is the one who basically did everything to help conserve the natural resources.
6. RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
a. What steps did Roosevelt take to solve the problem?
Roosevelt didn't do very much to solve this problem, but he did appoint an African American as the head of the custom house in Charleston, South Carolina. In addition, he invited Booker T. Washington to dinner at the White House.
b. Which legislation helped solve the problem?
What was done about racial discrimination was pretty much only done by the executive branch of government because it was only Roosevelt doing the little things that were done.
Explain the importance of each of the following:
7. Square Deal:
A term used to describe the various progressive reforms sponsored by the Roosevelt administration
8. The Jungle:
A book written by Sinclair to show what conditions were like in the meat packing industries, causing the passing of the Meat Inspection Act.
9. Upton Sinclair:
A journalist who researched things about the human conditions in the stock yard of Chicago. This research was done for his book "The Jungle" but people mostly focused on the conditions in the meat packing workplaces rather then the human conditions in the stock yard.
10. NAACP:
The National Association for the Advancement of Couloured People, which was an organization that was formed because many presidents didn't do much to contribute to the advancement in treatment of people who are discriminated against.
11. Meat Inspection Act:
The act passed by congress in 1906 that dictated strict cleanliness requirements for meat packers and created the program of federal meat inspection
12. Pure Food & Drug Act:
The act passed by congress in 1906 that halted the sale of contaminated foods and medicines as well as truth in the labeling of foods.
13. Significance of the 1902 Coal Miners’ Strike:
The actions Roosevelt took during this time proved that disputes could be settled in a peaceful manner, and basically set an example for the nation.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
The Jungle - Exposing the Meatpacking Industry
1. In your opinion, which specific details in this excerpt most convincingly highlight problems in the meatpacking industry in the early 1900s? Why? Use specific passages and quote. Analyze at least five details.
A. One problem in the meatpacking industry was how poorly they treated the animals about to be killed for their meat. For example, "There were high squeals and low squeals, grunts, and wails of agony" This quote obviously shows how scared the pigs were as they were hanging from only one of their legs. This is such a convincing quote because of the image it can put in your head, very persuasive.
B. Another example of the animals being treated poorly was, "until there was a double line of them, each dangling by a foot and kicking in frenzy" which clearly shows how awful these pigs were treated. Mind you, they were still alive while this was happening, it's one thing to kill them for meat, it's another thing to torture them. Yet again, this is such convincing evidence because of the image it can put in your mind of the pigs being dangled by their feet, helplessly squealing.
C. An obvious problem the meat packing industry had was the health department. There was a government inspector that was supposed to check each pig for tuberculosis. This seems like such a great thing because no one would want people getting sick from eating diseased pork, but it didn't work out that way. This inspector was easily distracted, as shown by, "while he was talking with you you could hardly be so ungrateful as to notice that a dozen carcasses were passing him untouched." meaning that the inspector wouldn't check the pigs if he was too busy having a conversation. This is convincing because it shows how much the people really cared about their customers if they didn't even have the common courtesy to check to see if the pigs were ridden with disease.
D. Another problem the meat packing industry had was sanitation. The workers there seemed as though they had no idea what cleanliness was, as proven by, "There was no place for the men to wash their hands before they ate their dinner, and so they made a practice of washing them in the water that was to be ladled into the sausage" This is absolutely repulsive. This water would be mixed in with the sausage, the water that dirty mens' hands had been washed in. This is a convincing problem because people actually ended up eating what was on some workers hands, that is disgusting.
E.Lastly, the meat packing industry had a problem with rats. There was always rats in their work place spoiling their "good" meat. "There would be meat stored in great piles in rooms; and the water from leaky roofs would drip over it, and thousands of rats would race about on it. It was too dark in these storage places to see well, but a man could run his hand over these piles of meat and sweep off handfuls of the dried dung of rats." This quote is a good indication of how many rats this place really did have. This also falls under the category of sanitation, which is really bad as i previously mentioned. This is convincing because, yet again, people were eating this meat, that had had rat poop on it, and little rat feet stomp all over it, which is really gross to even imagine.
2. What is the overall tone of the story?
The overall tone of the story seems to be "Anti-meat packaging industry" because of all of the problems being mentioned in the story. Also, using imagery and guilt is a persuasive technique this author used to seem to get people to feel bad about eating meat. Perhaps she was a vegetarian trying to get everyone to stop buying meat because of a ll of the problems this place had.
3. Based on your reading of this excerpt, why do you think Sinclair titled his novel The Jungle?
There are plenty of good reasons why this excerpt could've been named "The Jungle" One reason could be for how unsanitary this place was. The jungle is not necessarily the cleanest place, so it could be a comparison between a jungle and the work place. Also, implying that the workplace is disgusting. Another reason why it could've been called "The Jungle" is because of the attitudes within the workplace. The workers had no problem with the torture that the animals were going through, which could be compared to the attitude of a lion. A lion is "The King of the Jungle" and it doesn't matter to him what he eats because he has no guilt. Again, this is very similar to the attitude of the worker's in this place.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Challenges of Urbanization
The People: why were the three groups below drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest?
1. Immigrants: The immigrants were drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest because cities were considered convenient and the cheapest, according to them. In addition, "Cities also offered unskilled laborers steady jobs in mills and factories"
2. Farmers: The farmers were drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest because there was "rapid improvements in farming technology in the second half of the 19th century" Improvements such as the McCormick reaper and the steel plow were only available in the city, it seemed, therefore sending the farmers into cities.
3. African-Americans: The African Americans were drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest because they were trying to "escape racial violence, economic hardship and political oppression. Along with the fact that many African Americans were losing their jobs and there was more oppurtunity in Northeastern and Midwestern cities.
The Problems: What was done in response to the following five problems?
4. Lack of safe and efficient transportation
In response to this problem there were innovations in the mass transit system, which were designed to help get workers to their job more safely and efficeintly. The carts could hold large numbers of people as well, so it was easy to get a bunch of people to the place in which they were going. Also, cable cars were introduced to the San Fransisco area in 1873. The only problem with these new inovations is that it was hard to keep up with the maintenence of the cars when they would become broken down, or something else went wrong.
5. Unsafe drinking water
In response to this problem some cities such as New York built public waterworks to keep up with the increasing number of people in the city and their need for water. In 1908's, chlorination was introduced to help rid disease and bacteria from water; and prior to that in the 1870's water filtration was introduced for the same reason as chlorination.
6. Lack of sanitation
In response to problems, such as manure pilling up on the streets, by the 1900's a lot of cities had created sanitation departments as well as sewer lines. Although this was a good response to the bad sanitation in most cities, it was difficult to maintain.
7. Fire Hazards
In response to this problem, Cincinatti was first to take action by creating the first paid fire department in 1853. Others followed this leadership. In 1874, the first automatic sprinklers were introduced, wich were obviously a great innovation to ease the worry of fire hazards. Lastly, by the 1900's almost every city had a full time professional fire department. In addition, most wooden settlements were replaced with brick or stone, also to help reduce the risk of fires breaking out.
8. Crime
In response to this problem, New York City was the first to take real action against it. In 1844, New York City created the first full time police force (paid of course) which did indeed help reduce the crime risk in the city. However, since the forces in other cities were not as large as the one in New York City, they didn't work as well.
1. Immigrants: The immigrants were drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest because cities were considered convenient and the cheapest, according to them. In addition, "Cities also offered unskilled laborers steady jobs in mills and factories"
2. Farmers: The farmers were drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest because there was "rapid improvements in farming technology in the second half of the 19th century" Improvements such as the McCormick reaper and the steel plow were only available in the city, it seemed, therefore sending the farmers into cities.
3. African-Americans: The African Americans were drawn to cities in the Northeast and Midwest because they were trying to "escape racial violence, economic hardship and political oppression. Along with the fact that many African Americans were losing their jobs and there was more oppurtunity in Northeastern and Midwestern cities.
The Problems: What was done in response to the following five problems?
4. Lack of safe and efficient transportation
In response to this problem there were innovations in the mass transit system, which were designed to help get workers to their job more safely and efficeintly. The carts could hold large numbers of people as well, so it was easy to get a bunch of people to the place in which they were going. Also, cable cars were introduced to the San Fransisco area in 1873. The only problem with these new inovations is that it was hard to keep up with the maintenence of the cars when they would become broken down, or something else went wrong.
5. Unsafe drinking water
In response to this problem some cities such as New York built public waterworks to keep up with the increasing number of people in the city and their need for water. In 1908's, chlorination was introduced to help rid disease and bacteria from water; and prior to that in the 1870's water filtration was introduced for the same reason as chlorination.
6. Lack of sanitation
In response to problems, such as manure pilling up on the streets, by the 1900's a lot of cities had created sanitation departments as well as sewer lines. Although this was a good response to the bad sanitation in most cities, it was difficult to maintain.
7. Fire Hazards
In response to this problem, Cincinatti was first to take action by creating the first paid fire department in 1853. Others followed this leadership. In 1874, the first automatic sprinklers were introduced, wich were obviously a great innovation to ease the worry of fire hazards. Lastly, by the 1900's almost every city had a full time professional fire department. In addition, most wooden settlements were replaced with brick or stone, also to help reduce the risk of fires breaking out.
8. Crime
In response to this problem, New York City was the first to take real action against it. In 1844, New York City created the first full time police force (paid of course) which did indeed help reduce the crime risk in the city. However, since the forces in other cities were not as large as the one in New York City, they didn't work as well.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Immigration
1. What major areas or countries of the world were immigrants coming from?
The major areas/ countries of the world that immigrants were coming from were mainly Europe, China and the West Indies and Japan. Some other countries were Russia, and Mexico. There was a large range from where immigrants came from.
2. What were the two major immigration processing stations in the United States?
Two major immigration processing stations in the United States were Ellis Island, in the New York harbor and Angel island, which is in the San Fransisco Bay.
3. Define Melting Pot.
The term Melting Pot is defined as "a mixture of people of different cultures and races who blended together by abandoning their native languages and customs."
4. Define Nativism.
The term Nativism is defined as "overt favoritism toward native born Americans." ( A nativist believed Anglo-Saxons were superior to all other ethnic groups)
5. According to the Immigration Restriction League, list the desirable immigrants.
The more desirable immigrants, according to the IRL were "British, German, and Scandinavian stock, historically free, energetic, progressive"
6. According to the Immigration Restriction League, list the “wrong” immigrants.
The least desirable immigrants, according to the IRL were, "Slave, Latin and Asiatic races, historically down- trodden... and stagnant"
7. Why did nativists’ sometimes object to an immigrant’s religious background?
Nativists sometimes objected to an immigrant's religious background rather then ethnicity because they felt as though Roman-Catholic and Jewish people "would undermine the democratic institutions established by the country's Protestant founders"
8. Why was the Chinese Exclusion Act passed?
The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed because many were in fear of the Chinese taking jobs away from citizens because they were willing to work for lower wages. At the time, labor groups were putting pressure on the government so that they would pass the act for this very reason.
The major areas/ countries of the world that immigrants were coming from were mainly Europe, China and the West Indies and Japan. Some other countries were Russia, and Mexico. There was a large range from where immigrants came from.
2. What were the two major immigration processing stations in the United States?
Two major immigration processing stations in the United States were Ellis Island, in the New York harbor and Angel island, which is in the San Fransisco Bay.
3. Define Melting Pot.
The term Melting Pot is defined as "a mixture of people of different cultures and races who blended together by abandoning their native languages and customs."
4. Define Nativism.
The term Nativism is defined as "overt favoritism toward native born Americans." ( A nativist believed Anglo-Saxons were superior to all other ethnic groups)
5. According to the Immigration Restriction League, list the desirable immigrants.
The more desirable immigrants, according to the IRL were "British, German, and Scandinavian stock, historically free, energetic, progressive"
6. According to the Immigration Restriction League, list the “wrong” immigrants.
The least desirable immigrants, according to the IRL were, "Slave, Latin and Asiatic races, historically down- trodden... and stagnant"
7. Why did nativists’ sometimes object to an immigrant’s religious background?
Nativists sometimes objected to an immigrant's religious background rather then ethnicity because they felt as though Roman-Catholic and Jewish people "would undermine the democratic institutions established by the country's Protestant founders"
8. Why was the Chinese Exclusion Act passed?
The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed because many were in fear of the Chinese taking jobs away from citizens because they were willing to work for lower wages. At the time, labor groups were putting pressure on the government so that they would pass the act for this very reason.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Robber Baron Document Rankings
Power Rank 1: Document Number: 5
Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?.This picture of Rockefeller best represents the era we've been studying because it shows how Rockefeller is so much bigger then the government. This could portray that Rockefeller is more powerful then the government, because he is talking about how silly and little the government is. Meaning, that the government can't control all of his actions and money gain. This is accurate because Rockefeller did seem to have more power then the people and the government.
Power Rank 2: Document Number: 1
Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
This document best represents the era we've been studying because, this document talks about how people like Rockefeller have no morals. This document also talks about how these people are taking money from the community and common people, which is true of the rich people of this time. This is accurate because it is saying how big money people should be more kind to the poor and not be so greedy with their money because they are taking so much from the less fortunate.
Power Rank 3: Document Number: 11
Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
This document best represents the era we've been studying because, this document talks about how the power and income for, persue, the railroads, should be taken away from the rich and given to the people who it is created for. Something such as the railroads were created for the community so poor people should not be taken advantage of, according to this document. This is accurate because so many common people were losing money to big buisnesses in this time period.
Power Rank 4: Document Number: 16
Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
This document best represents the era we've been studying because, even though it pretty much goes against what i believe represented the industrial era, ("Big Money" people taking the community and common people's money) it does make a few points that i agree with. This document best represents the era because of how the big money people thought, they made the money so they should be able to keep it. I honestly agree with that a little, but it is also how the era is represented because it shows someone's perspective that isn't a common civilian.
Power Rank 5: Document Number: 18
Why do you believe it best represents the era you have been studying?
Again, this document goes against my views on the big buisness people taking everyone's money because it is supporting Rockefeller because of his contributions to his community. This does however show the perspective of someone who supported Rockefeller and it is accurate because it does show just how much money he had to spare, and how much he was willing to spend on the community with all of his extra money.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Age of Railroads
1. What problems did employees of the railroad companies face?
Some problems that employees of the railroad companies faced were attacks from the Native Americans as they were laying out the tracks on "treacherous terrain". Another problem these employees endured is disease and also some accidents that happened while working. This lead to the statistic of 2000 deaths and 20,000 injured.
2. What was it like to live as a Pullman employee in the town of Pullman?
Living as a Pullman employee in the town of Pullman was actually not too bad. The town of Pullman was basically made up of housing for all the workers of the Pullman company. According to the text, the houses were "clean, well-contructed brick houses and apartment building with at least one window in every room" The town also included basically everything a normal town would consist of, including the doctor's office, shops, etc. One of the downsides of living in this town though, is that it was a very strict town. For example, there was no consumption of alcohol allowed. There was good reason for the strictly enforced rules though, the better the employees health and well-being is, the better workers they would be for the company, so the town had to be tightly maintained. However, when pay cuts happened, but the price of rent stayed the way it was before pay cuts, there was a strike in 1894.
3. Who was involved in Crédit Mobilier, and what was the purpose of this company?
The people involved in the Credit Mobilier were stockholders in the Union Pacific Railroad who decided that they would make a contract that let workers "lay down track at two or three times the actual cost" and the money that was profited was donated to representatives in congress. The purpose of this company was simply to sway representatives with the profit they took in from the stockholders, which would've given the Republican party a benefit.
4. In what ways did the railroad companies use their power to hurt farmers?
The railroad companies used their power to hurt farmers by doing a few different things. One of these things was not using the government land grants properly, by selling them to other businessed instead of the settlers which is where they were supposed to go in the first place. Something else the railroad companies did to hurt the farmers is that they charged different customers different prices, usually not in a very fair manor either. For example, a short trip would cost more then a longer trip on the train.
5. Why didn’t the decision in the Munn v. Illinois case succeed in checking the power of the railroads? This case didn't succeed in checking the power of the railroads because, even though the decision in this case was to keep the Granger laws, and also gave the right to the goverment to "regulate private industry to serve the public intrest" later on the supreme court made another ruling. This ruling stated that states could not regulate rates on railroad traffic that was going or coming from another state. This fails to check the power of the railroads because it basically put them back where they started.
6. Why didn’t the Interstate Commerce Act immediately limit the power of the railroads?
The ICA didn't immediately limit the power of the railroads because they "had difficulty regulating railroad rates because of a long legal process and resistance from the railroads" which basically means that there was a long process to go through in order to limit the power of the railroads and also that the railroads didn't want their pwer to be limited, so they were fighting back.
Some problems that employees of the railroad companies faced were attacks from the Native Americans as they were laying out the tracks on "treacherous terrain". Another problem these employees endured is disease and also some accidents that happened while working. This lead to the statistic of 2000 deaths and 20,000 injured.
2. What was it like to live as a Pullman employee in the town of Pullman?
Living as a Pullman employee in the town of Pullman was actually not too bad. The town of Pullman was basically made up of housing for all the workers of the Pullman company. According to the text, the houses were "clean, well-contructed brick houses and apartment building with at least one window in every room" The town also included basically everything a normal town would consist of, including the doctor's office, shops, etc. One of the downsides of living in this town though, is that it was a very strict town. For example, there was no consumption of alcohol allowed. There was good reason for the strictly enforced rules though, the better the employees health and well-being is, the better workers they would be for the company, so the town had to be tightly maintained. However, when pay cuts happened, but the price of rent stayed the way it was before pay cuts, there was a strike in 1894.
3. Who was involved in Crédit Mobilier, and what was the purpose of this company?
The people involved in the Credit Mobilier were stockholders in the Union Pacific Railroad who decided that they would make a contract that let workers "lay down track at two or three times the actual cost" and the money that was profited was donated to representatives in congress. The purpose of this company was simply to sway representatives with the profit they took in from the stockholders, which would've given the Republican party a benefit.
4. In what ways did the railroad companies use their power to hurt farmers?
The railroad companies used their power to hurt farmers by doing a few different things. One of these things was not using the government land grants properly, by selling them to other businessed instead of the settlers which is where they were supposed to go in the first place. Something else the railroad companies did to hurt the farmers is that they charged different customers different prices, usually not in a very fair manor either. For example, a short trip would cost more then a longer trip on the train.
5. Why didn’t the decision in the Munn v. Illinois case succeed in checking the power of the railroads? This case didn't succeed in checking the power of the railroads because, even though the decision in this case was to keep the Granger laws, and also gave the right to the goverment to "regulate private industry to serve the public intrest" later on the supreme court made another ruling. This ruling stated that states could not regulate rates on railroad traffic that was going or coming from another state. This fails to check the power of the railroads because it basically put them back where they started.
6. Why didn’t the Interstate Commerce Act immediately limit the power of the railroads?
The ICA didn't immediately limit the power of the railroads because they "had difficulty regulating railroad rates because of a long legal process and resistance from the railroads" which basically means that there was a long process to go through in order to limit the power of the railroads and also that the railroads didn't want their pwer to be limited, so they were fighting back.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Big Business and Labor
1. What is it? B. How did it help businesses such as the Carnegie Company and tycoons like Andrew Carnegie?
1. Vertical integration
A. Vertical Integration is the process in which one buys their own suppliers.
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because one could buy everything they needed, from themselves, so they could make everything they need super cheap and very easy for themselves to obtain.
2. Horizontal integration
A. Horizontal integration is the process in which companies by out their competitiors or companies with similar products.
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because it eliminated competitors and made it so that one company could sell one product, and everyone would have to go to that one company for the product.
3. Social Darwinism
A. This was basically a philosophy stated by some businesses that it was okay to be the only company selling one product, similar to Darwin's theories of survival of the fittest. If one was able to have a good business, then why should it be tampered with.
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because it made it so that one could have a monopoly and it be legal; that it was alright with everyone to have a big business and put other ones that were not adequit out of buisness, therefore also helping the bigger business because it gets rid of competitors like the horizontal intregration.
4. Monopoly
A. When one has "complete control over it's industry's production, wages, and prices"
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because one could have a monopoly. If one had a monopoly, they basically had total control over one thing, meaning there were no other places to buy the item, some one person could over charge and get even more rich from the over-pricing of one item.
5. Holding company
A. A holding company is something that can be set up that is a "corporation that did nothing but buy out the stock of other companies"
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because again, it would eliminate competitors so there would onloy be one place to by a certain product, and the product would most likely be overpriced because there is only one place to get it. Inturn, this had a positive effect on a company because they could make more money.
6. Trust
A. A trust is something in which someone gives their stocks over to a group of trustees, who ran seperate companies as one large cooperation.
B.This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because the bigger companies got some of the profits made by the trusts, so they were able to make more money for their company.
7. The perception of tycoons as “robber barons”
C. How did it harm businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller?
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because one could have a monopoly. If one had a monopoly, they basically had total control over one thing, meaning there were no other places to buy the item, some one person could over charge and get even more rich from the over-pricing of one item.
5. Holding company
A. A holding company is something that can be set up that is a "corporation that did nothing but buy out the stock of other companies"
B. This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because again, it would eliminate competitors so there would onloy be one place to by a certain product, and the product would most likely be overpriced because there is only one place to get it. Inturn, this had a positive effect on a company because they could make more money.
6. Trust
A. A trust is something in which someone gives their stocks over to a group of trustees, who ran seperate companies as one large cooperation.
B.This helped businesses such as the Carnegie Company because the bigger companies got some of the profits made by the trusts, so they were able to make more money for their company.
7. The perception of tycoons as “robber barons”
C. How did it harm businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller?
The perception of Tycoons as "robber barons" harmed businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller because it could've possibly made people fear buying one item from one producer, in fear that they may soon have complete control over it and charge more then the price should be for the item.
8. Sherman Antitrust Act
C. How did it harm businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller?
8. Sherman Antitrust Act
C. How did it harm businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller?
The Sherman Antitrust Act harmed businesses such as Standard Oil and tycoons like John D. Rockefeller because the act stated that it was illegal to form a trust that interferred with free trade between states and other countries which meant that it would be more difficult for someone to make a profit off of a trust, seeing as free trade between states and other countries had never before been an obstacle, and a monopoly wouldn't have been a problem because it didn't matter if it affected free tr4ade between states and other countries.
Expansion of Industry
Factor 1: Abundant Natural Resources
A. Which resources played crucial roles in industrialization?
A. Which resources played crucial roles in industrialization?
Some resources which played crucial roles in industrialization were oil (kerosene).
B. How did Edwin L. Drake help industry to acquire larger quantities of oil?
Edwin L. Drake helped industries to aquire larger quantities of oil because he had "successfully used a steam engine to drill for oil " which made it a lot easier to get oil from the ground and therefore pushed the oil drilling industry foward.
B. How did Edwin L. Drake help industry to acquire larger quantities of oil?
Edwin L. Drake helped industries to aquire larger quantities of oil because he had "successfully used a steam engine to drill for oil " which made it a lot easier to get oil from the ground and therefore pushed the oil drilling industry foward.
C. How did the Bessemer process allow better use of iron ore?
The Bessemer process allowed better use of iron ore because through this process air was injected into molten iron to remove carbon and other things. This made steel and thus made a better use of the iron ore.
D. What new uses for steel were developed at this time?
Some new uses for steel that were developed were mainly rails for the railroads that were being developed, along with barbed wire and some farming machines.
Factor 2: Increasing number of Inventions
A. How did Thomas Alva Edison contribute to this development?
Thomas Alva Edison contributed to this development because, not only did he invent the first research laboratoy, but he also created the lightbulb ! This later led to his invention of distributing electricity.
B. How did George Westinghouse contribute to it?
George Westinghouse contributed to this development because he "added innovations that made electricity safer and less expensive."
C. How did Christopher Sholes contribute?
Christopher Sholes contributed to this development because he invented the typewriter.
C. How did Christopher Sholes contribute?
Christopher Sholes contributed to this development because he invented the typewriter.
D. How did Alexandar Graham Bell contribute?
Alexandar Graham Bell contributed to this development because he invented the telephone (along with Thomas Watson) which obviously chamged the world's way of communication.
Factor 3: Expanding Urban Populations Provided new markets for inventions and industrial goods; and provided a ready supply of labor for industry
Factor 4: Government Support of Rapid Industrialization
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Tarbell's History of Standard Oil
1. How did Rockefeller set out to aquire control of the oil industry?
Rockefeller did a lot to aquire control of the oil industry. One of the first things he did was have pure dedication to aquireing the control of the industry. As the readings says, "It seemed to be an intellectual necessity for him to be able to direct the course of any particular gallon of oil from the moment it gushed from the earth until it went into the lamp of a housewife" which is a quote that basically proves what dedication Rockefeller had to gaining control of the oil industry. Another way Rockefeller set out to aquire control of the oil industry was to further the advances in transporting and refining oil. According to the reading, " that Mr. Rockefeller inherited when he succeeded in corralling the refining and transporting of oil" which shows that Rockefeller did help advance the technologies on refining and transporting oil, which overall helped him aquire control of the oil industry.
2. Do you think Rockefeller deserved to be called a "robber baron?" Why or why not?
I do believe Rockefeller deserved to be called a robber baron because he did "become welathy by exploiting natural resources" He most indefinitly exploited natural resources by finding new ways to refine and transport the oil, oil being a natural resource. This eventually made him have control of the oil industry and being in control of really any industry can make you wealthy. According to the reading "If a dealer bought out a barrel of oil a year, it must be from Mr. Rockefeller " which implies that Rockefeller had complete control over the oil industry. This also leads to the conclusion that any oil being bought was from Rockefeller, and thus he turned up a profit and earns the right to be called a robber baron.
Rockefeller did a lot to aquire control of the oil industry. One of the first things he did was have pure dedication to aquireing the control of the industry. As the readings says, "It seemed to be an intellectual necessity for him to be able to direct the course of any particular gallon of oil from the moment it gushed from the earth until it went into the lamp of a housewife" which is a quote that basically proves what dedication Rockefeller had to gaining control of the oil industry. Another way Rockefeller set out to aquire control of the oil industry was to further the advances in transporting and refining oil. According to the reading, " that Mr. Rockefeller inherited when he succeeded in corralling the refining and transporting of oil" which shows that Rockefeller did help advance the technologies on refining and transporting oil, which overall helped him aquire control of the oil industry.
2. Do you think Rockefeller deserved to be called a "robber baron?" Why or why not?
I do believe Rockefeller deserved to be called a robber baron because he did "become welathy by exploiting natural resources" He most indefinitly exploited natural resources by finding new ways to refine and transport the oil, oil being a natural resource. This eventually made him have control of the oil industry and being in control of really any industry can make you wealthy. According to the reading "If a dealer bought out a barrel of oil a year, it must be from Mr. Rockefeller " which implies that Rockefeller had complete control over the oil industry. This also leads to the conclusion that any oil being bought was from Rockefeller, and thus he turned up a profit and earns the right to be called a robber baron.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Telling New Stories
1. What were the two versions of the Camp Grant attack that existed among the U.S. public, and who supported each view?
Version One of the Event: The attackers were lead by U.S. settler William Oury and Mexican- American brothers Juan and Jesus, their version of the attack on the Apache at Camp grant is that the "Apaches from this settlement had stoeln cattle and killed local settlers" and it was a form of retribution. Some supporting the version of the event didn't call it an attack, rather an affair.
Who supported Version One? This first version was supported by local settlers
Version Two of the Event: In this version "the attack was not a form of retribution but was a violation of the U.S. Army's peace agreement with the Apache near the fort, and a slaughter of innocent women and children." Some even began to call this attack a massacre because of the extreme levels of violence.
Who supported Version Two? The second version was supported by the U.S. government and reformers.
2. Why was the trial that took place after the attack significant? The trial that took place after the attack was significant because, even though many crimes had been commited against the Apache in the past by many different groups, there was one key detail that changed everything; the fact the the Apache has been under the protection of the U.S. government when they were attacked. Therefore, for the first time ever ( in the history of the Arizona Territory ) non- Apaches had been put on trial for killing Apaches, however the accused were found innocent.
3. Whose views were absent in the accounts of this attack that were told in the United States?
All views except the perspectives of the U.S. settlers or "Anglo Americans" had been absent. The views that had been absent were limited to the Mexican Americans, the Apache, and the O'odham.
4. Why have Native American views been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States?
Native American views have been excluded from the story of the U.S. ecpansion that is told in the United States because Anglo Americans "wanted to remember and tell the history of the West in a way that portrayed them favorably and justified their claims to land and resources" Often, the contributions of other groups/ people were down played, indirectly meaning to make the U.S. seem better by comparison. As a result, stories exclude Native American views, fights, or any contributions they made into creating the West. The U.S. didn't want it to seem like they had done anything wrong and "preferred to see itself as a benevolent force that spread its lofty ideals across the continent."
5. What were the two parts of the U.S. government's assiimilation plan in the late nineteenth century?
a. One part of the U.S. government's assimilation plan in the late nineteenth century was to get all indian groups onto reservations. ( They believed this would make getting rid of their culture a lot easier. )
b. Another part of the U.S. government's assimilation plan in the late nineteenth century was to get the Native Americans to speak English and farm small plots of land so they could be cultured like an average settler. One way of doing this was banning the Native Americans from "practicing their religions and cultural ceremonies", also Native American children were often sent to boarding schools were their hair would be cut short, their names would be changed and they would be forced to speak English.
6. Give two examples of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures?
a. One example of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures is (as I said before) banning their religion and cultural ceremonies.
b. Another example of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures is by sending the children to boarding schools, where they would have their hair cut, their names changed, and would be forced to speak English to better fit in with the settlers culture rather then their native ways.
7. What effect did the railroad have on U.S. settlement of the West?
The effect the railroad had on U.S. settlements of the West is that it largly increased the population, as the reading says "settlers were pouring into the West" The railroad also made it easy to get supplies and other manufactured goods from around the country. Lastly, the killing of Buffalo increased due to the easy transportation of their hides, along side of the necessity of Buffalo for food, clothing, tools, etc.
8. How did westward expansion fuel U.S. industrialization?
Westward expansion fueled U.S. industrialization for many reasons. One reason is because of the railroad, good were easily transported from one side of the continent to the other, making the production of goods a goal for people. Also, the large population made it easy for goods to get made/ grown because so many people were in the buisness. Along side that, "Food grown on western farms became critical for feeding populations in the East" which was obviously a benefit for the West seeing as their good were needed. Overall, because "The railroads brought goods and people westward, and they also linked western industries to markets in the East" westward expansion fueled U.S. industrialization.
Version One of the Event: The attackers were lead by U.S. settler William Oury and Mexican- American brothers Juan and Jesus, their version of the attack on the Apache at Camp grant is that the "Apaches from this settlement had stoeln cattle and killed local settlers" and it was a form of retribution. Some supporting the version of the event didn't call it an attack, rather an affair.
Who supported Version One? This first version was supported by local settlers
Version Two of the Event: In this version "the attack was not a form of retribution but was a violation of the U.S. Army's peace agreement with the Apache near the fort, and a slaughter of innocent women and children." Some even began to call this attack a massacre because of the extreme levels of violence.
Who supported Version Two? The second version was supported by the U.S. government and reformers.
2. Why was the trial that took place after the attack significant? The trial that took place after the attack was significant because, even though many crimes had been commited against the Apache in the past by many different groups, there was one key detail that changed everything; the fact the the Apache has been under the protection of the U.S. government when they were attacked. Therefore, for the first time ever ( in the history of the Arizona Territory ) non- Apaches had been put on trial for killing Apaches, however the accused were found innocent.
3. Whose views were absent in the accounts of this attack that were told in the United States?
All views except the perspectives of the U.S. settlers or "Anglo Americans" had been absent. The views that had been absent were limited to the Mexican Americans, the Apache, and the O'odham.
4. Why have Native American views been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States?
Native American views have been excluded from the story of the U.S. ecpansion that is told in the United States because Anglo Americans "wanted to remember and tell the history of the West in a way that portrayed them favorably and justified their claims to land and resources" Often, the contributions of other groups/ people were down played, indirectly meaning to make the U.S. seem better by comparison. As a result, stories exclude Native American views, fights, or any contributions they made into creating the West. The U.S. didn't want it to seem like they had done anything wrong and "preferred to see itself as a benevolent force that spread its lofty ideals across the continent."
5. What were the two parts of the U.S. government's assiimilation plan in the late nineteenth century?
a. One part of the U.S. government's assimilation plan in the late nineteenth century was to get all indian groups onto reservations. ( They believed this would make getting rid of their culture a lot easier. )
b. Another part of the U.S. government's assimilation plan in the late nineteenth century was to get the Native Americans to speak English and farm small plots of land so they could be cultured like an average settler. One way of doing this was banning the Native Americans from "practicing their religions and cultural ceremonies", also Native American children were often sent to boarding schools were their hair would be cut short, their names would be changed and they would be forced to speak English.
6. Give two examples of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures?
a. One example of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures is (as I said before) banning their religion and cultural ceremonies.
b. Another example of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures is by sending the children to boarding schools, where they would have their hair cut, their names changed, and would be forced to speak English to better fit in with the settlers culture rather then their native ways.
7. What effect did the railroad have on U.S. settlement of the West?
The effect the railroad had on U.S. settlements of the West is that it largly increased the population, as the reading says "settlers were pouring into the West" The railroad also made it easy to get supplies and other manufactured goods from around the country. Lastly, the killing of Buffalo increased due to the easy transportation of their hides, along side of the necessity of Buffalo for food, clothing, tools, etc.
8. How did westward expansion fuel U.S. industrialization?
Westward expansion fueled U.S. industrialization for many reasons. One reason is because of the railroad, good were easily transported from one side of the continent to the other, making the production of goods a goal for people. Also, the large population made it easy for goods to get made/ grown because so many people were in the buisness. Along side that, "Food grown on western farms became critical for feeding populations in the East" which was obviously a benefit for the West seeing as their good were needed. Overall, because "The railroads brought goods and people westward, and they also linked western industries to markets in the East" westward expansion fueled U.S. industrialization.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Experiencing U.S. Expansion: Southern Arizona - Part II
6. What two threats did Mexico face in its northern frontier in the mid-nineteenth century?
a. One threat that Mexico faced in its northern frontier in the mid-nineteenth century was their conflict with the Indian groups. As the reading says, one threat was "the renewed conflict with Indian groups like the Apache" What had happened is the establicimientos de paz failed and a lot of Mexicans wanted all of the members of the Apache to be eliminated. "The next year, the legislature declared war on all Apache groups, and required all local male citizens to serve in the military or pay a fine " as the reading said. There was basically a huge fude with Indian groups going on during the mid-nineteenth century which was a threat the Mexico faced in tis northern frontier.
b. A second threat they faced is the U.S.; to the North of Mexico. There was also a fude going on between Mexico and the U.S. for the land they both wanted, due to the great natural resources there. As the reading states, "U.S. leaders had long set their sights on this region, with its wealth of natural resources" Mexico had to face this threat in addition to the fude with the Indian groups. However, the U.S. was in a similar situation as Mexico because they were against the Indian groups like the Apache. " At the same time, amny U.S. traders also participated in the campaign against the Apache, killing Apache people and collecting rewards for their scalps" in which way Mexico and the U.S. had something in common.
7. Why did the Gadsden Purchase have such a great impact on northern Mexicans?
The Gadsden Purchase had a great impact on northern Mexicans. "The United States' hunger for land was not satisfied with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo" This treaty gave the U.S. a lot of land, which is mostly
part of what is southern Arizona today. However, since we wanted more land, Mexico leaders gave 30,000 square miles of land for 10 million dollars. Even though this Gadsden Purchase was a lot smaller than the land recieved for the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, it had a large impact on northern Mexicans because "This sale moved a number of prominent towns and hundreds of Mexican citizens into U.S. territory"
8. List two ways that cultural misunderstanding contributed to a growing conflict between U.S. settlers
and Apache groups.
a. One thing that went wrong within cultural understandings is that often, the United States would think that they "made an agreement with a number of groups while the Apache believed the peace was only with their own band" so when Apache would still raid, the U.S. thought that their allies were betraying them and their agreements. This problem lead to the growth in the conflict between the Apache and U.S. settlers.
b.Another thing that caused conflict between the Apache groups and the U.S. settlers is when U.S. forces would get involved. Sometimes, the Apache would take captives from settlements in the U.S. and then the "U.S. forces would often seize captives from another group, assuming that any Apache leader could coordinate the return of their people" Basically, the U.S. forces thought that they were taking captives from an Apache group that took some U.S. settlers as captives, but the Apache people they would take as captives had nothing to do with the taking of the U.S. captives. They would punish the wrong people.
9. How did the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase spark a civil war in...
a. Mexico?
These two land transfers sparked a civil war in Mexico because it turned a lot of Mexicans against their goverment. "In Mexico, people were angry about the huge loss of territory sustained by their goverment" A lot of citizens believed the the Mexico leaders had made a mistake and that "Mexico's goverment, economy, and society needed a complete transformation"
b. the United States?
These two land transfers sparked a civil war in the United States because of the gain of all the land, which is opposite Mexico. The reason was because "Debates over the status of slavery in the new territories inflamed tensions that were already at fever pitch" The United States had basically already been struggling with what to do about slavery, and when new territories came into the picture, there was a large fude of what to do, weather the territories would be free or slave.
10. a. What did many U.S. settlers want U.S. policy towards the Apache to be?
A lot of U.S. settlers wanted the U.S. policy towards the Apache to be, to kill them. Most people wanted to rid the west of the Apache all together. As the reading says "Some even advocated for extermination of native groups as a way to make the West safe for U.S. settlement" and "the only thing the Apache understood was violence"
b. In what ways did this clash with the federal government’s Peace Policy?
This policy clashed with the federal government's Peace Policy that Ulysses S. Grant put into play because the Peace Policy was intended to have reservations where Indian groups could settle and be safe. If the U.S. policy towards the Apache were to be violence and complete extermination, then all of them would be gone, including the ones that settled on reservations protected by the U.S. goverment, which completly contradicts the purpose of the Peace Policy.
11. Why were the Apache hesitant to move onto reservations?
The Apache were hesitant to move onto reservations for obvious reasons, such as the United States tricking the Apache to move onto the reservations so that they could exterminate them; almost using the reservations as "bait". Another reason is because it would go against Apache tradition because it "prevented them from making yearly migrations"
a. One threat that Mexico faced in its northern frontier in the mid-nineteenth century was their conflict with the Indian groups. As the reading says, one threat was "the renewed conflict with Indian groups like the Apache" What had happened is the establicimientos de paz failed and a lot of Mexicans wanted all of the members of the Apache to be eliminated. "The next year, the legislature declared war on all Apache groups, and required all local male citizens to serve in the military or pay a fine " as the reading said. There was basically a huge fude with Indian groups going on during the mid-nineteenth century which was a threat the Mexico faced in tis northern frontier.
b. A second threat they faced is the U.S.; to the North of Mexico. There was also a fude going on between Mexico and the U.S. for the land they both wanted, due to the great natural resources there. As the reading states, "U.S. leaders had long set their sights on this region, with its wealth of natural resources" Mexico had to face this threat in addition to the fude with the Indian groups. However, the U.S. was in a similar situation as Mexico because they were against the Indian groups like the Apache. " At the same time, amny U.S. traders also participated in the campaign against the Apache, killing Apache people and collecting rewards for their scalps" in which way Mexico and the U.S. had something in common.
7. Why did the Gadsden Purchase have such a great impact on northern Mexicans?
The Gadsden Purchase had a great impact on northern Mexicans. "The United States' hunger for land was not satisfied with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo" This treaty gave the U.S. a lot of land, which is mostly
part of what is southern Arizona today. However, since we wanted more land, Mexico leaders gave 30,000 square miles of land for 10 million dollars. Even though this Gadsden Purchase was a lot smaller than the land recieved for the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, it had a large impact on northern Mexicans because "This sale moved a number of prominent towns and hundreds of Mexican citizens into U.S. territory"
8. List two ways that cultural misunderstanding contributed to a growing conflict between U.S. settlers
and Apache groups.
a. One thing that went wrong within cultural understandings is that often, the United States would think that they "made an agreement with a number of groups while the Apache believed the peace was only with their own band" so when Apache would still raid, the U.S. thought that their allies were betraying them and their agreements. This problem lead to the growth in the conflict between the Apache and U.S. settlers.
b.Another thing that caused conflict between the Apache groups and the U.S. settlers is when U.S. forces would get involved. Sometimes, the Apache would take captives from settlements in the U.S. and then the "U.S. forces would often seize captives from another group, assuming that any Apache leader could coordinate the return of their people" Basically, the U.S. forces thought that they were taking captives from an Apache group that took some U.S. settlers as captives, but the Apache people they would take as captives had nothing to do with the taking of the U.S. captives. They would punish the wrong people.
9. How did the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase spark a civil war in...
a. Mexico?
These two land transfers sparked a civil war in Mexico because it turned a lot of Mexicans against their goverment. "In Mexico, people were angry about the huge loss of territory sustained by their goverment" A lot of citizens believed the the Mexico leaders had made a mistake and that "Mexico's goverment, economy, and society needed a complete transformation"
b. the United States?
These two land transfers sparked a civil war in the United States because of the gain of all the land, which is opposite Mexico. The reason was because "Debates over the status of slavery in the new territories inflamed tensions that were already at fever pitch" The United States had basically already been struggling with what to do about slavery, and when new territories came into the picture, there was a large fude of what to do, weather the territories would be free or slave.
10. a. What did many U.S. settlers want U.S. policy towards the Apache to be?
A lot of U.S. settlers wanted the U.S. policy towards the Apache to be, to kill them. Most people wanted to rid the west of the Apache all together. As the reading says "Some even advocated for extermination of native groups as a way to make the West safe for U.S. settlement" and "the only thing the Apache understood was violence"
b. In what ways did this clash with the federal government’s Peace Policy?
This policy clashed with the federal government's Peace Policy that Ulysses S. Grant put into play because the Peace Policy was intended to have reservations where Indian groups could settle and be safe. If the U.S. policy towards the Apache were to be violence and complete extermination, then all of them would be gone, including the ones that settled on reservations protected by the U.S. goverment, which completly contradicts the purpose of the Peace Policy.
11. Why were the Apache hesitant to move onto reservations?
The Apache were hesitant to move onto reservations for obvious reasons, such as the United States tricking the Apache to move onto the reservations so that they could exterminate them; almost using the reservations as "bait". Another reason is because it would go against Apache tradition because it "prevented them from making yearly migrations"
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Experiencing U.S. Expansion: Southern Arizona
1. What were the two broad groupings of Native Americans in southern Arizona when the Spanish arrived?
Broad Group 1 Name for Self: O'odham "the people" Spanish Name(s): Pima, Papago
Broad Group 2 Name for self: Nnee "the people" Spanish Name(s): Apache
2. How did the O’odham show their unwillingness to fully embrace the Spanish missions?
The O'odham showed their unwillingness to fully embrace the spanish missions by basically not staying on the missions. Some "withdrew to the desert and only visited Spanish settlements in times of need or on the course of their yearly migrations" Overall the O'odham just didn't show full commitment to the change in civilization by not being fully commited to the Spanish missions.
3. Why did Apache groups raid Spanish settlements?
The Apache groups raided Spanish settlements because the Spanish settlements were a new form of resources to them. The Apache groups often had trouble obtaining food, supplies and other things. Most things were very hard for the Apache groups to get and as the reading says "Spanish settlements became a new source for supplies" This is why the Apache groups raided Spanish settlements, in order to get their food and supplies that they needed.
4. What was the cycle of violence?
The cycle of violence all started with the Apache groups raiding Spanish settlements for food. Even though they made sure not to take too much at a time or basically "over-raid" However, even though they didn't take too much at a time, sometimes they did end up killing some of the Spanish people. This ended up starting a cycle of violence because the Spanish "led their first military campaigns against the Apache in the 1690's" because the Spanish were sick of the repeated attacks.
5. How did Spanish and Apache views of the peace created by the establicimientos de paz differ?
In order to create peace among the Apache and the Spanish, they decided that in order for the Apache to settle in the area known as establicimientos de paz they would be expected to help the Spanish fight off some of the Apache groups who were hostile against the Spanish still. Many were settling in this area, and hostile Apache groups were easily overpowered.
Broad Group 1 Name for Self: O'odham "the people" Spanish Name(s): Pima, Papago
Broad Group 2 Name for self: Nnee "the people" Spanish Name(s): Apache
2. How did the O’odham show their unwillingness to fully embrace the Spanish missions?
The O'odham showed their unwillingness to fully embrace the spanish missions by basically not staying on the missions. Some "withdrew to the desert and only visited Spanish settlements in times of need or on the course of their yearly migrations" Overall the O'odham just didn't show full commitment to the change in civilization by not being fully commited to the Spanish missions.
3. Why did Apache groups raid Spanish settlements?
The Apache groups raided Spanish settlements because the Spanish settlements were a new form of resources to them. The Apache groups often had trouble obtaining food, supplies and other things. Most things were very hard for the Apache groups to get and as the reading says "Spanish settlements became a new source for supplies" This is why the Apache groups raided Spanish settlements, in order to get their food and supplies that they needed.
4. What was the cycle of violence?
The cycle of violence all started with the Apache groups raiding Spanish settlements for food. Even though they made sure not to take too much at a time or basically "over-raid" However, even though they didn't take too much at a time, sometimes they did end up killing some of the Spanish people. This ended up starting a cycle of violence because the Spanish "led their first military campaigns against the Apache in the 1690's" because the Spanish were sick of the repeated attacks.
5. How did Spanish and Apache views of the peace created by the establicimientos de paz differ?
In order to create peace among the Apache and the Spanish, they decided that in order for the Apache to settle in the area known as establicimientos de paz they would be expected to help the Spanish fight off some of the Apache groups who were hostile against the Spanish still. Many were settling in this area, and hostile Apache groups were easily overpowered.
Monday, September 19, 2011
New Settlers in the West
1. Read pages 10 - 18 List three reasons why people in the United States moved west.
a. One reason why people in the United States moved West is because it was good for farming, and other types of earthy occupations. As the reading says, "There was rich, fertile land for farming, great forests full of timber, and a wealth of mineral resources to be discovered" Thus, the West was a good place to settle seeing as it was not only good for farming, but logging and mining.
b. Another reason why people in the United States moved West is because of the growing population during the time. " The United States grew from a country of 7.25 million in 1812 to more than 23 million people in 1852" as the reading says. There needed to be more room for all of the population and the West was good place for them to move.
c. A third reason why people in the United States moved to the West is because of religious freedom. People like the Mormons settled in Utah because they "wanted freedom from persectuion for their religious beliefs" For some, the West was simply a place to escape ridicule from others.
2. How did westward expansion contribute to sectional tensions in the United States?
Westward expansion contributed to sectional tensons in the United States because of slavery, basically. The Southern part of the nation was for slavery, where as the Northern part of the nation was for freedom. As the United States expanded farther and farther west, both the North and the South wanted as many new states as they could that way they could have control in congress and "further their economic interests"
3. What was the Peace Policy?
The Peace Policy was a policy put into play by Ulysses S. Grant. The goal of the policy was basically to keep the Indians safe and stop moving them about. In order to this Indian reservations would be put aside by the governmant in order for the Indians to have their own lands, that was protected by the government.
a. One reason why people in the United States moved West is because it was good for farming, and other types of earthy occupations. As the reading says, "There was rich, fertile land for farming, great forests full of timber, and a wealth of mineral resources to be discovered" Thus, the West was a good place to settle seeing as it was not only good for farming, but logging and mining.
b. Another reason why people in the United States moved West is because of the growing population during the time. " The United States grew from a country of 7.25 million in 1812 to more than 23 million people in 1852" as the reading says. There needed to be more room for all of the population and the West was good place for them to move.
c. A third reason why people in the United States moved to the West is because of religious freedom. People like the Mormons settled in Utah because they "wanted freedom from persectuion for their religious beliefs" For some, the West was simply a place to escape ridicule from others.
2. How did westward expansion contribute to sectional tensions in the United States?
Westward expansion contributed to sectional tensons in the United States because of slavery, basically. The Southern part of the nation was for slavery, where as the Northern part of the nation was for freedom. As the United States expanded farther and farther west, both the North and the South wanted as many new states as they could that way they could have control in congress and "further their economic interests"
3. What was the Peace Policy?
The Peace Policy was a policy put into play by Ulysses S. Grant. The goal of the policy was basically to keep the Indians safe and stop moving them about. In order to this Indian reservations would be put aside by the governmant in order for the Indians to have their own lands, that was protected by the government.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Indian Removal Act
1. Read pages 10 - 12 (Stop at "Settlers Move West"). Why did the United States fight or negotiate with dozens of Indian groups for the lands in the Louisiana Territory?
The Louisiana Territory was a very improtant region the United States needed in order for the country to progress. First of all, we didn't have New Orleans which was "an essential port for U.S. farmers along the Mississippi River" and would be necessary as a trading port for us. Also, the amount of land in the Louisiana Territory was quite large which meant there would be lots of room for settlers to...settle. Lastly, there was a lot of pressure on U.S. leaders, from "land speculators, miners in search of precious minerals, and white settlers" whom wanted the land. Thus, the Indian Removal Act was signed by Andrew Jackson, and eventually all of the Indians were forced to move from their land farther west.
2. In what ways did the Cherokees assimilate U.S. values and customs?
Surprisingly, some Indian groups benefitted from assimilation policies, such as the Cherokees. The Cherokees created a new form of government (a republic ) which was "modeled on the government of the United States" Also, some Cherokee farmers participated in the cotton industry, which was doing extremly well at the time. Some even had African Americans work as slaves on their plantations. Lastly, the Cherokee wrote a constitution for itself in 1827, which declared the Cherokee nation as an independent one.
The Louisiana Territory was a very improtant region the United States needed in order for the country to progress. First of all, we didn't have New Orleans which was "an essential port for U.S. farmers along the Mississippi River" and would be necessary as a trading port for us. Also, the amount of land in the Louisiana Territory was quite large which meant there would be lots of room for settlers to...settle. Lastly, there was a lot of pressure on U.S. leaders, from "land speculators, miners in search of precious minerals, and white settlers" whom wanted the land. Thus, the Indian Removal Act was signed by Andrew Jackson, and eventually all of the Indians were forced to move from their land farther west.
2. In what ways did the Cherokees assimilate U.S. values and customs?
Surprisingly, some Indian groups benefitted from assimilation policies, such as the Cherokees. The Cherokees created a new form of government (a republic ) which was "modeled on the government of the United States" Also, some Cherokee farmers participated in the cotton industry, which was doing extremly well at the time. Some even had African Americans work as slaves on their plantations. Lastly, the Cherokee wrote a constitution for itself in 1827, which declared the Cherokee nation as an independent one.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
The Transformation of a Continent
1.How does the term "the West" mask the different perspectives of people at the start of the nineteenth century? (Keep in mind the discussion at the beginning of class today - "Eastward Expansion")
The term "the West" masks a lot of different perspectives of the expansion of the west. One example of this would be westward expansion for someone who lived in South America, or New Mexico. For the people that lived there, it would be considered northern expansion because from their region, they are South of the expansion, not East, thus making it northern expansion, rather then westward. Another way "the West" masks the different perspectives of people is the for someone who lived in Russia, it would be eastward expansion because their starting point wouldn't have been from our east coast, it would be from the west, thus they would be going eastward. Lastly, although some considered the "westward expansion" the "advance of civilization and the winning of a continent" to the Native Americans it was a decrease in their land and the loss of what they had established before we decided to expand.
2. Read page 5. Summarize the three major areas of differences and misunderstadings between the Europeans and Native Americans.
Trade: There was much confusion among the trading category. One example of this is the values trade had for the Indians vs. the Europeans. Indians thought trade was about keeping friendships and basically being nice to one another while Europeans believed the only good reason for trade was to make a profit. A negative effect this had on the Indians is that they learned to rely more on European goods such as guns and horses, rather than their own items. Trading basically became a necessity to their new lifestyle.
Land: Another big issue was land. The indians viewed land as something they belonged to, for different reasons, wheather that be cultural, spirtual, or economic reasons. The Europeans however, believed the land belonged to them, and they did not belong to the land. They viewed land as something they could own and/ or sell which was something the Indians were not used to.
Treaties: Treaties became an issue between the Europeans and the Indians as well. When an some Indians would sign a treaty, the Europeans figured the treaty was valid with all the Indians, but that did not hold to be true. Genrally, the treaty would only be for specific Indian communities not all of the different communities as a whole. Lastly, Indians thought they were getting more than what they signed for in their treaties because of what was said orally at meetings. When in reality, they were only getting what was said in the treaties they would sign, and often did not realise what they were losing in their treaties.
3. Read pages 3 - 7 (stop at U.S. Westward Expansion). How did the arrival of Europeans transform life in the West? (Feel free to bullet point your answer. But use lots of key details!)
The arrival of the Europeans had many effects on the way life was in the west prior. As the reading stated that the Europeans had a huge impact on the west in ways such as "European diseases,rreligions, weapons,goods, and livestock" which "all traveled along Indian trade networks and sparked significant changes among western Indian societies " However "the three that caused the most profound changeds were horses, guns, and disease" To start, horses became a necessity to the Indians, they no longer depended on their own feet to get them where they were going and shaped their lives based on their horses. Some Indians became "skilled horse breeders" while some other Indian groups "became nomads, migrating witht eh seasons to hunt buffalo and care for their horses" They completly transformed their lives to revolve around the new animal they had been introduced to. Guns also became something that were necessary for the Indians survival. There was so much conflict going on that they relied on their new weapons to help get them through it rather then their old ways. Last but not least, the Europeans brought disease. Some of these disease were, smallpox, chicken pox, measles and cholera. These diseases spread quickly through Indian nations, and seeing as the Indians had never been faced with such disease their immune systems were not built to defend them against such. These diesease thus brought death upon many, many Indians, wiping out thousands.
4. Read pages 7 - 10. In a paragraph, explain this sentence from the reading (which is the first paragraph under the heading of "US Westward Expansion."): "The new country's treatment of native people would contrast sharply with the ideals it set for itself."
"The new country's treatment of native people would contrast sharply with the ideals it set for itself." is a statement that is true. The ideals they set for themselves went along the lines of having personal liberty and individual rights and they believed that "thier nation was exceptional" but with the way the settlers treated the Indians, they seem like complete hipocrites. As the packet states they would take land from Indians " by trade, treaty, trickery and violence" which seems to contrast being an exceptional nation or personal liberty because it's not very fair to trick the Indians nor is it "exceptional nation"-like to use violence just to expand land. Some leaders actually thought it was unconstitutional to expand into other territories because it was never stated in the constitution that new land was to be added to the union. In addition, "Many early U.S. leaders believed that land ownership was key to preserving liberty" and taking land away from Indians seems to contrast their ideal of persoanl liberty if they don't get to keep their land and are tricked out of giving it up or violence is used until they do. In conclusion, the way the settlers treated Indians made the new country's ideals seem like they couldn't be fulfilled because their treatment of the Indians was contrasting their ideals.
The term "the West" masks a lot of different perspectives of the expansion of the west. One example of this would be westward expansion for someone who lived in South America, or New Mexico. For the people that lived there, it would be considered northern expansion because from their region, they are South of the expansion, not East, thus making it northern expansion, rather then westward. Another way "the West" masks the different perspectives of people is the for someone who lived in Russia, it would be eastward expansion because their starting point wouldn't have been from our east coast, it would be from the west, thus they would be going eastward. Lastly, although some considered the "westward expansion" the "advance of civilization and the winning of a continent" to the Native Americans it was a decrease in their land and the loss of what they had established before we decided to expand.
2. Read page 5. Summarize the three major areas of differences and misunderstadings between the Europeans and Native Americans.
Trade: There was much confusion among the trading category. One example of this is the values trade had for the Indians vs. the Europeans. Indians thought trade was about keeping friendships and basically being nice to one another while Europeans believed the only good reason for trade was to make a profit. A negative effect this had on the Indians is that they learned to rely more on European goods such as guns and horses, rather than their own items. Trading basically became a necessity to their new lifestyle.
Land: Another big issue was land. The indians viewed land as something they belonged to, for different reasons, wheather that be cultural, spirtual, or economic reasons. The Europeans however, believed the land belonged to them, and they did not belong to the land. They viewed land as something they could own and/ or sell which was something the Indians were not used to.
Treaties: Treaties became an issue between the Europeans and the Indians as well. When an some Indians would sign a treaty, the Europeans figured the treaty was valid with all the Indians, but that did not hold to be true. Genrally, the treaty would only be for specific Indian communities not all of the different communities as a whole. Lastly, Indians thought they were getting more than what they signed for in their treaties because of what was said orally at meetings. When in reality, they were only getting what was said in the treaties they would sign, and often did not realise what they were losing in their treaties.
3. Read pages 3 - 7 (stop at U.S. Westward Expansion). How did the arrival of Europeans transform life in the West? (Feel free to bullet point your answer. But use lots of key details!)
The arrival of the Europeans had many effects on the way life was in the west prior. As the reading stated that the Europeans had a huge impact on the west in ways such as "European diseases,rreligions, weapons,goods, and livestock" which "all traveled along Indian trade networks and sparked significant changes among western Indian societies " However "the three that caused the most profound changeds were horses, guns, and disease" To start, horses became a necessity to the Indians, they no longer depended on their own feet to get them where they were going and shaped their lives based on their horses. Some Indians became "skilled horse breeders" while some other Indian groups "became nomads, migrating witht eh seasons to hunt buffalo and care for their horses" They completly transformed their lives to revolve around the new animal they had been introduced to. Guns also became something that were necessary for the Indians survival. There was so much conflict going on that they relied on their new weapons to help get them through it rather then their old ways. Last but not least, the Europeans brought disease. Some of these disease were, smallpox, chicken pox, measles and cholera. These diseases spread quickly through Indian nations, and seeing as the Indians had never been faced with such disease their immune systems were not built to defend them against such. These diesease thus brought death upon many, many Indians, wiping out thousands.
4. Read pages 7 - 10. In a paragraph, explain this sentence from the reading (which is the first paragraph under the heading of "US Westward Expansion."): "The new country's treatment of native people would contrast sharply with the ideals it set for itself."
"The new country's treatment of native people would contrast sharply with the ideals it set for itself." is a statement that is true. The ideals they set for themselves went along the lines of having personal liberty and individual rights and they believed that "thier nation was exceptional" but with the way the settlers treated the Indians, they seem like complete hipocrites. As the packet states they would take land from Indians " by trade, treaty, trickery and violence" which seems to contrast being an exceptional nation or personal liberty because it's not very fair to trick the Indians nor is it "exceptional nation"-like to use violence just to expand land. Some leaders actually thought it was unconstitutional to expand into other territories because it was never stated in the constitution that new land was to be added to the union. In addition, "Many early U.S. leaders believed that land ownership was key to preserving liberty" and taking land away from Indians seems to contrast their ideal of persoanl liberty if they don't get to keep their land and are tricked out of giving it up or violence is used until they do. In conclusion, the way the settlers treated Indians made the new country's ideals seem like they couldn't be fulfilled because their treatment of the Indians was contrasting their ideals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)