Test Essay

During Andrew Jackson’s presidency he was known to some as “King Andrew” and to others as “The People’s President”.

Those who did not support Andrew Jackson’s actions referred to him as “King Andrew”, implying that he acted like he had absolute power. Jackson fired enemies and hired friends sometimes regardless of qualifications. This is better known as the Spoils System, which Jackson used to reward supporters. Jackson threatened to use the army to collect tariff of 1812 taxes. Not only did Jackson favor local banks that supported him, his veto of the Bank of the United States charter resulted in an economic crisis. Jackson forced the migration of Native Americans during Indian Removal. He refused to enforce the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of the Cherokees saying that, “The Supreme Court has made their decision. Now let them enforce it.” The Supreme Court may have ruled in favor of the Cherokees, but Jackson is the one with the army, not the Supreme Court. Jackson will not support the Supreme Court’s decision.

Andrew Jackson was from the backwoods of the Carolina’s. He was more relatable to the middle class than other candidates, which is how he gained the nickname “The People’s President”. Jackson even used the slogan, “Vote for Andrew Jackson who can fight, not for John Quincy Adams who can write”, showing how he believed strength was more important than education. Jackson created his legacy of defending the United States during the War of 1812, meanwhile making a name for himself in battles with Native Americans. Jackson’s popularity with the people was seen in the Election of 1824, in which Jackson led in both the popular and Electoral College votes, but didn't have the outright majority and lost. There was an outrage over his loss, which just increased his popularity. During South Carolina’s fight against the Tariff of 1828, Jackson kept revolutions at bay and kept the Union intact by preventing South Carolina from nullifying the tariff. Jackson also believed in Manifest Destination, and promoted western expansion.

I believe that the title “King Andrew” would have been more fitting for Andrew Jackson. I agree that at times Jackson’s decisions benefited the people, but only when it also benefited him. Jackson overstepped his power by continuing to pursue Indian Removal after the Supreme Court ruled in the Cherokees favor. Jackson did not want the National Bank because he thought it would be detrimental to his reelection. Jackson fired enemies and hired friends sometimes regardless of qualifications. He kept a “Kitchen Cabinet” in which he used personal friends for advice. He let his personal experiences influence his decisions. He fired the members of his cabinet that wouldn't socialize with Peggy Eaton because his wife endured the same harassment and he could relate to the Eatons. Jackson at times acted for the good of the country but most times his actions were motivated by selfishness.

I believe that the title “King Andrew” would have been more fitting for Andrew Jackson than “The People’s President” because at times he acted for the good of the country, but more so when it also directly benefited him.

If the Monroe Doctrine Was Applied Today...

The Monroe Doctrine was a major element of American foreign policy for decades, and can still be applied in some ways today.

Elizabeth Barber, a writer for Time Magazine, wrote the article, “Top U.S. Commander in Africa Is Optimistic on Liberia’s Battle With Ebola” describing the international effort provided by the American military to aid in the recovery of countries affected by Ebola. United States Army General David M. Rodriguez serving as the Commander for United States Africa Command told reporters that if progress reports for Liberia’s condition continue to show improvement, U.S. troops deployed in Liberia may be shifted to other countries in the region or sent back home. The Ebola virus has infected 17,14, and has killed 6,070 people. Around 2,900 U.S. troops have been deployed to West Africa to try and help contain the virus.   The World Health Organization said that cases in Liberia are “stable or declining”.  Liberia has reported 43 new cases over a five-day period, which has decreased from the 78 cases the previous week.

The Monroe Doctrine has three longstanding principles; separate spheres of influence, non colonization and non intervention. If the U.S was following the principles displayed by the Monroe Doctrine the decision of aiding Ebola stricken countries would have had a much different outcome. If separate spheres of influence was applied, the U.S would not have deployed troops. Soldiers would have stayed in the United States, and those infected with Ebola would stay in their countries. Non colonization cannot be applied in this situation because no one is trying to taking countries affected by Ebola. I think if non intervention was applied there would have been a debate. Non intervention implies that the U.S. won’t intervene unless the issue affects us directly. Some might say that because Ebola hasn't spread to the U.S we aren't directly affected by it, but I disagree. If we were to ignore the issue, then there is the chance that someone infected with the virus could enter the U.S and spread the disease here.  I believe that Ebola is serious enough, and affects the U.S enough for the need of intervention.

In the case of Ebola, the Monroe Doctrine could have been used to decide the U.S’s plan of action to ensure the safety of the citizens of the United States.

http://time.com/3617511/ebola-liberia-us-general/

Race & Identity in Latin American Revolutions and Today

Race and identity were factors in the Mexican Revolution and continue to be factors in the United States today.

The Mexican Revolution began with the famous speech delivered by Father Miguel Hidalgo, a Catholic Priest. The speech, known as the “Grito de Delores” or “Cry of Delores”, which called for the end of the three hundred years of Spanish rule in Mexico, redistribution of land, and racial equality. Hidalgo was eventually defeated, captured and executed. His attempt at revolution sparked many more peasant uprisings, such as José María Morelos. In 1820 liberals took power in Spain, promising to appease the Mexican Revolutionaries. In 1821 Agustín de Iturbide, the leader of the loyalist forces, negotiated the Plan of Iguala. Under the plan, Mexicans of Spanish descent would be seen as equal to pure Spaniards, but Mexicans of mixed or pure Indian blood would have lesser rights. Another racial divide was created by only certain ethnic groups supporting leaders. Hidalgo was supported by Indians and Mestizos, but not by the Creoles. If Hidalgo was successful in his revolution the Creoles would have equal rights with Indians and Mestizos, and the Creoles did not want that.

The current event I chose to find an article on is racial profiling. The article, by Robert King, “Racial Profiling Reaches Up Social Ladder, too”, discusses personal stories from people of color and their encounters with law enforcement. Reverend Theron Williams recalls taking his Corvette out for a drive in Indianapolis and being stopped three times by separate officers. The officers checked whether the car was stolen, cautioned him on his speed and asked him if he had taken part in any afternoon drinking. He drove home without a ticket, believing that his only crime was being a black man driving an expensive car. Williams tells Robert King, “It is just part of the black experience, it just happens when you are African-American.” It is unfair and unacceptable that people of color have to experience any racial profiling. Amp Harris, a promoter handling events for celebrities such as Jay Z and 50 Cent, was pulled over on suspicion of driving a stolen car. He was not driving a stolen car. Harris said that he “wouldn’t dare” be on a dark street to let a cop pull him over. He would have them follow him onto a main street because, “You just don’t know nowadays.” No human being should have to feel in danger near a police officer, someone who is meant to protect them.

I believe that race does continue to affect politics. Someone’s attitude towards a certain race can affect how they vote. For example: A person of color is running for mayor, or governor, and that person has good ideas on how to help the economy, the environment, and the town or state as a whole. But, this person will lose voters based solely on the fact that he or she does not have white skin.

Race continues to be an influence even hundreds of years after the Mexican Revolution.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2014/11/22/racial-profiling-reaches-social-ladder/19428725/

The Congress of Vienna

This unit we studied the Congress of Vienna and the different principles and rights put in place after it met.

The essential question for this unit asked what people in power should do when their power is threatened. Those in power should make every attempt to destroy revolutions and any further spread of revolutions. Although they should try to meet the needs of smaller sects of their people, they must first think of what would most benefit the entire country as a whole. They should work together with other powerful nations to crush revolutions and the spread of revolutions. In class we experienced deciding on how to respond to the threat of power from Metternich’s point of view. We were given scenarios that the Congress of Vienna dealt with and were asked to choose a response that we thought Metternich would have agreed with.

The Congress of Vienna was called to meet in 1814 to settle the many unresolved issues brought about by Napoleon conquering the majority of the continent. The background reading we received in class explained that the Congress of Vienna was a much needed peace conference for those of the war torn continent and the millions of families that lost loved ones during Napoleon’s domination. Together the Congress of Vienna agreed upon the Principle of Intervention. The Principle of Intervention was the ideology that gave the great powers the right to send troops into a country to stop revolutions and restore the monarchs. Since the amount of troops powerful countries were sending into revolution ridden countries outnumbered those in the revolution, revolutions were much more easily put out.

I think the powerful people at the Congress of Vienna made a poor choice. Instead of allowing large countries to separate into some smaller countries they wanted to keep them all together. Independent countries can be more successful than trying to keep the whole country as one. Smaller countries can celebrate their own cultures and religions. If the smaller countries were allowed to rule themselves there would be no need for violent revolutions. The powerful should be willing to sacrifice some of their power in order to keep their entire country from revolting against them.

In class, making the decisions on how to respond from Metternich’s point of view was helpful in understanding why the decisions were made. Looking at it from our point of view and already having an idea of how history played out would have influenced our decisions.

Nationalism

h

Reflection on Napoleon

Napoleon contributed precious artwork and money to France during the French Revolution. He abolished titles of serfdom, nobility, and Church privileges. Under his rule, more citizens had rights to property and education. He also established the Bank of France which balanced the budget and undertook major public works projects. The broad spectrum of varying opinions from the public on Napoleon can be seen in “The Lost Voices of Napoleonic Histories”. On the positive side George Gordon Andrews says that “...Napoleon be worthy of his page in the records of history”. One the negative side of the spectrum Andrews goes on to say, “Napoleon was so inconsistent in many of his actions…”, but goes on to explain, “so untrustworthy in much that he said of himself, and so all-inclusive in his ambitious designs that differing interpretations of the man are inevitable”.

Napoleon restored economic prosperity by controlling prices, encouraging new Industry, by building roads and canals and removing trade barriers. Some areas Napoleon successfully conquered were Italy, Austria (four times), Belgium, Holland, Venice, Cairo and many more. Some saw Napoleon’s invasion of Cairo, Egypt as a good thing, but others view it as negative for those living in Cairo. Napoleon reorganized the government which would have been bad for those who held jobs in the government and those who benefited from the Egyptian form of government. A good thing Napoleon did for Egypt was that he established the Institute of Egypt, which began the study of ancient Egypt.

He established a “meritocracy” where people were rewarded for their skills not their social class. Not everything Napoleon did benefited everyone involved. He was even described as a "moral dwarf". Although he added to France’s art collection, the art was stolen from Italy during the French Revolution. Even though he was abolishing titles of nobility and serfdom across Europe, he was also putting his family in the positions he had “abolished”. Madame de Stael was a member of nobility and the daughter of King Louis XVI’s former financial advisory so she was supportive of the government that Napoleon was overthrowing. Madame de Stael bitterly opposed Napoleon. She viewed him as a tyrant that rose to power through the persuasion of men by cunning and force. Marshal Michel Ney served closely as an officer with Napoleon and respected Napoleon from a military standpoint. Ney says refers to Napoleon as their “sovereign”, their “august emperor” and goes on to say that the right to “rule over our beautiful country” belongs to Napoleon alone.  

Starbursts and Socialism Blog Post #4

In class we experimented with starbursts to recreate what it was like to live in societies under Capitalist, Socialist and Communist control. To recreate Socialism almost every student started out with three starbursts,very few received ten. We then played games of rock-paper-scissors. If you lost you gave up a starburst, and if you one your opponent gave one up.You had a choice of whether or not you wanted to play. Then to demonstrate Socialism the teacher collected the candy and equally redistributed it, giving each student three. Finally, to demonstrate Communism when the students were asked if they wanted to continue playing rock-paper-scissors majority of the class refused. This showed how without a “government” the class came to a decision on their own on whether or not to continue playing for starbursts.

Smith’s theory of the invisible hand was created around the idea that there is no need for government control. Supply and demand will regulate business on its own by businesses offering competitive prices. The prices are lower in order to be competitive so the poor are able to afford it and the business people are still making money. Karl Marx’s theory of Communism begins with capitalism. Capitalism includes private ownership of industry with equality, freedom of competition, which results in unequal economic classes, a struggle between classes and eventually a worker’s revolt. The freedom of competition means that people born into poorer families have the same chance to succeed as the people born into wealthy families. Marx believed that Communism would lead to Socialism. Socialism is based around government ownership of industry, where the goal is to bring about equality, and to bring about a classless society. The classless society means that nobody would need to worry about being poor. Marx believed that Socialism would lead to Communism. The goal of Communism is to achieve a classless society with no government needed,

I think that the best theory is the Invisible Hand Theory. Rachel Bevere mentioned that she didn't think the poor should be left to starve and I agree with her. Since the prices are being lowered in order to stay competitive the poorer people could afford it. One flaw in this theory is that it takes a long time for the business and demand to regulate.

RAFT

The Luddites were skilled weavers, mechanics, and artisans. The Luddites attacked machines and factories in the early stages of the Industrial Revolution in England. They attacked the machines as a way of protesting the ‘fraudulent’ use of technology. They believed that factories were using machines in a deceitful way. The machines were taking business away workers who had had an apprenticeship and were skilled at their trade. Luddites were not violent. In fact more violence was inflicted upon them than they ever caused. Some of the original Luddites were cross dressers to call attention to their cause. The letter that follows is a mock primary source letter from a skilled weaver to her cousin in America.   

April 10th 1812

Dear Jenna,

I hope all is well with you and your family. A great revolution is happening here. Has news of the Luddites reached America yet? I’ll tell you anyway, and I’ll tell you what’s really happening from my point of view as a skilled weaver (if I do say so myself). The Luddites follow their leader Ned Ludd, who actually doesn’t even exist. The story I know of Ned contains a young apprentice named Ludd or Ludham who was working at a stocking frame when a overseer yelled at him for knitting too loosely. Ned grew enraged, grabbed a hammer and flattened the entire mechanism. Ned Ludd turned  into the Luddites symbolic leader. I do consider myself a Luddite. I agree that skilled workers that can create quality goods should be getting a pair pay, not factories that manufacture cheap goods in large quantities. Luddites are not violent, they simply destroy machines in an act of protest. Unlike the soldiers the government is sending after them. Just the other day the owner of a mill near Manchester ordered troops to fire into a crowd of Luddites, killing 3 and wounding 18. I have decided to attend a Luddite meeting tomorrow. It is not fair that unskilled workers working at machines should be able to take my business. Who is going to want to pay for the more expensive clothes that I make when they can buy cheaper ones from the mill? Write soon.

Attitudes Towards Women

The Lowell Experiment was an industrial project that tried to avoid the negative aspects of the Industrial Revolution in England. Women and young girls were especially appealing to the Lowell Experiment because of their nimble fingers. Another appealing factor of the women was that they would make obedient workers because women during that time were used to taking orders from men.

In an attempt to motivate women and young girls to go to the Lowell Mills, corporations promised that the girls would maintain morality and dignity. The way that authority was distributed in the mills and mill houses directly reflects the attitudes towards women in the 1800’s. A paternal system maintained throughout the mills reflected the dynamic of most families. The factory overseer set rules such as Church on Sundays, curfew at 10, and mill hours. The factory overseer was the “father figure” for the mill girls. The mother figure was the boardinghouse keeper. The boardinghouse keeper regulated behavior outside the mill, and the ‘home’ environment of the boarding house.

The benefits of working in the Lowell Mills definitely outweighed the costs. Although girls didn’t make much they made enough so that they could buy clothes of their own, they could put money towards their dowry, and they could send money back to their families to help pay for the mortgage. Girls also gained a lot of independence from their families. The mill girls looked out for each other, and were welcoming to new girls at the mill. Some negative aspects of the mill were that although the girls looked out for each other when one stepped out of line they made sure she was punished by being blacklisted from other mills. Being black listed meant that your name was put on a list and were turned away from any mill that saw the list. Working in the Lowell Mills was a good thing for most women and young girls.

Becoming a Luddite

I spent from 3 PM until 4 PM on Thursday without using my phone, laptop or any other internet connected device. I did not find it very hard. I spent the time working on my homework and the time went by very quickly. I can see how my phone could have been a distraction during my homework, but it was also inconvenient not being able to use it. For some classes I need to check Edline or text a classmate to find out the homework or to ask for help on the homework. I had to wait until four o’clock to find out some of my homework. I also like to listen to music when doing English homework and without my phone I was unable to listen to music. I understand that in some ways technology can be bad in that it distracts from getting homework done, but it is also good because it makes it so that I can have help with homework just a text or click away. Although not using my phone helped me stay focused on my homework it also made it difficult to complete parts in which I needed the internet.

A Visit to the Museum: Museum Curator

My group’s exhibit is entitled “Unlawful Conditions, Dangerous Workspaces, and Mistreated Children”. Our title accurately describes what will be featured in our exhibit. We came up with our title by examining each document and deciding the most important idea from each. After someone visits our exhibit they will learn about the children’s side of the Industrial Revolution. Visitors will become aware of the mistreatment of children and what the children went through for the Industrial Revolution to be successful.

We displayed the mistreatment of children with photographs of children, documents, and Acts that were put in place in an attempt to protect the children. The photo entitled “Children wore leather…” shows children with leather belts slung around them with a chain attached to a carriage pulling heavy loads.  The next piece we used for our exhibit was a chart called “Age Distribution in Cotton Factories”. The chart showed the starting age and the current starting age percent of people working in the factories in 1818, then again in 1819. The document shows that 49.9% of the children in the factories started working under the age of ten. The Factory Act lowered it to 3.9% in 1819. The Factory Act was an Act put in place in the United Kingdom to protect underage children from working under the unlawful conditions and hours. We included the Factory Act in our exhibit, which stated that no children could work past 8:30 PM or before 5:30 AM, that 18 years olds couldn’t work more than 69 hours a week and no one under 9 years old could work. We also put a picture called “Children in Coal Mines. Hurriers and Curriers.” This drawing showed miserable children pushing a cart through a dark tunnel. The image really added to the theme of mistreated children because even at a glance a visitor is able to see the sadness on the children’s faces. Another document we used entitled “Observations of Young Bobbin Girls” described that Bobbin Girls were young girls who set flakes of wool onto the Spinning Jenny and set the bobbins in motion by turning a large wheel. The document also revealed that most parents didn’t want to send their children to the mills, but needed to for the money. The final image we used in our exhibit was called “Young Helpers in Georgia Textile Mills”. The photograph showed very young children standing barefoot on a large machine. Children were not allowed to wear shoes because the shoes could create friction which could set fibers on fire. Since they were not allowed to wear shoes more industrial accidents were likely to occer. Our exhibit showed the “Unlawful Conditions” through the “Age Distribution in Cotton Factories” and The Factory Act documents. We displayed “Dangerous Workspaces” in the image of “Young Helpers in Georgia Textile Mills”.  “Mistreated Children” could be seen in all document but was most prevalent in “Children wore leather…”, “Children in Coal Mines”, “Hurriers and Curriers” and “Observations of Young Bobbin Girls”.

Visiting the other four exhibits created by my classmates broadened my knowledge of the Industrial Revolution. In the exhibit “Weaving Slavery into The Industrial Revolution” I learned that slavery contributed to the increase of wealth during the Industrial Revolution. Also, slave population increased between 1770 and 1860 in 15 southern states. In the exhibit called “Fueling Transportation in The Industrial Revolution” I read that the iron rail made travel easier. I also read that the availability of transportation made England 1/6 of its size. In the exhibit “Changes to Life Conditions Due to the Industrial Revolution” I became aware that factories during the Industrial Revolution created smoke and air pollution. Due to that pollution the river smelled bad and was brown and cloudy. The final exhibit I visited was called “A New Age is Looming over the Horizon”. In this exhibit I learned that population in London grew over one hundred years during the Industrial Revolution because people who used to work on farms were moving to London to work. Also families were separated by age to different working classes.

Visiting each group’s exhibit not only taught me different aspects of the Industrial Revolution but also the importance of color and a catchy title. The exhibits that used lots of color, were organized, and had a catchy title that related to their topic were the ones that were most enjoyable for me to visit and the most informational.