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.