Friends or Foes

There is major conflict going on in the Middle East which is affecting the US foreign policy. Libya and the United Nations which consist of Egypt, Arab Emirates, and Qatar are fighting with each other over religion and land. The United States are allies with the United Nations and want them to come up with a compromise and resolve their problems with Libya without fighting and causing bloodshed. However, the governments of America’s allies do not want to follow the United States actions and instead want to resolve things with only using force. Even though America has been requesting they take this action for months, Egypt, Arab Emirates, and Qatar all continue to encourage local factions to fight instead of compromise.

The Monroe Doctrine was written by James Monroe who was an American president to address congress. In the doctrine he states his position on American and European affairs. There were three main principles stated in the doctrine which were: separate spheres of influence, non-colonization, and non-intervention. If the United States were still following the rules of the Monroe Doctrine to address the Middle East affairs they would use the non-colonization principle. The United States is trying to tactfully convince the United Nations to follow their route of action without trying to over dominate them. The United Nations is the United States allies and the United States does not want to lose their allies in the Middle East by making it look like they are trying to rule their countries. The Monroe Doctrine is basically saying stay on their good side and don’t cross the line by being overpowering. Even though governments do not agree on the terms of action to be taken, the United States will peacefully push their position of action onto the United Nations to remain at peace with them.  Reuters, David. "Libya Peace Talks May Be Doomed by Meddling Powers: U.S." Vagazette.com. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. .

The Affects of Racism

The Mexican Revolution ended dictatorship in Mexico and started a constitutional republic. The revolution began when Napoleon’s occupation of Spain led to the outbreak of revolts all across America. A Catholic priest Miguel Hidalgo issued his “Cry of Delores” which called for the three hundred years of Spanish rule in Mexico, redistribution of land, and racial equality to end. Hidalgo ended up being captured and executed and another revolution by a peasant leader named Jose Maria Moreios was attempted but ended up being unsuccessful. Liberais took power in 1820 and the new government was promised reforms to appease the Mexican Revolutionaries. Soon after, the Treaty of Cordoba was signed and Mexico became a constitutional monarchy. However, plans of Iguala were negotiated and Mexicans of pure or Indian blood would have lesser rights. The revolution was aimed at ensuring a fairer way of life for the farming classes. Hidalgo and Francisco Madero were supported by the Mestizos, but could not get all of them to work together. The news laws they had put in discriminated against certain races and caused more problems for the people of Mexico.

The current event article I found was called “Where Do We Go after Ferguson” by Michael Eric Dyson. This article was about the controversial shooting of a black man by a white cop that happened this past summer. Both white and black races were greatly upset when the cop was not charged, but mostly the blacks. In my opinion race and identity is still a big problem in the United States. I don’t agree that the cop should have shot the man, but would the same thing have happened if it was a white cop and a white man? People still define who a person is based on the color of their skin or their ethnicity. As much as we try to deny racism is no longer a problem in our country it is. I believe that even though times have changed some people of different races are still against each other. For example, black and whites most of the time have different opinions of things and make it hard to solve problems in the world. The racial opinions and ideas is what makes it hard for people in the United States to have the same views on problems that we face. Even though the United States has changed race still continues to affect national identity and politics.   Dyson, Michael. "Where Do We Go After Ferguson?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 Nov. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2014. .

Congress of Vienna

The essential question was what should people in power do when their power is threatened? This question is asking what the congress of Vienna was going to do when another power was trying to take over. For example, Napoleon wanted to conquer Austria and take over Metternich's power who was the prince of Austria. However, Napoleon was defeated and his conquest was reversed. Europe’s goal was to maintain a balance of power and have no one country be powerful enough to take over or dominate the others. In class we discussed the three problems that the congress had and what Metternich's decision would be to fix those problems. The first problem was the map of Europe, the second was governmental leaders, and the last problem was future revolutions. As a group for each problem we had to choose what option Metternich would choose to fix the problem and prevent their power from being threatened. When Napoleon was defeated the European powers used the Balance of Power, Principle of Legitimacy, Holy Alliance, and Principle of Intervention to eliminate the threats to their power.

The concept of Holy Alliance was one way Metternich and the Congress of Vienna eliminated threats to their power. The Holy Alliance was created by Russia, Austria, and Prussia. England did not want to take part in it. The alliance gave monarchs the divine right to rule. There were Christian values put in place in Europe and any revolution was a treason and against God. They used the alliance to create peace,  but in reality it did not because they did not listen to what the people of Europe wanted. The Holy Alliance impacted who would rule in Europe during the time.

In my opinion the people at the Congress of Vienna did not make the right choice. In the Holy Alliance monarchs had the divine right to rule. However, I think that this was a bad idea because they did not listen to what the people of Europe had to say. In my opinion a better way for the congress to react was to set up an election. If they set up an election the people in Europe have a say in who would be their leader. Most of the time monarchs are not the best leaders. If the people elected their own ruler it would be their fault if the ruler was not good. The powerful should be willing to sacrifice some of their power under certain circumstances because sometimes the most powerful can not fix the problem, but others can. If they pass down some of their power to others during certain times it could potentially better Europe and keep it from losing its power.

The Ultimate Victor

Napoleon Bonaparte made a huge impact on Europe, especially in France. He had a great impact on the political, economic, and social systems of Europe. Napoleon was a good leader who conquered many countries and changed Europe for the better.

Napoleon Bonaparte changed the political government in a big way. He took away monarchy and established the new system of meritocracy. This system rewarded people based on their skills rather than their social class. In 1709 Napoleon also planned to overthrow the directory and five of the directories members resigned. By replacing the directory Napoleon would be able to enforce the new government system and provide new jobs for people who deserved them. The power Napoleon had, gave him the opportunity to make the government system better in France and around Europe.

The economic system also had a positive change thanks to Napoleon. All across Europe he made French armies abolish titles of nobility and serfdom, ended church privileges, removed trade barriers, and stimulated the industry. Removing the barriers and making new canals and roads helped increase trade from country to country. To restore economic prosperity he also controlled prices and encouraged new industry. Controlling prices allowed people to afford new things and still have enough money to live off of. Bonaparte had a huge impact by establishing the bank of France. By doing this France could easily balance the budget and undertook massive public work programs. Napoleon’s ideas on making the economic systems better led to a more balanced way of living throughout Europe.

The last big impact Napoleon had on Europe and France was on the social system. He allowed more citizens to have rights to property and access to an education. He made this happen by abolishing titles of nobility and serfdom. However, this angered many of the noble people. They thought that this new system brought down their social class and status. Napoleon also redrew the map of Europe. By redrawing the map only Britain was not a part of Europe anymore and Frances territory was increased. All the land Napoleon had conquered made soldiers admire him. They believed he was a great leader and improved Europe for the better.

Napoleon Bonaparte made great advances in bettering the lives of people across Europe. His views and ideas on political, economic, and social systems in Europe inspired others and improved things for the better. Even though Napoleon was not loved by everybody, many people admire his dedication towards improving the government.

Marx's Theory Vs Smith's Theory

When we walked into class most people were handed three starbursts and a few others were given ten. The students with three starbursts represented the poorer class and the students with ten represented the wealthy class. We played rock, paper, scissors against each other to win more candy. Some people strategized by playing it safe, they kept their candy and didn't participate in the game. Most of us played and risked it while others broke the rules and tried to steal the candy. Playing the game was fun if you were winning, but it was frustrating when you kept losing or people were stealing from you. The purpose of this lesson was to show how the government worked.

Marx and Smith both had different theories about how to help the poor. Unequal distribution of wealth led to Marx theory which was socialism. This theory wanted the government to have ownership of industries and the goal was to bring economic equality. The whole point of socialism was to aim for a classless society. However, the wealthy people and government did not like this theory and opposed it. On the other hand Smith had a different theory. His theory was called The Invisible Hand. The thought was that no government control will promote business and supply and demand will regulate business in the market. This lead to business people lowering their prices and getting better goods hoping to attract more people. Competition was supposed to regulate the market and commerce, free trade, and limited government would help the poor.

In my opinion both of these theories is not a good solution. They might help at first, but I don’t think either will have a positive result. It is not fair to the wealthy to have a classless equal society because most of them worked hard for their money and deserve to keep it. We should still figure out a way to help the poor, but not make the wealthy lose all their money because of it. I also think getting rid of the government is a bad idea. Without the government there would more than likely be an anarchy and that would just make things ten times worse than they already are. Both of these theories could work for the time being, but I believe there is a better solution to this problem.   

 

Who Were The Luddites

The Luddites were a group who opposed technological progress. The group was usually made up of skilled weavers, mechanics, and other artisans and were followers of the mythical figure ‘Ned Ludd’. In the early industrialization the Luddites attacked machines and factories because they were against the methods of how technology was used. Most people however thought that they were a group of people who hated technology all together. Luddites protested because there was an unfair pay and they wanted more appreciation for their skills. Their wages were going down because machines were becoming more efficient. The paragraph that follows this will be a mock primary source letter written in the perspective of a young factory worker to her cousin in America about why she is against the Luddites.  What The Luddites Really Fought Against.

Dear Cousin,

There is this new group that has come about called the Luddites. They are a group of people who hate technology and have been starting to protest. They go around town attacking machines and factories as sabotage. I have recently got a job as a factory worker and enjoy the experience. I made some new friends and I get paid which helps support the family. The machines and factories have helped a lot of girls provide for their families and they might lose that opportunity if the Luddites continue what they are doing. If the Luddites come to attack my factory and machines I might lose my job and not be able to provide for my family anymore. The Luddites are bad for this town and they need to be stopped. The town needs to get more soldiers brought in to protect the factories and make sure the Luddites can’t cause any damage. I am also thinking about starting my own protest against them and see if I can get other factory workers to join. Hopefully everything will work out and my job as a factory worker will be okay.

sincerely,

Jenna  

Life In The Mills

The Lowell Mills opened up a new opportunity for women during the Industrial Revolution. The mills intrigued many women and they wanted to go their and work to experience a new life. They were told that the conditions would be wonderful and they would get to live on their own. The only bad part was the women had to leave their families on the farms and go live at the mills. The women did provide money to their families with their new jobs and sometimes had some leftover to buy themselves something like a new pair of shoes. The headmaster’s of the mills were very rude. They treated the women with no respect and bossed them around. Headmaster’s would even chop off a woman's hair if she didn't follow the rules. The Lowell Mills had some bad sides to it, but by the women working there they were able to learn how to live independently, send money home to their families, make new friends, and even buy themselves something new.

Looking Into the Industrial Revolution

Our exhibit is a major part of the Industrial Revolution. Each picture on the exhibit represents a different job that the children had to do while they worked in the mills. We put shoes, cotton, and coal on the poster to show how the children didn't wear shoes, worked in cotton factories, and the harsh conditions of coal mines. For the exhibit we used six different sources. The first source was called “Children Had Leather”. It was a photo that showed the mistreatment in factories and how leather belts use to be slung around children to pull loads of coal. The second source was called “Age Distribution In Cotton Factories” and it showed that in 49.9% of children started working in cotton factories when they were under ten years old in 1818. Fortunately in 1819 that percentage decreased to 3.9% of children working under ten years old. The third source was called Children In Coal Mine. Hurriers and Curriers”. This source was also a photo showing the mistreatment of children and how they were not allowed to wear shoes while working in bad conditions. The Fourth source was “Young Helpers In a Georgia Textile Mill”. It was a photo that showed how children worked with bare feet near dangerous equipment and could be seriously injured by the machines. The fifth source was called “Bobbin Girls” and it was an excerpt that described how young girls ran the machines and most parents didn't want to send their kids to work, but they needed the money. The last source we had was another excerpt called the “Factory Act”. This was suppose to help create laws that prevented children from working long hours and in bad conditions.

The title of our exhibit was “Unlawful Conditions, Dangerous Work spaces and Mistreated Children”. We came up with this title by looking at all the different bad conditions the children had to deal with during the Industrial Revolution. We discussed the three topics that we thought were the worst for the children and made it our title. I hope when visitors see our exhibit they will learn how badly children were really treated during the Industrial Revolution. I hope they learn about how young children were when they started working and all the terrible jobs they had to endure. They should see how the Factory Acts helped keep children under ten from working and stopped the unlawful hours and conditions they had to work in. This exhibit should help people see how bad the Industrial Revolution was and how it started to get better towards the end.  

As I walked around the  four other exhibit’s I learned a lot about the other parts of the
 Industrial revolution. The first exhibit I saw was called “weaving Slavery Into The Industrial Revolution” and it had a lot of pictures and showed how slavery contributed to the increase of wealth and products. It also explained how high demands for cotton made slavery in the mills more common. The next exhibit I visited was the “Fueling Transportation In The Industrial Revolution” and I learned that trains could travel through all different kinds of landscapes and reduced travel times. However, the new transportation negatively affected things and they wanted to preserve the nature. Another exhibit was “Changes to Life Conditions Due to the Industrial Revolution” and I learned that because of the factories there was a lot of smoke and air pollution. This lead to the rivers smelling bad, turning brown, and becoming very cloudy during the revolution. The last exhibit I saw was “A New Age is Looming Over the Horizon”. This exhibit showed how the loom made textiles easier and people began to spin in their homes. I also learned that five year old children could run the wheel and kids were separated by age into different working classes. Families were still poor because they only earned six schillings. All four of these exhibits taught me something about the Industrial Revolution that I never knew before.