Were Southern politicians more or les...

1. Were Southern politicians more or less likely to own slaves than other White Southerners?
Yes, the statistics show that politicians own more than just white families. 

2. Were higher level politicians more likely to own slaves than other politicians?

Yes. I think they felt that because they have more power in the government they should own a large amount of slaves. 

3. What do these facts suggest to you about the nature of the Southern political system?

The government officials aren't doing their job in listening to the people. Instead of stopping the Slave Trade, they are a huge part of it.

4. How uniform were the proportion of slaves in the population and the proportion of whites owning slaves across the South?

The amount of slaves in the populations aren't widespread but instead the percents are in the same range (40-60), except for Texas. The proportion of whites owning slaves across the South is pretty uniform because all except for Texas are in the range of 30-50%.

5. Was there a relationship between the number of slaves in a state's population and whether and when it seceded from the Union? 

There was a relationship. The higher the number of slaves in a state's population decided when it seceded from the Union because the white owners could not keep control. The higher number of slaves in a state's population meant that that state depended on the labor of the slaves. The northern states were able to keep their slaves because there were low percents of slaves in their population and their income didn't depend on their labor. 

6. What material advantages did the North possess on the eve of the Civil War?

The North was able to keep their slaves, thus they could make more railroads, farm more crops, and their output was higher. 

7. Do you think material advantages are decisive in the outcome of wars? Why or why not?

Definitely, because if one country has more guns and more ammo than the other, I think its self-explanatory as to who would win that fight. Maybe some countries have good strategies, but if they don't have the firepower they most likely won't kill anyone. Having more railroads and more mileage of railroads means easier transportation and capability to get to more places faster.

8. Why did troop strength peak in 1863?

Cannot be determined by the information given. 

9. Do you think that the differences in troop strength were responsible for the war's outcome?

Yes I do, because not only do wars need fire power, but they need soldiers. One man isn't going to win a fight against two unless he's like Jackie Chan or something. 

10. How does the cost of the Civil War--in casualties and expense--compare to the cost of other American wars?

It is probably the 3rd cheapest War compared to others. Plus people killed each other more and there were more diseases to kill soldiers.

11. Why do you think that the Civil War was so lethal?

I think the Civil War was so lethal because people weren't being wounded and sick, instead they were being killed in combat. Our medical science was not well equipped at the time. 

12. What was the radical Republican program for reconstructing the Union?

inflict punishment on rebel belligerents, confiscate all estate of every rebel's estate that was worth $10,000 or their land that exceeded 200 acres, then that land would go to each adult male freedman, changing "the whole fabric of southern society", the property of the rebels will pay for the national debt and indemnify freedmen and loyal sufferers, Rebel States will be divided into military districts and will be subject to military authority; 

13. What were the goals of the radical Republican program?

Get rid of "low white trash", and change the whole southern society. 

14. Why was the program unacceptable to President Andrew Johnson?

"The power... given to the commanding officer over all the people of each district is that of an absolute monarch." It can "reduce the whole population of the ten states to the most abject and degrading slavery." President Johnson doesn't like the fact that one officer is being given power over all the people, "his mere will is to take the place of all law."

15. Why do you think the North failed to follow through with policies that would have secured the rights and economic status of the freedmen?

I think they failed because their policies were tough. The North wanted to basically annihilate the southerners. Plus their authoritative figures were just one man. A big group of people can take down one man. 

16. What were the major political and social achievements of Reconstruction?

I don't think that anything immediately came out of the Reconstruction, but later in time, their amendments were considered effective. Slavery was eventually prohibited, so thats a win on their part. Also, citizenship was given nation wide and so was voting. 

Imperialism Essay

Imperialism vs. Humanitarianism

oil, resources, push gov style/ beliefs, pro kill, Racism

educate, infrastructure, democracy, sacrificing

Thesis: The period of American history in the late 19th century and early 20th century exemplifies the United States attempt to export it's beliefs and ideals in an imperialistic way by Example 1, Example 2, and Example 3.

Outline

"And so, by these Provinces of God -- and the phrase is the government's, not mine -- we are a World Power."

    Push culture/style on them

        a.  "There was nothing left for us to do but to take them all and to educate the Filipinos and uplift and civilize and Christianize them by God's grace do the very best we could by them..." President McKinely

        b. "My own belief is that there are not 100 men among the who comprehend what Anglo-Saxon self-government even means" Senator Albert Beveridge

        c. 

    Racism

        a. "1889-1903; 2 black americans every week (on average) were lynched by mobs- hanged, burned mutilated."

        b. "Dealing with Orientals"

        c. "our fighting blood was up, and we all wanted to kill (n-word)... This shooting human beings beats rabbit hunting all to pieces."

    Resources

        a. "No land in America surpasses fertility the plains and valleys of Luzon. Rice and coffee, sugar and coconuts, hemp and tobacco.... The wood of the Philippines can supply the furniture of the world for a century to come. At Cebu the best informed man on the island told me that 40 miles of Cebu's mountain chain are practically mountains of coal."

        b. "What we want is a market for our surplus"

        c. "And just beyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets... Where shall we turn for our consumers of our surplus? Geography answers the question. China is our natural customer... The Philippines give us a base at the door of all the East."

    Conclusion answers questions doesn't put more out there.

Essay

    

    History has proven imperialist countries has advantages and disadvantages but also a rough road. Being imperialist may come with with good ends, but the ends don't always justify the means. America is an imperialist power. It has gone about getting the things it wants through harmful ways. To be an imperialist country is to do things for self benefit only. It would do things like push it's own government and culture on the other country, racism against the opponent would spread across the country, America is an imperialist country because we have done all these things. 

    The United States has shown its imperialist ways through resources. "No land in America surpasses fertility the plains and valleys of Luzon. Rice and coffee, sugar and coconuts, hemp and tobacco.... The wood of the Philippines can supply the furniture of the world for a century to come. At Cebu the best informed man on the island told me that 40 miles of Cebu's mountain chain are practically mountains of coal." From this statement anyone can tell that taking over the Philippines is not for their own good but for America's and what America can benefit from it. "What we want is a market for our surplus", this statement pretty much defines America as an Imperialist country. Being Imperialist, the goal is add on to what one already has. This statement also shows that America had no intentions of helping the Philippines. You can that the products the USA would sell in their market would be the abundant resources they get from the Philippines. "And just beyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets... Where shall we turn for our consumers of our surplus? Geography answers the question. China is our natural customer... The Philippines give us a base at the door of all the East." This is another statement that shows America's goal for controlling the Philippines was for their own personal gains like making more money. 

    

     People see America as an imperialist country through it's racism. During the war with the Philippines there was immense racism that spread all around the country. At the end of his speech, Senator Albert Beveridge said, "Senators must remember that we are not dealing with Americans or Europeans. We are dealing with Orientals." Here he is comparing Americans and their ancestors, Europeans, to Orientals like they are some lower kind of human being. During the war against the Philippines, that is what people of America thought. "In the years between 1889 and 1903, on the average, every week, two black americans were lynched by mobs -- hanged, burned, mutilated." A humanitarian country would not be doing those kinds of things to people that are different than them. "Our fighting blood was up, and we all wanted to kill (n-word)... This shooting human beings beats rabbit hunting all to pieces."That just shows the kind of people Americans are. It got to a point where American soldiers didn't think of the war as a war but something related to game hunting and thought it was fun. Being a racist country during that war shows America is an imperialist power. 

    A most important attribute of imperialism is pushing government and culture onto another country. America's leader, President McKinley said, "There was nothing left for us to do but to take them all and to educate the Filipinos and uplift and civilize and Christianize them by God's grace do the very best we could by them..." He wants to make it sound like America has the best of intentions, but they are forcing their culture on the Filipinos. Through racist eyes that only see resources to be held and sold America makes it their business to force their form of government, religion, and education. They don't see that the Filipinos have their own way of living and were doing a fine job at it until Theodore Roosevelt decided, "I should welcome almost any war, for I think this country needs one.", and an American soldier fired the first shot. "My own belief is that there are not 100 men among the who comprehend what Anglo-Saxon self-government even means", said Senator Albert Beveridge during the debate about whether or not to take the Philippines. So not only do Americans think Filipinos are lesser than them but they don't even think they are capable of governing themselves. Thus they feel the need to go into the Philippines and force their government on them. 

    There isn't any question that America is an imperialistic country. It has sought to take the Philippines for their resources and not to help them. It has put it's people in a higher ranking, thinking less of others who are different. America had also forced its own way of life onto the Filipinos. All of these reasons show self interest and self gain in an imperialist way. Mark Twain once commented on the Philippine war. He said, "And so, by these Provinces of God -- and the phrase is the government's, not mine -- we are a World Power."

    

4th Q. Research Project

Try to get 10,000 views on youtube with my Did You Know video. I'll fix my video by working on the details.

"Civil" War assignment

1. Use evidence to describe the economic impact of casino ownership and gambling on Native American tribes.
"Only 48 tribes earn more than $10 million a year on gaming." That's 48 tribes out of 557 in America. A "more typical" casino for a gambling hall owned by tribes includes 3 trailers far from an urban market and they barely earn $1 million a year. This $1 million is supposed to feed a community of people. It is no wonder that Indians have the highest rates of poverty, unemployment and disease. $1 million couldn't feed a town of Americans.

2. What is the most significant problem of trying to understand the condition of the modern Native American population?

The most significant problem of trying to understand the condition of the modern Native American population is that people try to "generalize 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstances --" The only thing all Native Americans share is a relationship with the United States government.


3. In what ways are Native Americans a unique minority group in the United States? Do these reasons seem justified?

Native Americans are a unique minority group because they are; "distinct independent political communities retaining their original natural rights", "the only minority group in America that has signed peace treaties with the U.S government" and "the only ethnic group with a government agency specifically devoted to its well-being." These reasons do seem justified in that they have taken the routes to ensure their safety in America.

4. Please find 4 specific examples of the sorts of events generalized in this paragraph. For each specific example, include a hyperlink to a website explaining the specific event, and a summary of that event.
Making treaties

They were a primary mechanism for creating reservations and to secure alliances and acquire land.

forcing them onto/off reservations

It "provided Americans of European descent with a legal justification for depriving Indians of most of the continent and confining them to remote areas considered less desirable by whites."

dispatching children to boarding schools

It was a way to assimilate Native Americans. Army officer Richard Pratt said, "In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man." Thus was the prime reason.

outlawing practice of their religion

White Americans thought that by doing this it was "... unquestionably a great assistance to the Indians in learning habits of self-government and in preparing themselves for citizenship." (quote from the site)

5. What is meant by the phrase 'diseases of the poor'? What is the relationship between economics and health implied by that phrase?

"Indians earn only a little more than hals as much money as the average American...a third of Native Americans live in poverty, which is more than twice the rate for Americans in general."

6. Is John McCain correct in his assessment of the treatment of Native Americans? Why?

Yes, his assessment is correct. He is correct because he stated facts and those facts make the USA look and sound terrible. To think that White Americans have pushed these smaller nations so much that they have to succumb to "poor" diseases is a "national disgrace".

7. Please define each of the following terms in the context of Native American policy:

* removal : doing whatever necessary, including killing and laws, to acquire what is wanted/ needed.

* allotment : Setting aside pieces of land to seclude owners.

* termination : 1950's way to "deal with the Indians", Congress should sever any ties with the Indians. It was supposedly intended to help Indians become self-sufficient but instead Indians were forced to survive on bare necessities.

* relocation : moving out of the home to foreign places.

* assimilation : to look, smell, and act like an "American" and do "American" things and be a part of the "American" culture

* self determination : "greater Indian control of reservations, less dependence on the BIA."

8. Finally, give a paragraph summary on what self determination means, and why it either is, or is not, the appropriate policy for Native American people with respect to the Federal government.

Self determination means to live however you choose and not having to consult someone else. It obviously wasn't the appropriate way for the Native Americans because they were slaughtered over the course of 500 years. I wouldn't blame them for wanting to be self determined. As a teenager I sometimes don't like consulting my parents for things I want to do, but if it involves life and death then I could give self determination up.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html
indian removal
http://www.indianlandtenure.org/ILTFallotment/introduction/introI.htm

Indian allotment

Local History proposal 4th Q

A collaborative page on the 60's using pages on pbworks.com

Research Project 3rd Quarter

Mind Map New Deal