Overview 6 & 7 B

Actively read the Sacco & Vanzetti packet.  Write one page explaining which “viewpoint” you agree with and why.

does our government have the responsibility to protect the right to speak out against  the government?

how can speech hurt physically?

when should the government be allowed to censor or amend the first amendment? 

what doth thou think?  

Henry Ford came out with the Model-T in 1908. By the 1920’s, there was nearly one automobile for every five Americans. It changed the way people lived, how cities were planned, and the assembly line production of the Model-T was a new business and manufacturing concept. I believe that the introduction of the first automobile in the US was a very important and defining moment in history, and it is largely due to this event that our lives are how they are now. Do you think it is important? How important? Are there other events in US history that have comparable importance in your opinion?

When the Model-T came out people were very excited for obvious reasons. It was an amazingly efficient, fast, new way to travel, and Ford had the brilliant idea of keeping costs low enough that even less wealthy Americans could afford a Model-T. Looking back as historians, we can see that there were also some negative aspects of the introduction of the car into American culture. The assembly line production was dehumanizing, and required almost no skilled workers. Because of this, manufacturers were able to pay their workers very little. They made cheap products that were sold to the average consumer. The items were so inexpensive that it fostered a throw-away consumer culture, that is still prevalent in the US today. Also, we know that cars, and gasoline engines in general, are huge contributors to global warming, and the Model-T was the first of these.

By comparing the good versus the bad effects of the introduction of the Model-T, do you think that America benefitted from the automobile? Do the negative effects on culture and the environment overrule the positive aspects of cars? Or vice versa?

Yes, that’s right.  The Gilder Lehrman site is down, so you are all granted respite.  Breathe.  Enjoy the sunshine.  Dance a little bit.

Sorry kids!  For some reason this didn’t post correctly on Friday!  Thanks to those of you who emailed me to let me know.

Because of the late notice, it’s just (active) reading for tomorrow — Please read in Chapter 23 from “The Prosperity Decade” to “Traditional America Roars Back”.

I know that Wikipedia isn’t the most reliable source, but when I did the reading from today/tonight I wanted to quickly get a sense of who McKinley was, so here’s the link with his information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McKinley

So we’ve spent the last half of a mod talking about things people did, but more about why they did what they did. It seems that people were very often motivated by money and power or fear and hunger. It seems like these conditions and incentives formed the political views of historical american citizens.

I always thought of the modern era as one of the least devoutly religious in American history. Clearly, though, religion influences politics to a great degree. Why, then, does it seem like religion had a much weaker influence on political matters during what I always thought of as a much more religious era?

A second, maybe more important question is whether religion, when it informs political decisions, is actually the basis for these decisions, or if just represents/covers up a person’s deeper motivations

Tonight, please write a one page wrap-up/reflection about the negotiation today.  Please include information about your own work and you work as a group (what went well, what was challenging, what surprised you, etc.) as well as information about the negotiation itself (how was your conversation today similar or different to the actual historical events?).

Hello everybody, it’s Tom. This is a post that was done for the reading that was due on Friday…I think. Unfortunately there were complications with posting and whatnot, but it’s cool now.

Here’s what I wrote (sorry for the rambling/ranting style of it):

When I was reading tonight’s reading, one simple, seemingly insignificant sentence caught my eye. “Herbert Spencer in England and William Graham Sumner a professor of political economy at Yale, adapted Darwin’s Reasoning to the human situation, producing Social Darwinism” (p. 359). What I noticed was that the ‘American’ was described, while the Englishman was not. I thought that maybe Spencer had been introduced earlier in the chapter/book, but the index points to him only being on this page.
This speaks to the self-centeredness of ‘America’ quite well. The authors clearly didn’t think it was necessary to describe the man from the other country, and even though it was probably not out of dislike or hatred for other people, it shows that the authors think we’re more interested in the ‘American.’
I know you may think that writing a post inspired by one sentence from the text might be ridiculous, but stick with me. The United States has had a history of portraying itself as more important than other countries. Even our sports are arrogant – the ‘World Series’ implies it is the most important, however, only 2 countries participate; the ‘National Hockey League’ is composed of the same 2 countries, but the nation referred to is obviously ours.
I’m rambling a bit, so I’ll get to one of the points: what makes us become so self-centered? I’m not saying I’d rather live anywhere else, but Sean Hanitty is quite arrogant when he insists that ‘America’ is the greatest country on Earth. I think I am very lucky to live in a great country such as the United States, but the country is far from perfect. From the self-indulgent, Botoxed faces in the mansions in Hollywood, to the cloaked, vampire-skinned faces of the Ku Klux Klan, our country has more than enough self-interest than you can wave a gilded finger at.
One of the things I’m sure some of you will notice is that I’ve put ‘America’ in quotes. How did we get away with calling ourselves ‘American’ and assuming people will know we’re from the United States? Are Canada, Mexico, and Central and South America just the ‘Fake America?’ Because why live in any other country of America, right? It would be crazy for anyone to want to live in a country with free health care, or one that doesn’t imprison people for practically anything, or one that doesn’t infringe upon a right to privacy guaranteed by a national constitution, right? I’m wondering if you guys get frustrated at this crazy, arrogant, self-serving culture we live in.
Again, this post rambled. My apologies.

     During the Gilded Age the north and the eastern half of the U.S. was growing in many ways. Industry was increasing tremendously, capitalism was evolving rapidly, and unions were being formed. Workers rights were on the fritz and many people worked 12 hour days in factories. These were hard times for the northern laborer populace, but it seems that in class we have been neglecting nearly half of the U.S. The West was also evolving rapidly from a frontiersland into prime agricultural land and cattle ranges. An especially interesting portion of the West was termed the Old West or the Wild West. This is the birthplace of cowboys and all the myths and stories out of these people. Myths about cowboys often are false. A large hole in these myths is hte freedom that comes with being a cowboy and great times one can have while being on “the open range”.

     Cowboys in many ways were just as hard worked and repressed as workers in the northern industry factories. When herding cattle in the spring and fall they usually worked 14 hour days with little to no relaxation time inbetween work and sleep. They had a diet that consisted of potatoes, dried fruit, beans, bacon, coffe, and bread. They earned aroudn 30 to 40 dollars each month. While working on the range they were not allowed to drink, fight, gamble, or even curse which is probably why most stories show cowboys fighting in bars and towns during their time off. These type of work conditions were very similar to those in the industrial northeast, but unlike the northeast the west did have many unions to speak of at least for the cowboys during the 1870’s.

     I think it is interesting how because the west was viewed as unknown and “wild” that myth and story came out of this area more than any other part of the U.S. The Northeast has no notable folklore that lives on today. Old West symbols and stories are still seen today. The Cowboy hat, a bison skull, and spurs are just a few of the symbols that are seen. The culture of the West is worn by everyone who wears jeans which also comes from the west originally made for miners by Levi Strauss. It seems to me that what lives on today of the northeast is it’s economic style and what lives on of the Gilded Age West are it’s stories, symbols, and culture.