American Imperialism
By: Kelsea Placey
The American invasion of the Philippines was an unfair equation between two countries in 1899. It was actually American imperialist egotism towards a small country like the Philippines. From the Philippines point of view, it's a war for independence. Even though they just got out from Spain, they still didn't have full independence due to American imperialism towards this country.
The reasons for American expansion and imperialism were relatively clear in the public area. The primary concern of the US has been and continues to be, business. Being one of the few countries largely founded by corporations, the United States continues its heritage and views. When the US doesn't take care of the needs of specific businessmen, companies, and industries it takes into account of the American business climate, and it recognizes how it can facilitate a larger business market, and popularity. These are some main reasons behind the invasion.
Hardships between the Filipinos and the American soldiers on the islands were there because of the conflicting movements for independence and colonization. There were many Hostilities during this time, and they started on February 4, 1899. An American soldier shot a Filipino who was crossing a bridge, and just from that taking place, they say that it was the cause of the war.
The war ended up lasting for about three years, and it was a very brutal war. It left hostilities continuing for years after that, until the establishment of the civilian government colonial government of governor William Howard Taft. After all of this happened, everyone looked at this war as one of the wars that would be forgotten by the U.S. Millitary. So basically, in conclusion, America is Imperialistic with the facade of being humanitarian. The government has claimed to care for the better of humanity, and the government has claimed to try to educate people and to bring them to Jesus Christ. However, when the government did these things through the force of arms, and through beatings and rapings that is deffinetly not a source of humanitarism. The have tried to put their ideas to other nations, because they think they have the best way. Also, that their way is the only possible right way.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
1. Were Southern politicians more or ...
1. Were Southern politicians more or less likely to own slaves than other white Southerners?
Ans-I agree with this fact.Politicians, many of them wealthy and slave-owners, were used as the example or model for the Southern population, when in fact the average Southerner lived day to day and could not afford to purchase another human being for $500-$1,500.
2. Were higher level politicians more likely to own slaves than other politicians?
Ans-Higher level politicians actually owned highest number of slaves then other white southerners.Here is a fact about government officials who owns slaves.About 53% County government officials, 68% State legislators and 83% Delegates to secession conventions had slaves,so the data revealed that higher level politicians had more slaves.
It represents actually slavery based political system which emphasized lower motivation towards humanity and unequal society structure. According to Cooper(author of The South and the Politics of Slavery: 1828-1856) to prosper in the South, a political party needed to present itself as a champion of Southern honor and protector of Southern interests, especially slavery.
4. How uniform were the proportion of slaves in the population and the proportion of whites owning slave across the South?
13. What were the goals of the radical Republican program?
To prohibit slavery, define national citizenship, add rights to hold public office, and prohibit denial to vote based on race, color, or previous servitude.
Ans-I agree with this fact.Politicians, many of them wealthy and slave-owners, were used as the example or model for the Southern population, when in fact the average Southerner lived day to day and could not afford to purchase another human being for $500-$1,500.
2. Were higher level politicians more likely to own slaves than other politicians?
Ans-Higher level politicians actually owned highest number of slaves then other white southerners.Here is a fact about government officials who owns slaves.About 53% County government officials, 68% State legislators and 83% Delegates to secession conventions had slaves,so the data revealed that higher level politicians had more slaves.
3. What do these facts suggest to you about the nature of the Southern political system?
It represents actually slavery based political system which emphasized lower motivation towards humanity and unequal society structure. According to Cooper(author of The South and the Politics of Slavery: 1828-1856) to prosper in the South, a political party needed to present itself as a champion of Southern honor and protector of Southern interests, especially slavery.
4. How uniform were the proportion of slaves in the population and the proportion of whites owning slave across the South?
In few southern states like South Carolina and Georgia, the proportion of the slaves relative to the total population is pretty high but also in some states they still remains relatively low. This same this applies to owning slaves in white families.
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 is some relation between the state population and the slaves which does differ from union to initial states to secede.
6. What material advantages did the North possess on the eve of the Civil War?
When we analyze the datas from the chart we can see that the north had all kinds of advantages than the south. The North had a larger proportion of infrastructure, financial, population, and financial resources.
7. Do you think material advantages are decisive in the outcome of wars? Why or why not?
it's clear that the northeast had the most resources towards the war, so it was crystal clear that north is going to win the battle.
8. Why did troop strength peak in 1863?
There is not enough data to answer this question.
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 is some relation between the state population and the slaves which does differ from union to initial states to secede.
6. What material advantages did the North possess on the eve of the Civil War?
When we analyze the datas from the chart we can see that the north had all kinds of advantages than the south. The North had a larger proportion of infrastructure, financial, population, and financial resources.
7. Do you think material advantages are decisive in the outcome of wars? Why or why not?
it's clear that the northeast had the most resources towards the war, so it was crystal clear that north is going to win the battle.
8. Why did troop strength peak in 1863?
There is not enough data to answer this question.
9. Do you think that the differences in troop strength were responsible for the war's outcome?
Of course it's a big factor because its what determines the winning side.
Because the number of people that lost, were from both sides. One side was fighting for their way of life, and their freedom, which is why they were fighting so hard.
Ans- Free school, free church, and free community events to develop a great community for the future. Also to give anyone whose estate was worth up to 10,000 dollars two acres of farm land in quanity.
10. How does the cost of the Civil War--in casualties and expense--compare to the cost of other American wars?
The Civil war is deffinately one of the most costly and bloody wars which did cost lots of lives all over the country.
11. Why do you think that the Civil War was so lethal?
Because the number of people that lost, were from both sides. One side was fighting for their way of life, and their freedom, which is why they were fighting so hard.
12. What was the radical Republican program for reconstructing the Union?
Ans- Free school, free church, and free community events to develop a great community for the future. Also to give anyone whose estate was worth up to 10,000 dollars two acres of farm land in quanity.
13. What were the goals of the radical Republican program?
To prohibit slavery, define national citizenship, add rights to hold public office, and prohibit denial to vote based on race, color, or previous servitude.
14. Why was the program unacceptable to President Andrew Johnson?
These program voted by president because his mindset wasn't radicaly.
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?
Because they were scared to know what would happen once they gave up their "help" of the slaves and to have blacks as equals to themselves.
16. What were the major political and social achievements of Reconstruction?
Many people knew that equal rights to all was the best thing to do, the right thing. Even still, many people were uneasy about the slaves being equal and this caused a major controversy.Friday, May 7, 2010
After fighting with Spain in Cuba in ...
After fighting with Spain in Cuba in 1899, USA wanted to show their power towards the world. As their mission, they attacked phillipinos, even though they didn't want to take phillipine. Also, the phillipine nation struggled with Spain for a very long time. After getting their freedom from Spain, they wouldn't want to give away their independence to the USA, so sometimes it is called the Phillipine war of Independence.
American notions of race and civilization greatly influenced U.S. support for the Philippine-American War that took place from February 1899 to July 1902. Their was another intension to go into the phillipine war to educate phillipine nation. However, after years of isolationist foreign policies, they coupled with the threat of growing European powers, and it had created a widespread anxiety among Americans into the 1890s. Historians do argue because the USA wanted to prove their political leadership, and their leadership towards other nations.
Imperialism, defined by The Dictionary of Human Geography, is "The creation and maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural and territorial relationship, usually between states and often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination." However, after judging the USA, it can be seen that the USA wanted to take this country or rule this country by removing the Philippine's own administration system. Also, not to tolerate civilian people, and last through massive destruction. Not only from that sense, but it is believed that every one will agree that you cannot destroy a nation just to prove that you are powerful.
They way that Ameican troops treated the Phillipines was excrutiating. At the time of the phillipine war, there were many stories that could have been told that were not friendly. A Very famous writer, named Mark Twain, told on the American invasion war of Philippine that the Americans have pacified thousands of the islanders and buried them. They destroyed their fields, burned their villages, and turned their widows and orphans out-of-doors.
The USA have acquired property in the three hundred concubines and other slaves of our business partner, the Sultan of Sulu, and hoisted American protecting flag over that swag. And so, by these Providences of God -- and the phrase is the government's, not general peoples' USA was and is a World Power.From his frustration about the situation over there from Mark Twain really forced us to think about the mass destruction happened in Philippines by soldiers of USA.
So at last it's proved that USA went to unfair conflict in Philipinnes where they started a dark history for poor filipinos.So from here we all should take lesson that how to take control and deal with them with respect so that there shouldn't be any masscare like happened in Philippine.
American notions of race and civilization greatly influenced U.S. support for the Philippine-American War that took place from February 1899 to July 1902. Their was another intension to go into the phillipine war to educate phillipine nation. However, after years of isolationist foreign policies, they coupled with the threat of growing European powers, and it had created a widespread anxiety among Americans into the 1890s. Historians do argue because the USA wanted to prove their political leadership, and their leadership towards other nations.
Imperialism, defined by The Dictionary of Human Geography, is "The creation and maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural and territorial relationship, usually between states and often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination." However, after judging the USA, it can be seen that the USA wanted to take this country or rule this country by removing the Philippine's own administration system. Also, not to tolerate civilian people, and last through massive destruction. Not only from that sense, but it is believed that every one will agree that you cannot destroy a nation just to prove that you are powerful.
They way that Ameican troops treated the Phillipines was excrutiating. At the time of the phillipine war, there were many stories that could have been told that were not friendly. A Very famous writer, named Mark Twain, told on the American invasion war of Philippine that the Americans have pacified thousands of the islanders and buried them. They destroyed their fields, burned their villages, and turned their widows and orphans out-of-doors.
The USA have acquired property in the three hundred concubines and other slaves of our business partner, the Sultan of Sulu, and hoisted American protecting flag over that swag. And so, by these Providences of God -- and the phrase is the government's, not general peoples' USA was and is a World Power.From his frustration about the situation over there from Mark Twain really forced us to think about the mass destruction happened in Philippines by soldiers of USA.
So at last it's proved that USA went to unfair conflict in Philipinnes where they started a dark history for poor filipinos.So from here we all should take lesson that how to take control and deal with them with respect so that there shouldn't be any masscare like happened in Philippine.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
1. Use evidence to describe the econ...
Civil War
1. Use evidence to describe the economic impact of casino ownership and gambling on Native American tribes.
That might surprise Americans who have consumed countless cheery feature stories about Indians making big bucks on casino gambling. Some tribes -- like the Mashantucket Pequots of Connecticut, who own Foxwoods, the country's largest casino -- have indeed gotten very rich. But less than a quarter of America's 557 Indian tribes own casinos, and only 48 tribes earn more than $10 million a year on gaming.
2. What is the most significant problem of trying to understand the condition of the modern Native American population?
Because there were so many people. It is impossible to generalize about 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstance. It was hard because everyone has a different past, and had different experiences, so in conclusion it would be wrong for people to say things about Native Americans as a whole, because they are all different, in so many ways.
3. In what ways are Native Americans a unique minority group in the United States? Do these reasons seem justified today, or should Native Americans be considered as a "regular" minority group (like African Americans, Asian Americans, women, etc.)?
As such, they constitute the only minority group in America that has signed peace treaties with the U.S. government, the only ethnic group with a government agency -- the Bureau of Indian Affairs -- specifically devoted to its well-being. Native Americans are the oldest tribal people that are her in the United States. I do believe that they should be justified as a regular minority group, even though it's not a proper way to describe this great tribal group, I do think it is the right thing to do.
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.
1.American Indians are the poorest people in the United States. http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=0fe5c04e-fdbf-4718-980c-0373ba823da7
2.Foxwoods, the country's largest casino
http://buffalopost.net/?tag=foxwoods-resort-casino
3.It is impossible to generalize about 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstances
http://www.native-languages.org/languages.htm
4. "Any objective observer would say that our treatment of Native Americans is a national disgrace."
http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/indian.htm
5. What is meant by the phrase 'diseases of the poor'? What is the relationship between economics and health implied by that phrase?
This phrase showed the current condition of native Indian Americans.The economical condition of native Americans are not too good, and also not only that, but they have to go through various discrimination and hatred. When it's a situation dealing with the health of Native American Indians, it comes down to it where they are far more able to succumb to diseases associated with the poor -- four times as likely to die of alcoholism, three times as likely to die of tuberculosis, and nearly twice as likely to die of diabetes.
6. Is John McCain correct in his assessment of the treatment of Native Americans? Why?
I do think that John McCain is correct when he says "Any objective observer would say that our treatment of Native Americans is a national disgrace." The United States government never really treated them in a honorable manner, and as of today, they are going through the worst economical and political time that they have never experienced.
7. Please define each of the following terms in the context of Native American policy:
Ans-Native American self determination refers to the series of social movements, legislation, and beliefs that support the ability of the tribes of native Americans in the USA to have a greater level of self-governance and decision making in affairs that affect their own people. Self-Determination's primary goal was and still is to reverse the paternalistic policies enacted upon Native American tribes since the creation of the tribal system and to enact and enforce new legislation that enables Native Americans to control their own affairs And i agree with this system because it should help Native tribes to lead a modern government administrative pathway.
1. Use evidence to describe the economic impact of casino ownership and gambling on Native American tribes.
That might surprise Americans who have consumed countless cheery feature stories about Indians making big bucks on casino gambling. Some tribes -- like the Mashantucket Pequots of Connecticut, who own Foxwoods, the country's largest casino -- have indeed gotten very rich. But less than a quarter of America's 557 Indian tribes own casinos, and only 48 tribes earn more than $10 million a year on gaming.
2. What is the most significant problem of trying to understand the condition of the modern Native American population?
Because there were so many people. It is impossible to generalize about 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstance. It was hard because everyone has a different past, and had different experiences, so in conclusion it would be wrong for people to say things about Native Americans as a whole, because they are all different, in so many ways.
3. In what ways are Native Americans a unique minority group in the United States? Do these reasons seem justified today, or should Native Americans be considered as a "regular" minority group (like African Americans, Asian Americans, women, etc.)?
As such, they constitute the only minority group in America that has signed peace treaties with the U.S. government, the only ethnic group with a government agency -- the Bureau of Indian Affairs -- specifically devoted to its well-being. Native Americans are the oldest tribal people that are her in the United States. I do believe that they should be justified as a regular minority group, even though it's not a proper way to describe this great tribal group, I do think it is the right thing to do.
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.
1.American Indians are the poorest people in the United States. http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=0fe5c04e-fdbf-4718-980c-0373ba823da7
2.Foxwoods, the country's largest casino
http://buffalopost.net/?tag=foxwoods-resort-casino
3.It is impossible to generalize about 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstances
http://www.native-languages.org/languages.htm
4. "Any objective observer would say that our treatment of Native Americans is a national disgrace."
http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/indian.htm
5. What is meant by the phrase 'diseases of the poor'? What is the relationship between economics and health implied by that phrase?
This phrase showed the current condition of native Indian Americans.The economical condition of native Americans are not too good, and also not only that, but they have to go through various discrimination and hatred. When it's a situation dealing with the health of Native American Indians, it comes down to it where they are far more able to succumb to diseases associated with the poor -- four times as likely to die of alcoholism, three times as likely to die of tuberculosis, and nearly twice as likely to die of diabetes.
6. Is John McCain correct in his assessment of the treatment of Native Americans? Why?
I do think that John McCain is correct when he says "Any objective observer would say that our treatment of Native Americans is a national disgrace." The United States government never really treated them in a honorable manner, and as of today, they are going through the worst economical and political time that they have never experienced.
7. Please define each of the following terms in the context of Native American policy:
- removal-he it is understood that Indian removal from time to time from their places and new facilities.
- allotment-The allotment system turned out to be a monumental disaster for the Indians. In addition to losing their "surplus" tribal land, many Native American families also lost their allotted land despite the government's 24-year period of trusteeship.
- termination-Indian termination was the policy of the United States from the mid-1940s to the mid-1960s.The belief was that Native Americans would be better off if assimilated as individuals into mainstream American society.
- relocation-After 1830 United States government struggled to force relocation of the southeastern nations Native American.
- assimilation-Military defeat, cultural pressure, confinement on reservations, forced cultural assimilation, outlawing of native languages and culture, forced sterilizations, termination policies of the 1950s, and 1960s, and slavery have had deleterious effects on Native Americans' mental and physical health.
- self determination-Native American self determination refers to the series of social movements, legislation, and beliefs that support the ability of the tribes of Native Americans in the USA to have a greater level of self-governance and decision making in affairs that affect their own people.
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.
Ans-Native American self determination refers to the series of social movements, legislation, and beliefs that support the ability of the tribes of native Americans in the USA to have a greater level of self-governance and decision making in affairs that affect their own people. Self-Determination's primary goal was and still is to reverse the paternalistic policies enacted upon Native American tribes since the creation of the tribal system and to enact and enforce new legislation that enables Native Americans to control their own affairs And i agree with this system because it should help Native tribes to lead a modern government administrative pathway.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
History of Softball
History of Softball
By: Kelsea Placey
By: Kelsea Placey
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Jfk Murder
I was crying, because Jfk was a really good leader, he did many things for our country, and it shocked me that some terrorists killed him. After all of this happened, i was very upset, and like myself, the whole country was upset, and disturbed by what happened. Everyone could see how serious the situation was, people were changing there ways because of what they saw.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)