Andrew Jackson

Essential Question: Is Andrew Jackson's long standing reputation as "the people's president" deserved? Why? Why not?

           Andrew Jackson was known as "the people's president". But was it deserved? There are many reasons for why Andrew Jackson was anything but the peoples president. The most compelling examples of why Andrew Jackson was anything but the peopls president are the bank war, the spoil system, and Indian removal. During the bank war, President Jackson strongly disliked the bank and believed it had too much power. Jackson refused to pass a bill that extended the banks charter, and the economy eventually collapsed as a direct result of Jackson's decision. Also, Jackson would reward supporters of his campaign with high government jobs. This is called the spoil system. While this system seems to be very appealing, most people appointed to these jobs were very unqualified, and sometimes even criminals. As a result of this, the government and the quality of decisions suffered.
Lastly, Andrew Jackson was responsible for Indian removal. Many tribes were forced to leave their homeland and thousands died during the journey. Jackson believed that he was saving them from the white people. By relocating the Indians, he believed he was doing them a favor. President Jackson said that Indians and whites couldn't live together. All of these elements together form a compelling argument to why Jackson was anything but the peoples president. In my group Project, we explained how all of these reasons put together shows that Jackson is not "the people's president".

Latin American Revolutions

Essential Question: Why is it essential to acknowledge human value regardless of race? How are the events in the Latin American Revolutions evidence of this social imperative?

           The essential question asks, why is it essential to acknowledge human value regardless of race? How are the events in the Latin American Revolutions evidence of this social imperative? To learn more about this topic, we first completed a pie chart of the different race percentages of Latin America. Then, as a class we divided into 3 groups (Mexico, Gran Columbia, and Brazil), analyzed documents, and made a timeline of events for our document topic. Lastly, we formed jigsaw groups, where a person from each revolution group formed a group of 3 with 2 other students, so that there was a representative for each revolution group, and shared information to answer questions.
         

During the jigsaw, we discussed 2 commonalities and 2 differences between the 3 

Revolutions. In my group, the 2 commonalities between the revolutions that we discussed were that the countries revolting all declared independence in some sort of way, and that all of the revolutions ended around the same time. The 2 differences between the 3 revolutions were that all of the countries fought different people, and they all fought in different places. Upon sharing information, we learned that race was clearly an issue in all of the revolutions. In all of the revolutions, people did not like their leaders being of another descent. They thought that their leaders would not be loyal to their country due to their nationality. Some thought that their leaders would secretly be helping their home country.

           Race still manages to play a big role in society today. It would be nice if race didn't matter, but unfortunately it does. People stick together based on similarities, such as race, and make judgments based on race. Currently, race is a popular topic in the news. There have been issues arising in Ferguson, Missouri lately. A black boy was killed by a police officer, and there have been huge race riots as a direct result of it. The topic of race is a very sensitive and controversial one. Race is a very important issue and is not to be taken lightly. Outbreaks are starting to erupt, but soon the floodgates will give way to the overwhelming pressure surrounding race issues in our society today.

         
       

Revolutions of 1830 and 1848

Essential Question: Were the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 really failures as many historians have concluded?

     Lately in class, we have been studying the revolutions of 1830 and 1848. Our goal has been to figure out if the revolutions were complete failures, or if they accomplished something productive. To find out, the class was split into groups and each group was assigned a revolution. Each group examined documents about their revolution and took notes. With this information, each group made a survey monkey. As a class we took each other's survey monkeys and went over the answers.

     My group and I were assigned the French Revolution of 1848. We analyzed documents and took notes on the goals, opponent, outcome, and reason for success or failure of the revolution. We then created a survey monkey on the information. During the French Revolution of 1848, the people denounced Louis Philippe's government for corruption. Discontent was heightened by a recession and many people lost their jobs and the price of bread rose.  The people demanded expanded suffrage. Louis Philippe abdicated, and the second republic was proclaimed. Middle class liberals wanted political reforms and socialists wanted social and economic change to help feed hungry workers, and New jobs were demanded. Workers rioted for lower bread prices, and bourgeois attacked them. The constitution for the second republic was issued which created a strong president, a one house legislature, and gave all adult men the right to vote.  Napoleon III was chosen to be the president of the second republic, but eventually proclaimed himself emperor, which ended the second republic.The second republic is described in Readings in European History. "The republic is proclaimed. The people are united."(J. h. Robinson, 1906, Readings In European History). Also, information on Napoleon III declaring himself emperor can be found in The Rise and Fall of The Second Empire. "In short, I asked myself: since France has been functioning for the past fifty years only thanks to administrative, military, judiciary, religious and financial organization of the consulate and the empire, why should we not also adopt the political institutions of the period?"(Alain Plessis, 1852-1871, the rise and fall of the second empire).
     Not all of the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 were failures. Some of them were complete failures, while some of them were profitable. The Decembrist revolt of 1825 was a failure. The people of Russia were fine until the death of Tsar Alexander I. After the death of Tsar Alexander I, Tsar Nicholas I was left the thrown. Everything went downhill from there. This is described by Marquis de Astolphe Custine Custine. "The government of Russia is an absolute monarchy moderated by assassination...The more I see of Russia, the more I approve of the conduct of the Emperor in forbidding his subjects to travel, and in rendering access to his own country difficult to foreigners.". Tsar Nicholas made it so that no one could leave Russia, and made it difficult for people to come into Russsia. He also left the peasants In a state of unforgivable neglect. This revolution was a complete failure. The French Revolution of 1848 was almost a success. After Louis Philippe was abdicated, the second republic was proclaimed. While it stood, the second republic benefitted many. This is described in the French Revolution of 1848 document. "Napoleon III, like Louis Philippe, ruled at a time of rapid economic growth. For the bourgeoisie, the early days of the second empire brought prosperity and contentment.". The people did receive some of the things they were hoping for, like extended suffrage. The bourgeoisie won too because they created the National Assembly and elected the new government. This revolution was almost a success. Lastly, the revolution of Hungary of 1848 was a success. Hungary wanted an independent government, but Austrian troops smashed the rebels in Budapest. Many were imprisoned, executed, or forced into exile. Then Louis Kossuth wrote a Declaration of Independence. This is described in the revolution of Hungary of 1848 documents. "On April 14, 1849, the Hungarian Parliament in Debrecen, following an appeal by Kossuth, unanimously adopted the following declaration.". Hungary was now free from Austria. This revolution was a success.

 

 

 

Congress of Vienna

Essential Question: What should people in power do when their power is threatened?

     In class, we have been studying Napoleon and his conquests. Obviously Napoleons reign did not last forever. Eventually Napoleons power was threatened, and he was exiled to the island of St. Helena where he died in 1821. This begs the question, what should people in power do when their power is threatened? To answer the question, we have been reading documents and watching reenactments about the decisions of Klemens Von Metternich and the Congress of Vienna.
     When Metternich and the other powerful people at the Congress of Vienna noticed that their power was being threatened by Napoleon, they eliminated him with the concept of balance of power.
The Congress of Vienna decided to bring French territory back to its boundaries as existed prior to expansion. Further, expand Prussian territory so as to surround France with a stronger neighbor. Establish the Kingdom of the Netherlands as another stronger border state. Give Russia and Austria additional territory as a condolence for the difficulties faced under Napoleon’s conquest. This land redistribution will ensure a balance of power for the allies in the face of any later attempts at French expansion. The reason for this was because it maintained a balance of power between Russia, Austria, Prussia, Britain, and France. It also reversed the changes of Napoleon's conquest. The impact that the Congress of Vienna had was peace among the major European powers. There were no wars between the 5 major powers of Europe up to 1853.
     I believe that the Congress of Vienna made the right decision. There would have been no need to punish France by taking additional land away. The only way that the Congress of Vienna could peacefully restore order was to only take back the land that Napoleon acquired during his conquest. Also, by surrounding France with strong neighbors and redistributing land, France could no longer expand like it did before. This choice may have not been the most popular among some people, but it was definitely the right one. In this situation, it is crucial to be willing to give up some of your power for the greater good. If the European powers were not willing to give up some of their power, there would have been no land redistribution, and no solution to protecting their power form Napoleon.

Citation

     

Ideologies

Essential Question: What were the major political ideologies of the 19th century and how did they influence social and political action?
     Lately, we have been studying conservatism, liberalism, and nationalism. The major political ideologies of the 19th century. To learn more about these ideologies, the class was divided into six groups. Each group made a presentation on either conservatism, liberalism, or nationalism. Once the presentations were finished, we watched them as a class. While watching the videos, we discussed and took notes.

     Liberalism presentationMy common craft presentation helps define and liberalism because it gives key information and the main beliefs about it. Such as the belief in individual liberty for all. Another important aspect of liberalism is the belief in human born natural rights. Rights you aquire naturally from birth. Liberals supported innovations and reform and thought that religions were just superstitions. Liberalism influenced social action during the 19th century through beliefs in social status. Liberalism supported meritocracy, the belief in acquiring jobs based on your skills and not your social class, and middle class participation in government. This gave more people a chance to change their social status and have a say in government. Liberalism also influenced political action during the 19th century through beliefs on how government should control people. It promoted constitutional monarchy over absolutism. Also, liberalism asserted that the goal of government was to protect and promote individual liberty. 
    From watching the presentations on conservatism, I now know that conservatism did not promote innovation and reform(unlike liberalism), and supported keeping things traditional. Conservatives feared change. They thought there would be a revolution if the change failed or backfired. They also supported monarchy. Conservatism influenced both social and political action during the 19th century through beliefs in how the government should control people and determine social class. Nineteenth century conservatives supported monarchy, the hierarchical class system dominated by aristocracy, and the church. They also opposed innovation and reform. From watching the presentations on nationalism, I now know that nationalism is the bringing together of nations through shared language culture and history. Nationalism and liberalism both shared a spirit of optimism, believing that their goals represented the inevitable, historical progress of humankind. Nationalism influenced both social and political action during the nineteenth century through beliefs in uniting nations. Nationalism supported the belief of uniting nations to make them stronger as a whole. Bringing together through language, culture and history. 


 

Napoleon's Impact on Europe

Essential question: What was Napoleons impact on the social, economic and political systems of Europe?
     Many people have different opinions on Napoleon Bonaparte, and whether he was good or evil. But in the end, what stands out is the huge impact he had on the world and Europe especially. Long ago when Napoleon controlled Europe, he impacted European society in many different ways. One impact he had, was on European economic systems. Napoleon encourage new industry and built new roads and canals. He also established mitocracy, which allowed citizens to acquire jobs based on their skills and not just their social class or connections. This allowed for many poor citizens to have jobs and for many jobs to be created. Ida M Tarbell wrote, "These deeds are great epics. They move in noble, measured lines and stir us by their might and perfection. It is only a genius of the most magnificent order which could handle men and materials as Napoleon did.". This explains how Napoleon was able organize men and materials like no other. How he was able to do great things such as establish ways to form a more efficient economy. Another impact that Napoleon had was on European political systems. During his rule, Napoleon redesigned the government entirely. He mixed the social and economic classes, and allowed for economic access for all classes. He made education accessible to all, not just the rich. Napoleon also made the government more democratic. From the writings of Madame de Staël, "It is necessary" he said "to do something new every three months, in order to captivate the imagination of the French nation, with whom anyone who stands still is lost.". This excerpt helps show that Napoleon cared for his people. He wanted to find ways to keep his people happy and well kept. The final impact Napoleon had was on the European social system. There were many ways that he improved the European social system. Due to Napoleon new laws and political system, he improved education and daily life. More citizens had rights to property and access to education, not just the rich. He also encouraged the sharing of new ideas and new economic systems. He gave economic access to all classes. From the words of Marshal Michel Ney, "The times are gone when the people were governed by suppressing their rights. Liberty triumphs in the end and our august emperor comes to confirm it." . This quote explains how Napoleon gave his people more freedom and access to new things.  How he cared about the rights of his people and did not suppress them.

Citation

Citation

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism

     This week in history class, we had a very entertaining lesson on Karl Marx's theory of capitalism. To begin the lesson, we were all given three Hershey's Kisses. Then, everyone had to play Rock Paper Scissors with each other in an attempt to win chocolates. If you won, you took one Hershey's Kiss from the class mate. If you lost, you had to begrudgingly surrender one of your chocolates. After we finished playing, some were left with 10 and some were left with none. The teacher then collected all of the chocolates and handed them out again to make sure we all had three. The purpose of this was to represent that capitalism allowed for some people to become really rich or really poor. Then the wealth was collected and redistributed among the population. I really enjoyed this lesson. Especially because we got to move around and work with our hands. It was a relief from writing notes and analyzing pictures.
     Adam Smith's Invisible Hand theory was also beneficial to the poor. In the Invisble Hand theory, the poor would help themselves. The theory purposes that by letting the economy run freely with no support or guidance, people will buy things from venders and the economy will naturally d flourish as if an invisible hand is guiding it. This will allow for the poor to acquire goods more easily and at a lower price. The Invisible Hand mostly benefitted the poor. Adam Smith developed this theory wanting to give the poor more options. The Invisible Hand allowed the poor to earn money and purchase items with no restraints. The theory included commerce and free trade. This made acquiring everyday items much easier for the poor.
     For their time, both of these theory's were revolutionary. They still play a big role in the world today. I believe that both of these options are not perfect and could be made better. But out of the two, Adam Smith's theory is definitely superior. I believe that the collecting and redistributing of wealth would not be liked. People should be able to work hard and earn a lot of money with out having it taken away and given to others who don't work at all. Adam Smith's theory allows the population to earn their own money at their own pace. The beauty of it is that the economy supports itself and naturally flourishes over time. This theory also prevents the poor from having no money at all. 
   

MOSI Live Chat Expereince

     The live video chat with Jamie was very cool. Especially because it was all the way over from Britain. Also, because we were getting information straight from the source rather than online. But we did have to do a lot of work to prepare for the chat. One thing we did to prepare was to read, observe, and investigate the MOSI website and write down three things that we learned. Another way we prepared for the chat was by watching a video of Jamie giving a tour of the museum and keeping a running list of terminology. We also had to draft two questions about industrialization with our group that we would like to ask Jamie during the chat. Lastly, we used our google keyword search skills to find the definitions of the MOSI machines video vocab.
     During the chat we learned many things about the machines, how they work, and the whole process of producing fabric. Before the production of factories and steam powered machines, the whole process to produce cloth took weeks. Also, the spinning wheel, which was usually manned by children, was slow and hand powered. The spinning wheel has been around since the 11th century and was generally simple. Later, Richard Arkwright invented the water frame, which was patented in 1769. The water frame was a faster alternative to the spinning wheel and was originally powered by water wheel. Another thing we learned during the chat was the positive and negative impacts of the industrialization of textile production on families. Some of the positive impacts were that families no longer had to spend weeks producing cloth. They now had cloth readily available to them. Also,  more jobs were created due to the factories. A negative impact was that many of the people who went to work in the factories eventually lost limbs, died by being sucked up into a machine, or had a terrible factory accident. All the knowledge that Jamie had of everything in the museum, made me realize that being a museum curator is not easy. Curators are basically a teacher. Teaching the public about our history.
     Overall, I liked the MOSI Video chat. It is fun to hear information directly from the source than looking it up on the internet. I think that I learned a lot more from discussing the topic with an outside expert. I would definitely like to do this again in the future and I believe that I will benefit from it.

Why was Industrialization so Revolutionary

     In honors history 10 A block, we are exploring the topic of the industrial revolution. The essential question is, what was ' revolutionary ' about industrialization? The 4 ingredients to industrialization that we have talked about are people, technology, resources, and transportation.
     One ingredient that played a big role in industrialization was technology. During this time period,  many breakthroughs in technology were produced. Such as the steam engine and improved iron. Before the steam engine, mines were cleared and emptied by hand, and transportation was very limited. The steam engine allowed for water to be pumped out of mines, rather than the slow and dangerous process of doing it by hand. The steam engine was also fitted to power boats, trains, and locomotives which aided in faster transportation and shipping of goods. Before the invention of improved iron, smelting iron was difficult and produced iron that was expensive and not the best quality. In 1709, Abraham Darby discovered that smelting iron with coal gave off impurities that damaged the quality of the iron. Once he knew this, he figured out a way to remove these impurities and produce better quality and less expensive iron. This improved iron was then used to build most of the railroads. Breakthroughs like these were truly revolutionary and changed the world as we know it. Without them, we would not be where we are today.
     Another ingredient that played a big role in industrialization was transportation. This time period was also know for new forms of transportation. Such as the steam locomotive and the steam boat. Before the steam locomotive, factories relied on water travel to ship their products. The invention of the steam locomotive made it easier for factories to sell to areas where water travel could not get to.  The invention of the steam boat played a big role also. Before the steam boat, goods were transported on wooden ships. They were slow and could not carry a lot. The steam boat was a lot faster and could carry 10 to 20 times the amount carried by wooden ships. These inventions were truly revolutionary for their time and still are today, because without them we would not be where we are today.Citation

Citation

Molding The Minds of The Future

             Hello, I'm Matthew. I am a high school sophomore and this is a portfolio of my work. This particular blog post is on the topic of teachers. The unsung heroes of our society.

             Most people, especially students, take teachers for granted. They're not just people who bombard us with homework and assignments. They mold the minds of our future. People like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had to learn from somewhere. What makes a teacher truly great is the ability to understand the students and their learning needs. A great teacher figures out a way to help the students really absorb the information. Instead of having them read a chapter of the textbook in class and complete a packet for homework. Less can be more. Sometimes interactive activities and group work really help. When I was in sixth grade I had a science teacher named Mr.Williams. To this day he has been the best teacher I have ever had. Mr.Williams might not have been the one to hand out candy or not assign homework. But he didn't sabotage us when it came time for tests. He made sure that everyone was totally comfortable with the subject before testing us. He would use every weapon in his arsenal.This is a vital quality to have in order to succeed as a teacher.  A specific thing that you, Mrs.Gallagher, could do to really support me this year would be to really understand us students and our learning needs.

             I agree with John Green that it is our duty as students to use our education to do great things. Someday we will be the ones responsible to change the future and push society forward. For this year I hope to reach a 4.0 gpa and hopefully keep improving it. To reach this goal I will work to keep all quarter grades in the A range.

Citation