Expectations vs. Reality

Lately in class we have been learning about the Women’s Rights Movement. We have learned by doing hands on experiences and diving right into the lives of the women who were treated so poorly in the 1800's.

Women in the 1800's were considered weaker and overall less than men. In the Lavender article, it discusses the four characteristics of an ideal woman. The four characteristics of an ideal woman are 1. Piety; purifying society through suffering 2. Purity; purity especially sexual 3. Submissiveness 4. Domesticity. Society believed that women should not enter the public sphere but stay safe in the private sphere. The public sphere was the world outside the home. Men worked in jobs full of temptation, violence, etc.  in the public sphere. The private sphere was the home and this is where the women stayed. Middle class women were to stay in the home and take care of the house and children, providing comfort and companionship to men, and remain out of the public eye.

The Seneca Falls Women's Rights Convention was a convention in 1848 in which women from all over America went to in Seneca Falls, New York. They discussed the plight of women and proposed a number of reforms that could have made life better for women. Men's voices were left out of the conversation. They finally had had enough of society's view on them and they decided to take action against what they were supposed to be for what they were. The Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions was a declaration formed in July of 1848 that resolved the issues of women's rights. Like the Declaration of Independence, it was formed in July and it has almost the same exact words and structure. Women's suffrage was the idea that women should have the right to vote. It was controversial because African American men obtained the right to vote while women of all races still had not yet had the right to vote.

We, as a class, took on the roles of women from the 1800's. We were supposed to step into the shoes of a group of 1800's women and act as if we were in the Seneca Falls Convention. My group was the Middle- and Upper-Class White Reformers. We were given the goal to make a list of five problems that should be resolved by this convention, based on the needs and beliefs of your social group. We had to number them in order of importance from greatest to least. As I looked at all of the groups ideas and resolutions, I noticed that there were many similarities. Comparing the resolutions that we formed and the The Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions, both had almost exact similarities in which that both covered and resolved the same topics. I feel that the only contrast between the two was that the The Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions was a little more vague and open-ended, where as ours was very specific.

I feel as though the most important resolution was women's suffrage. Although things such as abuse are much more severe, they cannot be legally enforced and will not be able to catch every time, whereas women's suffrage sparks the beginning of women's rights actually transforming. Women will be able to have a say in what happens and will be able to shape the future with the right to vote. Women have the right to argue that some things are not equal between genders, but there's one thing that they cannot argue about, and that's suffrage. Women now have the right to vote. They cannot say that voting fluctuates like salaries or job opportunities, no vote is more important than another, they are all equal. A man's vote is equal to a woman's vote. This was a huge achievement by women because they sparked a movement that snowballed off of each achievement before it, all starting with women's suffrage. Many of the resolutions from The Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions have been resolved since.

Women were considered inferior to men for many years. They then stood up for what they believed in and made a change. This change happened so rapidly, that it out paced the preceding actions before it. It all starts with one spark. I learned to stand up for what you believe in and to never back down.

Modern Day Monroe Doctrine

The Monroe Doctrine had a major impact on US foreign policy for decades and, in some ways, still impacting the US. One article that discusses an important current issue in US foreign policy is from the Washington Post about the nuclear weapon threat in Iran.

For the past decade, Iran has supposedly been developing a nuclear weapon. There have only been talks that they have been developing a nuclear weapon. There is no substantial evidence to prove that this is true but the world and the US are still worried. They could use this as a threat or sell it in the black market to enemies of the US or terrorists.

There are few options that the US could choose from to do about this issue if it was following the three lasting principles of the Monroe Doctrine: 1. Separate spheres of influence 2. Non-colonization 3. Non-intervention. The US has to wait until it is proven that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and then they have to wait until Iran invades the Western Hemisphere, and then they have to wait until they threaten us directly, and then they can take action. By this time, there are very few options but to invade wherever the Iranian army is and destroy their weapons. Also, by this time, the nuclear weapon will probably be in the possession of many other countries and organizations and then the US has to wait until they invade and then threaten in order to take action.

The Monroe Doctrine is still used in some ways today. There are many different issues in US foreign policy. One of them includes the talking of Iran developing a nuclear weapon. If the US is following the three lasting principles of the Monroe Doctrine then they don't have many options. They must wait for Iran to go through many steps and then they can take action, but by that time the weapon will most likely have already spread. Parts of the Monroe Doctrine are useful and necessary for current issues in US foreign policy, but most of them will only hurt us.

 "A Nuclear Deal with Iran Will Require the West to Reevaluate Its Presumptions." Washington Post. The Washington Post. Web. 9 Dec. 2014. . 

The Power of the Past

The past shapes the future, with every event, belief, and action making history in time. The Brazilian revolution was one of the only revolutions to have no war, physical fighting, or bloodshed. It all started with the Portugese monarchy. They were in Portugal until Napoleon conquered it in 1807, but the Portugese monarchy fled to Brazil before he conquered it. In 1815, Napoleon was defeated and the Portugese monarchy could return to Portugal, but they didn't. Also in 1815, King John VI made Brazil a kingdom which upset and angered many brazilian citizens. In 1821, King John VI was forced to return to Portugal by the Brazilian army but Prince Pedro stayed as the prince regent. In 1822, Prince Pedro declared Brazil's independence. In 1825,  Portugal reconized Brazil's independence. In 1831, Prince Pedro abdicated the Brazilian throne and returned to Portugal, leaving the throne to a team of advisors who ruled for the five year old Pedro II. The Brazilian revolution was a revolt of race. The Brazilian people felt as though Prince Pedro was still a Portugese ruler and he was not Brazilian. They turned on him because he was not Brazilian. They felt that they were not independent because Pedro, their ruler, was not the same race as them but that of their mother countryadn they felt that they were still a colony of Portugal and that Portugal thought that Brazil was less then them.

Lately in America, there has been breaking news about the racial issue in Fergurson, Mossouri. The New York Times' article "What Happened in Ferguson?" explains in detail what happened on the night of the event, showing pictures, evidence, and diagrams. A young man by the name of Michael Brown was shot by Fergurson police officer Darren Wilson. Michael Brown was of African-American descent. Fergerson police officer Darren Wilson was caucasion. The shooting has caught a lot of attention because some people believe that Michael Brown was shot because he was black and that police officers are racist against black people. Many people in Ferguson and across the country have been taking violent action to express their beliefs about the event. I do believe that race affects national identity, politics, and almost every single thing that we do each and every day. It will continue to affect our nation until those steriotypes and false statements are broken by having the people who they are accused against prove that it is not just a small percentage of their population that it is false for, but that it is their whole population that it is false for, and they must make it false. I believe that people have the right to believe that Michael Brown was innocent but they can take action peacefully. They do not have the right to take violent action and vandalize this country by using "taking action" as an excuse. If they want to do something about it, then make sure that there is no racism in the police forces. Have more African-American people become police officers to stop racism instead of terrorizing this country. Race will always affect our nation until people show that they are not a stereotype, but they are themsleves. They must not conform to these stereotyopes, but prove that they are not true.

"What Happened in Ferguson?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Aug. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/ferguson-missouri-town-under-siege-after-police-shooting.html?_r=0>.

The Return to the Throne

This week in history class we learned about the Congress of Vienna and their meetings. We did a small project where we were put the shoes of Clemens von Metternich, the prince of Austria at the time and host of the Congress of Vienna. We were given circumstances for topics that the Congress was actually faced with and were required to make a decision for each problem based on what we thought that Metternich would have done. As we took in each and every factor and made a well-thought hypothesis of what Metternich and the Congress of Vienna chose as a resolution for each topic, we were constantly reminded by an overarching question. This essential question was: what should people in power do when their power is threatened? People in power should give the citizens what they want and provide for them, winning them back and creating security from any thoughts of revolts or having their power in jeopardy.

One topic that was brought before the Congress of Vienna was who was to rule France now. They believed in Principle of Legitimacy, which is to restore lawful monarchs. Metternich and the Congress of Vienna decided to make the brother of Louis XVI, who would rule under the name of Louis XVIII, the new ruler of France. This brought the Bourbon family back to the throne, which eliminated threats of power to those in the Congress of Vienna. It eliminated threats to their power because there would be a monarchy once again and they would achieve Principle of Legitimacy. Also, if they put Napoleon's son at the head of France, the people might revolt or try to achieve what Napoleon did because many of their citizens were on the side of Napoleon. And his son might even free Napoleon and then Napoleon would seize control once again. Napoleon gave the citizens more rights and freedom and a better lifestyle which ultimately decreased the power of the ruler and increased the power of the citizens, but now that they have restored monarchy and the rightful monarchy family, the citizens will lose rights, freedom, and power and then the rulers will regain control once again.

I believe that they made the right decision for themselves but the wrong decision for their citizens, the country of France, and even the world. They should have seen the success of the United States' democracy and copied that idea which would give the citizens’ rights and freedom and they would feel as though they controlled the country even though the government still has control. This would benefit the citizens, the country, and the world but the rulers would have to sacrifice some of their power. It's a small price to pay for so many positive outcomes of this style of rule, which is why the rulers should be able to sacrifice their power because it will save them of any thoughts whatsoever of an uprising. The powerful should be able to sacrifice their power in certain circumstances such as a revolt or in order to form a democracy.

Napoleon's Influence on Europe

Napoleon Bonaparte was a hero to many, conquering almost all of Europe. Napoleon was a french leader, carrying his country to success during his reign. Napoleon impacted the social, economical, and political systems of Europe in positive ways.

Napoleon impacted the social systems of Europe in a positive way. Napoleon abolished titles of nobility and serfdom. This led to more equal rights and freedom. Under the rule of Napoleon, more citizens had rights property and access to education than had been the case before his rule. Napoleon gave the people of Europe better living conditions.

Napoleon impacted the economical systems of Europe in a positive way. Napoleon controlled prices, encouraged new industry, and built roads and canals in order to restore economic prosperity. Napoleon also removed trade barriers and stimulated Industry. This led to an increase in trade. Napoleon established the Bank of France, balanced the budget, and undertook massive public works programs. Napoleon increased the economy in Europe by making many crucial changes.

Napoleon impacted the political systems of Europe in a positive way. He established a "meritocracy" in which people were rewarded based on their skills, rather than their social class. Napoleon also reorganized the government and established the Institute of Egypt, which began the study of ancient Egypt, while invading Egypt. Napoleon increased the political systems of Europe while also increasing the economic systems of Europe.

Napoleon impacted the social, economical, and political systems of Europe in positive ways. He changed the social systems of Europe by giving the citizens more rights, liberty, and freedom. He changed the economical systems of Europe by controlling trade, industry, prices, and creating banks and public works programs. Napoleon changed the political systems of Europe by forming a meritocracy and changed the governments of all of the countries that he conquered. Napoleon impacted Europe in many different ways.

RAFT Luddites: Taking Sides

In early industrialization, there was a group known as the Luddites who protested their beliefs by taking physical action. Luddites were skilled weavers, mechanics, and other artisans who were followers of a mythical figure named "Ned Ludd" and attacked machines and factories in early industrialization. They protested for economic hardship, class warfare, and to protest the leaders of the factories. The following paragraph is not a primary source letter; it is a mock primary source letter that shows the perspective of a young girl who is a factory worker during the time of the Luddites.

The image above depicts two Luddites hammering a piece of machinery in a factory. (Tom Morgan / Mary Evans Picture Library)

Dear cousin,

Yesterday was my sixteenth birthday. I just began working in a local factory in order to help support my family and to gain more freedom. I am writing to you out of frustration of this new group that is know as the Luddites. The Luddites are poor craftsmen who are just mad that the machines are taking all of their jobs and that they don't have any money. They go around to factories, smashing and breaking all of the machinery to get their revenge. They don't like industrialization because it stole their jobs, but industrialization has treated me very good. It has provided me with an opportunity to support my family and gain independence by giving me this job. I am against the Luddites because they are breaking the equipment that I need in order to preserve my job. If they destroy all of the equipment, then I will lose my job. I need to do something about this. I am going to report any and all Luddites that I see or catch. There is not much that I can do but this will help to some degree. Hopefully in my next letter, I will have great news of rejoice and I will tell you all of the details.

Wish me luck,

Patricia

Attitudes Towards Women

Not only did children work in factories and mills during the industrial revolution but women also began to work in these mills in search for happiness. Women were motivated to work in the Lowell mills because they were searching for freedom and liberty. As shown in the Lucy Hall video, women had the opportunity to go and start a new life and make there own money and have their own freedom. They wanted to make sure that they didn't live the same lives as their mothers because they believe that their mothers lives are not how women should live; having no property and no rights or freedom. Their decisions to go to the mills had both good and bad effects. Some costs include their family having one less person to help work on the farm and the loss of pride that their fathers felt when they had to send away their daughter to make enough money for them. Some benefits include having one less mouth to feed, the women learned proper manners and how to be proper women, they had food and shelter, their were stores there for the girls to shop in, and they women made money for their family and sent the money back to their families. Opportunities for women and restrictions on their working lives reflect attitudes towards women in the 1800's because women were developing rights and beginning to slowly gain freedom and, during the time, as women began to take more actions upon mistreatment people began to respect them more and treat them a little bit more equal. Women gained more freedom and liberty by working in mills and people began to reflect these attitudes towards them in the 1800's.