You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
US History Final Discussion
This final discussion is on topics that are created, researched, and defended by students from the first semester of us history at phs. An outline of the final discussion can be found on mrarmy.pbworks.com.
We overstepped boundaries in the Spanish-American war. We had no reason to show other countries the we wouldn't back down. As a country, we would have had no problems if we didn't get involved. The war just brought fighting and poor rapport with other countries.
There might not have been any reason to enter the war but that was the time to get out to other countries to let them know we wouldn't back down. We wanted other countries to feal afraid.
i agree. if the americans would have researched the incodent a little more instead of pointing fingers in pure rage, the US could have compleatly avoided a war. http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm
I disagree with you, i feel that the Spanish American War was needed and helped resolve a lot of things. They needed to fight for what they wanted and other countries felt the same, so they decided into war.
I agree, if it wasn't for yellow journalism the U.S. public could have been correctly informed and the war may have never started because they would have known the facts.
I agree with this because the Spanish American war could have been avoided butthe americans had to show that they had power over other countries which was not needed. Because we had to much nationalism that we thought we were better and that there were no problems to be resolved.
True, this war may have been the cause for all of our following wars. We wouldn't have needed to protect our terriories in WWI &IIif;we didn't have them.
So what if other countries got poor after the war? The Spanish Empire didn't need to abuse the people they were ruling. We would have problems no mater what.
The Revolutionary War let other countries know that the US wasn't going to back down; the Spanish American war just showed that we were wreckless, ruthless, and a little bit insane
I have to completely agree with this. The revolutionary war was something special, it set our independence. The Spanish American war was short, and defiantly not sweet. It was stupid and started based on a conspiracy.
I agree here. The revolutionary war was very successful for the united states and it proves that our army has become a lot stronger than we were in the beginning which helps alot. with everything we have been through since.
We were bullied around by the British before the Revolutionary War. I thought it would be perfcet for us to fight back the British Empire and show to the world that we will fight as a country.
I dont think that this was a good thing. I think that if people think this that we might get ourself into trouble. If people think that we are the top power, they might want to try to get into the top and try to take the united states out of the top. That would lead to another huge war.
Communism is a good system for equality. But it doesn't allow for progression or the pursuit of money. I personally don't believe in communism as that means that sometimes dictators are taking all the excess.
Communism can actually be a good thing depending unpon on a persons' point of view. Then soon power will be given to one person and that power will be abused.
Power does funny things to people. And people do funny things to power! Hitler, for example, he was a bit messed up in the head, but he convinced many people to their deaths in WWII.
I agree that power does strange a terrilbe thing to People. Its very cleary recorded in history from Peter the Great to Hitler. Most of these were assassinated by followers.
America wanted to show how we were not afraid of any other countries. We wanted to gain power in the world, so we showed that we were strong and united and ready to stand together to defeat other countries to prove oursleves.
Why should we show how powerful we really are? That is stupid. We should be remembered as a country who gives help, who was kind and nice to our neighbors, and we never give up goals and dreams.
I agree. The United States is one of the most imperialistic countries that there is especially during the progressive era. We think that we are always right and everyone should follow us and be like us. Wars and disputes that we have been involved in help prove this and show that we want control and power over everything and want everything to be like us.
i agree, the United States was very imperialistic. we were just trying to show everyone that we are the best, and that everbody else was wrong in there ways.
Exactly... We had to show other countries that we had great power so we started to take control of other contries. This meant that we were very imperialistic.
Showing other countries that we are a strong and confident country does not mean we are imperialistic. If the countries were not in the best of shape we helped them rise above were they were. Many countries are better now sence we helped them then before where they were struggling to keep people alive.
i agree with zach. i feel every single problem that other countries have, its emeidialtly the US's problem. maybe if we let countries alone unless they asked for our help, we would be so hated?
I agree with what Zach and Andrew are saying. I think if we didn't get into all the other countries problems we wouldn't be hated so much. We seem to always want to get involved with everyone else and I don't think a lot of countries like that.
People look at us as the bad guys yes,but put it like this,ever seen a fight you could of stoped but didnt because you didnt want to get invalved.Would people hate you more if you just stood there and watched,or helped out and made a difference.
I agree with you also. I think that if we stayed out of other countries problems unless they asked for our help. We would solve so many problems in the world
I agree. We get involved in everything little thing that goes wrong, thinking that if we make it better countries will like us more. All the u.s. does is angers other countries by always making their business our business. We need to wait until other countries want our help.
Right on! Lets look at who the US is hated by, many middle eastern countries because we entered into wars over there for greedy purposes and ruined their way of life. Its only a matter of time before its the US (and maybe Britain if we are lucky) against the world
I also agree. Our country talks about all of our money problems but as soon as someone needs help we spend millions on trying to save people, which is good but not if it's going to be used against us as imperialism.
i also agree. i thnk that most of the wars we have entered have been pointless. most of them we have nothing to do with and the others that we do have to do have been over stupid situations
I disagree, we felt that we were the superior country and that we needed to get involved with other countries to make them more like us. If we had stayed out of other peoples business we probably could have avoided a few wars.
Yes you are right, but yet wrong friend. If it wasn't for the certain, key wars, we wouldn't be here today with this advanced technology. Those wars that we lost, helped us to strenghten our armies and citizens to become more involved in the wars, to defend our country. So yes, stupid but also smart ideas they did.
i agree with you Tom. Other countries can live the way THEY want to. We have no right to tell them how they should or should not live. It is not our responsiblity to. We live the way we live. They live the way they live. Thats that.
This is one of my favorite topics to talk about. When humans find something that's different than them, they try to create an illusion of similarity by forcing it onto others. This happens to animals all the time. "Humanizing". An act of evil to us may be survival to them.
This is the definition of humanizing
make or become human: to make something human or like humans, or become human or like humans
That gave us an ego, thinking we were the best and better than other countries because we could fight them. First of all, that isn't right in any way. We have no right to brag about the way we live.
Our country is always in war. most of the time we get involved in wars with other countires. We get involved with stuff that dont matter to the U.S. We will always be fighting in one way or another
Exactly. Our countries puts itself in situations that we shouldn't be involved in. We shouldn't be bragging when nowdays our country in trillions of dollars in debt. That's not something to brag about.
to our government it is the right thing and they think we are doing the world a favor. but realy we are just making everything much more difficult for ourself and everywhere else in the world.
I think that showing people that we have power is a good thing. I think that taking over places and people shows that we have power and if you mess with us you will pay for what you have done. Being imperalistic is good so not to many people mess with us or go to war with us.
We are imperialistic. It all started because of the Yellow Journalists. They don't have specific information and all it is, is basically lies. Those lies are to make our country sound better and stronger. It wasn't just imperialistic but nationalism.
Not entirely. They weren't lying to people, they were exaggerating the painful truth. What they did was try to dig up interesting dirt to increase their own fame.
Why? why didwe need to prove ourselves? Did it make the world a better place? No, it got us more enemies though. Instead of proving ourselves through war (which we have been doing since our beginning) why don't we try peace for a change
Yes to a degree. We should still be feared as allies with smaller countries. Us becoming a world power through imperialism makes our allies less likely to get in a war because the opposing country will think twice about fighting us, thus creating peace.
I also dissagree with this America was indeed very imperialistic at this time. They many times became involved in foreign affairs that didn't involve them. They would however push their way in to it to try and better the U.S.
I disagree because we fought the Spanish for land to show our imperialism we build the Panama canal to charge any country that chooses to ship supplies though.
I think that in winning the war we got a big head. I think that we think that we can take on any country in the world and just destroy them. I dont think that we are going to be able to do that anymore. I think that we are in for a rude awaking.
Now that America had shown their imperialistic power every other country wanted to challenge them. Becuase they had this huge target on their back the U.S. was forced to continually become involved in other conflicts that were either started by us or other countries.
I totally agree with you because other countries were jealous of our power. They wanted to challenge us but we usually used it for good. We got involved because we had to or we wanted to help.
It showed we were powerful and stupid. We had no reason being involved. It made us look like what we are, imperialistic. By throwing ourselves in the war and trying to be "the big guy" that saves the day. It was ridiculous and made us just look more arrogant.
The taking of colonies had a big part on how America was imperialistic. We started to expand overseas and expanding colonies. We took control of the Carribean. Taking colonies meant that America was a great nation.
This led to the building of the Panama Canal. Taking over the carribean now thought that we should continue to build the canal. Roosevelt wanted to revitalize the navy.
America being founded on colonies shows how we have always been imperialistic but this isn't necessarily a great thing. The reason we rebelled from the British is because they were over controlling and imperialistic. 300 years ago we thought that that was bad, but now we are doing it to other countries.
I agree with you that it isn't necessarily a great thing to be impearialistic but now we are not doing it to other countries we are helping countries and defending for good reasons.
i agree with some of this like that british was imperialistic, and that is why the colonies where found. But i really dont agree with when you say we are doing to other countires. The U.S. is the peace keeps in the world. So i dont understand your last part of your post
What do you mean we? Did we actually get involved into this or was it the army? You see when the very first settlers came they were not imperalistic. They tried to escape there hard life of where they used to live. We treated the indians fairly and they treated us, in return, fairley. So actually no, our army was not imperalistic, UNTIL we started to get into the progressive era.
I agree with you because that did have a big impact on how the United States became very imperialistic. We kind of took over and started to control more things and that helped us. THis did make us a bigger and greater nation.
Soon as we started taking colonies then we thought that everyone wanted us to go into their country and help them with there problem when they truely didn't.
Many other countries also had control in the Caribbean at the same time as us. Spain, France, Great Britain and the Netherlands also had claims in the Caribbean.
It's true, but all countries have a certain sense of honor. We are part of the country and therefore the imperialism. And we are therefore prone to calling the country great.
Maybe not a great nation but a greedy nation. What is the point of taking the carribean islands when we have one of the greatest countries in terms of square milage in the world?
What led to the Spanish American War was the U.S. Maine exploding. Yellow Journalism said that there were mines that blew up the Maine. Yellow Journalism convinced America to go to war with Spain.
i agree i think that america just pointed fingers at other countries instead of actually stoppping what they were doing and THINK about all of the posiible mistakes that could have happened.
Part of this is all america's fault. In the tabloids we can't believe everything that we read and need to do a little more fact digging before we believe every little thing that people tell us.
I agree with this because there is no proof that Spain or Cuba had anything to do with the US Maine blowing up. The yellow journalists just wanted attention and caused greater damage than they should have, leading up to the Spanish American war.
I agree with what has been said. When the U.S. Maine exploded the U.S. just pointed fingers at other countries instead of getting to the bottom of things. They started stuff with other countires and ecused them of damaging their stuff.
I think that they just went into action because they didnt want to go deeper into things because i think that they blew up there own ship so they could have a reason to go to war. I think that not going into what happened kind of puts up a red flag in my head. I wonder why they didnt investagate what happened. Maybe it was because they did it?
The main purose of this happening was because the U.S. wanted land and the natural resources and even the Yellow Journalists knew. It's pretty obvious enough that they were clearly not fighting for "justice and freedom" but planning on pointing fingers just so they can get what they want.
I agree this was the final push that led us into war and the yellow journalism really forced the idea that it was all the spanish but i we were most likely going to go to war even without the USS Maine exploding
If people would just be honest and only let out the truth then there's a good chance we never would have gone to war. Peopl make things up to try and get attention and this causes things to happen for the wrong reasons.
If we would have been honest, we would have had a war earlier and not would have had time to plan out our army. if they found out right away they would declare war.
Towards the end of the class I still agree with my exact hypothesis that America was very imperialistic during the Spanish-American War. They set out to take controll of other land. They showed they had great power and other countries would not start stuff. America became very strong in the Spanish- American War.
After the Spanish-American War, U.S. has been involed with world conflict throughout history. Even to this every day the U.S. is being inloved with conflicts.
I believe the U.S. made the correct decision to enter WW1 when they did. If the U.S. had waited to enter the war later there is a chance that Germany and the Central powers could have won the European front. When the U.S. finally would have entered the war they would have had all of Europe to contend against.
I also agree with you. It was the perfect time to enter WW1. We helped fight off the Germans and like you said if we wouldnt have entered at a perfect time the Germans could of won the European Front.
To be honest, I think that it didn't matter whether the U.S. went into war early or not because none of that would have occured "anyway" if it weren't for those cocky nationalists who had like alliances all over the place saying you hurt my friend I hurt yours.
I believe that as well, we needed to go in at that time to back up our allies and show that we are strong as a country and can stand up for our selves.
on the otherhand, while Germany was building an empire the U.S. would just be there chillin like, hey we're America, we're just chillin here. and we would have been left alone.
I agree. I think the United States made a right choice in enetring WWI at that specific time. If they would've waited, the Germans could've won and be more powerful than the other countires. Also, when the United States came in, then other European allies joined in too to help defeat Germany.
The Jungle was a 1906 novel written by the muckraking journalist Upton Sinclair, to expose the crimes of the meat packing industry to the general public, who were also considered lower class. The novel discussed that meat packing industries did absolutely disgusting things to the meat to maximize profits, while paying off inspectors to “not notice”. They were pretty much taking advantage of the lower class by having bad working conditions, and then selling them crappy meat. Sinclair’s work influenced President Roosevelt to start the FDA, and was a major milestone in the progressive movement.
"The Jungle" was said to "hit Americans in the stomach". Americans couldn't ignore conditions because they were so disgusting and terrible. Teddy could not turn a blind eye. Sinclair forced change to happen.
The book The Jungle was good for U.S because like you said, it grabbed the president's attention and got him to do something about it. Without this book, the food today might still be made with things that food should not be made with.
It's sad that it took "The Jungle" to make a change happen. The president should have never letten food sanitation get so terrible. It shouldn't have gone so far that it took a book to make a difference.
This is a good post. I also posted about this book, this book really opened up the view of people, and shocked Americans ever where. The government really didn't like this about the writer, but this opened up to muckrakers and showed many people the truth.
This book was an example of how the media was such a strong influence on the American public. This one book was able to force changes in government. Today media is still a huge influence in our society and still makes the government see changes that they other wise would try to turn a blind eye to.
The only difference between today's media and the media of the Jungle is that was muckraking, while tday I think we are going back towards yellow journalism and while we may be keeping the gov. "change" it's a biased influence
The Jungle is a great book that still well known in today. When I heard about this book in my science class I did not know how this book effected meat industy in the U.S. but it is also recognized as a famous and outstanding book from science area.
Who do you think will be the Republican presidential candidate? I personally believe Ron Paul is the best candidate on several different issues. For example, he is the only one who does not want to send our troops back to Iraq.
I agree that Ron Paul should have that nomination, but I don't think it will happen. He has not been ahead in any polls and seems that he is not a favored candidate. His libertarian policies are considered radical by many.
I think that Germany was very imperialistic because they started World War II because they thought they were the alpha nation and everyone else should be eliminated.
Progressivism is an umbrella label for a wide range of economic, political, social, and moral reforms. These included efforts to outlaw the sale of alcohol; regulate child labor and sweatshops; scientifically manage natural resources; insure pure and wholesome water and milk; Americanize immigrants or restrict immigration altogether; and bust or regulate trusts.
I think that SOPA should not be put into place on the internet. Google itself has proven that it can protect itself from piracy. There should be no need to have it, because its most likely going to happen anyways. If they did put the censorshi on the internet people will only find a way to get around it like they always have.
I agree. SOPA is going to cause more problems than good. Plenty of people will protest and find their way around it. It will just cause trouble. It should not be put into effect.
I support this because if you really think about it, Do you really want to have to go around all of the sites that you don't want, just to get to the site that you want?
All Quiet on the Western Front was that movie about WWI. The movie communicates to the audience on an emotional level the hardships of the soldiers on all sides. The soldiers were basically thrown into a war, fighting people they had no beef with. Most of them didn’t even know what the fighting was all about, the Germans especially. It was this, along with the screwing over of the Germans at Versailles, that fueled their hunger for revenge, allowing Adolf to rise.
I strongly agree. The soldiers war in a tough place. They had to to kill or be killed, but they had no reason to do so. They were forced to do terrible movie also shows how what we consider the "enemy" was really in the same situation as us
I also agree. In the movie, when the soldiers were eating and they were talking about why they are fighting a war they start to talk about how they feel no need to kill any Englishmen and that they don't know why this is such a huge war.
I think that WW! was kindof a joke. People didnt know who they were fighting against or why. why would the soldiers revolt and stand up for what they beleive. in the movie won of the maine characters says. "ive never seen an english man, and ive beet that the englishman have never seen germans be fore this too." http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ww1.htm
I agree with you. I think that the countries used propaganda to get men to volunteer for the war. They didn't really know why they were fighting, except for the reason of their country telling them to.
I agree. Countries tell their men that they need to fight for their fatherland and defend their country. They tell them this without actually telling them why the war is being faught and what purpose it has.
I agree with you. The goverment was taken advantage of their workers by not informing them about what they were getting into. They goverment and officers let the soilders think that the war was going to be all fun and games. When they finally went into war they realized that was far from the case. The soldiers began talking and discovered that they had absolutely no clue why the war was being fought anyway.America has also forever lost the service of thousands of good soldiers who are now disabled as a result of battle wounds in Iraq. Many others will need mental and emotional rehabilitation before they can return to normal life.
The goverment using propaganda to get the soldiers in the war was not fair. They didnt even know what they were fighting for and they went to the war. I don't think the goverment should have taken advantage of the men like that.
I agree, this movie definitely showed the audience that the war was hard and brutal. Also, you could tell that they had NO idea why they were even fighting. They were handed a gun and a uniform and fought with no purpose at all. I agree with you on the part of the revenge. I think that was there only reason for fighting. Revenge. To me, that doesn't seem like such a good reason to kill many people.
I agree with you because the movie was very violent and brutal and it was fought without a purpose. They didn't know why they were fighting either. I felt like they just wanted to get revenge and that was the only reason too. And i definitley agree that that is not a good enough reason to run around killing people.
I agree. The movie that we have been watching really shows that they took the war as a joke. They thought it was all fun and games and that no one was going to get hurt. Then they finally realized when there freinds were getting hurt/ dieing that it was no longer a joke
I agree. I think that the movie really put the war into perspective. I agree that the troops were just handed a gun and clothes and they were put out there to fight for somthing that they didnt even know. Many of the troops put out there were teenagers and they had little or no training and they were just put out there to kill.
At the beggining of the movie it showed that the teacher was talking like the war was the greatest thing ever. That made the kids think that being in the army would be fun and games.
Yeah thats how government got involved and tricked citizens into fighting. The government over exaggerated on how other countries were so bad and what they were doing even though it wasn't.
I agree. They got the boys all excited and made them think the war was going to be exciting and fun. They hid the fact of starvation and diseases and having to see your friends die right in front of you. When the young men actually got into the war and saw what it was really like, I'm sure they were in shock becase of the extreme difference between their fantasy and the reality.
Yeah, those soldiers thought that the french started the war and they didn't really have a reason to fight. There government just threw them into a war they didn't understand.
I disagree because I don't think people would go into a war if they didn't know exactly what they were fighting for. They had some sort of an idea on why they were fighting.
Yes, I totally agree with this. I have posted already about the war and how it was fought between the governments, and not the people. I have a link to support that the soldiers got along at night, and then went back to killing the next day. It talks about the Christmas truce.
I agree with everyone one, The government just sent men into the war not giving them any knowledge of what was going on or why we were fighting. No one actually realized how bad the war was till they were actually fighting.
In the movie we watched in US History Class people were shown in bad conditions. And that was just a movie. Imagine the real thing! I don't think that you could ever sleep again afterwards.
Our Iraqi war is mostly technological and planning. WWI was all about new tech. But they used the tech in an old fashioned way, making it 10 times as brutal.
I agree. I don't think they knew that the War would end up how it did, but soon enough I think they got that it was going to be a long, bruital even and they would just have to keep fighting through.
I think this movie was a great thing for americans to see because of all the propaganda making the Germans seem evil, but they were just scared soldiers like us and this movie let us see that.
I agree because they didnt know what they were fighting for but they were just told to join the war and fight. None of the soldiers knew why they were there but they were proud to be fighting for their country. The germans were told by many of the people around them to join the war like there was that teacher who told his whole class to join and fight.
on chrismas eve during WWI an american soldier stood up in the trenches and started singing chrismas songs as his volume grew a soldier on the enemy side all started singing they both got up and started walking towards eachother thier fellow soldiers started yelling at them and they began to run towards eachother then when they met they started to sing together and then their fellow soldiers put the guns down and came out and the 2 sides collided and shared their food and cried together and had a night of rest because they had no clue why they were there then the next day the killing continued
This is a very good post that I agree with. The German soldiers most of the time had no idea what they were fighting for bu tehe idea of being in the army was intreiguing to them. After the treaty of Versailles left Germany in ruins the german citizens wanted a scapegoat and Hitler was able to give it them by blaming the Jews.
I agree with this post. I guess it was too difficult to imagine for the young soldiers what the war would really be. Especially they were taught war as process to protect their own country. Even I watched this movie I still cannot think that it happened actually in this world. The war was transcend what human can be.
I agree, the Germans were so full of fire to get into the war, but as the time raged on the soldiers realized the error in their decision. So, when they lost they became full of hatred, and that just fueled the fire of revenge.
What do you think are the biggest differences from child labor today from the late 19th century? Child labor today is a lot less extreme then it was in the late 19th century, now a days kids in school have a certain number of hours they can work during a school week and have minimum wage and don’t have bad working conditions, although places like Nike have child labor it isn’t as cruel as it was in the late 19th century kids would get paid very little only enough to provide for their family and didn’t have good working conditions at all.
Today we have a better economy now than then. Children are not working in very dangerous conditions anymore, everybody is much wealthier then they were back then
I agree with you Meghan. There is a big difference between child labor back then and now. Obviously today children don't work crazy hours with horrible pay. Also, the working conditions are so much more safe to be working in. There are not as many accidents and deaths now then there was back then.
Today with kids going to school they are only allowed to work so many hours a week. People are working because its money for them, for college and the education must come first.
I think that kids need to work more though out in the work field. I think school is important but you need some work experience before you go to college and get a steady job that pays good. I think that kids working now is a good thing. Working teaches them good habbits and helps them later on in life.
and usually that doesn't happen today because the middle class is larger than the lower class, when the middle class didn't really exist in the progressive era.
That shows that are economy has grown a lot since then. We have no more children working in factories. And it is a law to have a safe working environment
I disagree with you because we still actually do have child labor going on in our country, their are several factories that use children so that adults don't have to suffer. Countries like china and india. And actually in the US as well.
I agree. There's totally a difference between now and then. Unions today are meant to help teenagers with minimum wages and benefits. Unions don't just help protect children since they help with the conditions of adults in work. Factories and laborers have a lot restrictions and rules concerning the conditions for workers.
I agree. The conditions for Child Labor are much better in America now. There are still countries like China though, that have unfair and bad conditions for child workers.
A lot of modern nations, china is a good example, have not had a progressive movement. Their government is not oriented on the well being of middle and lower classes as the united states. That being said, our government is starting to revert and begin to favor the upper class citizens.
Well, China has had a progressive moment, but it's not in the same way the US had one. Mao Tse-Tung had a big impact on China improving with their industrial methods.
This artical explains how the Chinese government is strict about world internet.
I think it was great incident that American could fight for their rights because even today Chinese did not be able to have such as progressive movement yet.
I agree with you also. Child labor is more controlled today. That is a good thing because I don't think that children should have to work in those conditions.
I disagree with you. I believe that the kids don't want to work to help their family. They just want to play and have fun. They are too young to realize how money are important.
Yeah, back then theere families weren't maing enough money so they had to work to let there family survive. It was their way of helping their family and parents.
Yes I also agree with you. During the Industrialization era Child labor was very dangerous for kids. They worked so hard and earned so little money. But now the economy is better than what it was so child labor is a lot more fair than what it was.
The only difference i see now with child labor is that the United states goes out side of our country to get children to do work for us that we could if were not lazy. Another thing is back then it was more visible in our country now its more hidden and less known about.
Yes the child labor laws might have made working conditions less harsh, but today there's still child labor going on. Its more hidden now before it was very appearant. There are still undernourished children picking cotton or doing more than that, why is that we need kids that are undernourished to do something that could seriously injure them or kill because of there undernourishment.
I think that our working conditons are deffinaltly better now then they were back then. But some areas in the U.S still dont have great working conditions. The U.S has gotten better child labor laws but we need to get other countries around us to pick up on our labor laws because most kids in other countries still get payed less and there working conditions arent that great.
The biggest difference from now and then is both work conditions and work hours. Young adults under the age of 16 are protected by child labor laws that were formed back in the time of the progressive era that are still used today.
Child Labor is better, if you're in the US, but, because of our demand on foreign made goods, such as Nike, we are causing more child labor in developing lands. This child labor is worse, almost like slae labor
I think child labor has gotten a lot better today then back then. Now, there are specific rules to help out the children like saftey, certain number of work hours, and salary. Now, children can help support their family without getting little pay or being overworked.
Often those other countries did not want help. The Vietnamese citizens hated american soldiers. We did more harm then help and just aggravated the people. In the end, we pulled out with no victory, instead just dead soldiers.
Yeah, and while we helped them built it, we killed a couple of thousand people. And, America only got involved with building the Panama Canal because America wanted to gain more control and access to more territory. They weren't doing it out of the kindness of their heart.
Yes we were trying to "help" other countries. But not every country wanted our help. So we shouldn't push them to want our help. If they want our help then sure we can help them, otherwise we should mind our own business. Also, i think we should worry about getting all OUR stuff figured about before we go and help other countries.
Part of Imperialism is helping. It's not like it our country's goal to harm other countries, but while helping countries, we're also trying to make them see things the way do. When we help countries, we do it OUR way, therefore that country is forced to do things the way we want.
I agree. Yes, we do help other countries but sometimes we shouldn't. We always think that our way is the best and that everyone should be like us. When we help, we force them to do things our way.
I don't believe we're being less imperialistic. The situations are different, but the US is still trying to get involved with things that don't concern us. If countries were to ask for our help or if we were directly attacked, then it's fine. But, the US is sticking their nose in other people's business, which is just costing us more.
Yes! We are always poking into other countries situations and then trying to be the good guy and help them. We should be worrying about ourselves a little more than countries that are doing fine.
We're not becoming lest imperialistic. We continue to force our opinions on others and go to war for no reason. We also continue to be imperalistic through helping countries that are having issues because we "fix" their problem OUR way which may not always be what's best for that country.
America is an imperialistic country and I really don't see how it's becoming less imperialistic. We are still in war in the middle east and we jump at any oppurtunity to make countries see things the way we do. Our country has been in war so many times because we for some reason can't accept the fact that sometimes people aren't going to agree with us.
I agree with you. The US is obvioulsy still imperialistic. In in an article about the war in Iraq, it say that the United States is not being imperialistic in the classical sense of trying to set up colonies, but we still have a military presence in Iraq. This shows we are still imperialistic.
Having a military in Iraq is not showing that we are imperialistic, we are there to protect the citizens there from the taliban. They all do not want to kill us there
Having a military in Iraq is not showing that we are imperialistic, we are there to protect the citizens there from the taliban. They all do not want to kill us there
This link shows that the US is still imperialistic. We have helped some people when we choose to help them, but mnay othr times we have not been helpful.
I believe the same thing our country is very imperialistic. I feel as if we could avoid going to into war. But for some reason we must like trying to force our ideas on others in a way its truly sad. Other countries have a right, so why do we still try forcing other countries to agree what us like Anna said.
I think America is still continuing to be imperialistic because they are still involved in many events in other countries. The United States tries and help out their allies in any way they can.
We did use to be very imperialistic, we went into alot of countries that the people didn't like us. It wasn't really ever a good think for the look of americans.
We are still imperialistic. We are still constantly in other countries business instead of taking care of our own problems. America is still going to war with other countries so our countries ideas and opinion of what we think is right, will be spread around the world. That's imperialism.
I 100% agree with you. Back then America wanted to get out to other countries and let them know they had great power and would'nt back dow to othr countries. Now America isn't trying to take control of mlre land but only to defend for good reasons.
My topic is going to be the Progressive Movement. The progressive movement was very important since it helped steralize food and bring a lot of heath-protecting laws into the US. The progressive era help defend children who were being used for child labor. "Progressives sought to suppress red-light districts, expand high schools, construct playgrounds, and replace corrupt urban political machines with more efficient system of municipal government." This qoute explains some of the benefits that were started because of this era.
Supporting Evidence:
Progressive Era
(www.digitalhistory.uh.edu)
I agree with you because this obviously was a big part of our history and it was very very important for the United States. And a big part of this was that it started to help protect and regulate laws on child labor and safety. The progressive era overall was very good and beneficial.
Yes i think that the Progressive era was good. Sometimes it was a little rough, but it gave us good benefits. It protected children and also helped to better the quality of our food.
I agree with you because there wouldt be U.S history without the Progressive Movement. It provided us with better protection from harsh working conditions and it protected us from rotten food. Now its steralized and not contaminated and much safer.
I agree, the progressive era was one of the biggest improvements for industries in the US. That improved working conditions, and food quality so less people got sick from bad food, or poor work conditions.
I disagree with you Zack. America can be a very imperialistic country at times. American sometimes thinks since they are better than the countries that are poor and everything that those countries should change to be like the US. When, in fact, they shouldn't because it's the way THEY live. Our way of living, may be good for us, but it may not be the way those other countries want to live.
i disagree, America is very imperialistic. We force are ideas on a lot of countries. Sometimes countries need help but it seems like every time a country needs help were always there. Some could probably be fine without our help but they choose not to. Each time a disaster happens countries rely on us to get them out of it, which isn't right.
I disagree with you because yea the U.S is trying to help but they are trying to hard. The help is turning into a problem when other countries are not likeing the help. Most of the countries arent even asking for help but since they are in a poor position the U.S automatically thinks that they need help when most of the other countries are progressing on their own. Help is not always needed.
I disagree. America is a very imperialistic country. We're more concerned about what's going on in other countries more than what's happening here. There's nothing wrong with that, but America is taking that to new levels. America, right now, needs to focuse more on what's happening with itself. We get involved in wars we're not even involved it, and the goverment completely ignores what's going on with the citizens.
I agree with your statement that we need to focus on ourselves more, and not things we are not involved in. However, I think it is important to maintain a certain level of involvement in world affairs, and take action when things get out of hand and may affect us in the future.
I disagree zack, we are an imperialistic country. We definitely force things on other countries and most of the time it is for the better. Some countries right now are doing so well because we force our things onto them.
Thats how it is more today. A 100 years ago though we were out to show everyone that we were very imperialistic. We may be helping countries today but we are still entering their own country and doing things that we probably shouldnt be doing.
It is being forced though. The citizens of places like Iraq and Afghanistan can't tell us how they feel about our military presence. Nationalistic journalism just says that they want us there, but we have no way of knowing if this is true. Many of the people shooting at our soldiers are citizens of these countries who don't like our presence.
I disagree with Zach. I believe the United States is extremely imperialistic. Look at how many wars we've been in. We are constantly trying to force countries to be like us. It's not always a bad thing though, we've brought freedoms to many countries that they may not have ever had if it had not been for America.
That may be, but we still got our noses into other countries business and that is what gets us into wars. We cant just keep to ourselves like we should be.
Why did explorers leave their mother countries to venture to America?
Explorers left their mother countries to venture to America because of freedom. There was also free land. The conditions in Europe “pushed” them to leave.
I agree with you Madison. Everyone has a voice and their own beliefs and they couldn't express that so they left. America gave them a "fresh" start where they could have the freedom they wanted and needed. No one likes being told what they can or cannot say or do. So, yes, I agree that they "pushed" them to leave.
Also, they left because of religious beliefs. Some areas only wanted one major religion in most cases. That caused other religious people to want their own land to be free to be whatever religion they wanted. They also left because of better good and opportunities in America to start a new life.
I agree with you madison becuase people really wanted the free land in America, I would too, people also came for their own freedoom and America was rising and becoming more popular with musicians and writers.
some other reasons that people left their mother county to go explore were because kings and powerful people saw a vision. more land = more power. king needed explorers and at the time it was the dark ages. then the renasance hit where people did explore and we got the land we wanted.
I agree with madison because thats the way that we got here because our relatives have had to have moved here for a better life or it was eassy for the to get land.
The United States is an imperialistic country. It always has to be in control. Many times in history, the United States have forced its help on people that have not asked for it. The U.S thinks that it is the best country and that every other country should be like In reality, the U.S. has problems of its own and should help its self.
I agree with you because the United States does think that they are better that all of the other countries which causes big problems with wars and other things. If the U.S keeps thinking they are better and can do whatever then it will not run smoothly. We need to have other countries think differently we have no need to make other countries afraid of us and to intimidate them when they arent a threat untill we get overly confident and find a reason to start an argument. We are not above the rest what happeded to everyone being equal beacause apparently its not happening.
I agree because every country has a problem and that each country should fix there own problems. The counties should not worry about other peoples problems.
I still believe that racism is big problem in the United States. For example many people believe that people from the middle east are terrorists or all black people carry guns and are drug deals.
84% of black americans believe racism is a problem compared to 66% of whites think racism is a problem. 48% of blacks and 43% of whites consider themselves racist.
Even popular political figures are accused of being racist, Herman Cain has came out guns hots saying that black left wing politians are more racism then white politicans.
I compleatly agree with you austin wiese compleatly. walking down the hall in the highschool, or hereing jokes about 70% of them are racist. racism is very bad because i beleive that everyone man and woman is equal and its not fair to colored people if they are treated wrong for something that they cant change about themselves.
I agree with you Austin. You see it everywhere. Once you see someone of the other race (black, muslim, etc.) You automatically judge them when they could be the nicest people you could meet. I think movies, tv shows are somewhat to blame. Our veiws of these other races, i think, come from movies and tv shows. The "druggies" in movies are normally black people from a neighborhood. And the terrorists in movies and shows are from the middle east.
I definitley agree with you, i believe that racism actually hasn't improved, because there are still some very ignorant people that are stubborn and act ridiculous. It's disgusting how judgemental people are now actually, it's makes us look really bad. And of course we shouldn't want that, US needs a good reputation. I found a few good quotes on racism:
I agree. In case people haven't noticed, South Caroline still uses the confederate flag as their state flag. There's still plenty of groups hiding that are against African American people. Just because there are laws and groups working to stop racisim doesn't mean it's gone completely away. Although, racism today is way different than what it used to be. "The New Black Panther Party for Self Defense (NBPP) is the largest organized anti-Semitic and racist black militant group in America."
I completely agree, not trying to call people/ groups out but down south it is bad, white people still believe that black people are less then people and black people just hate whites for it.
I agree with you. I think that the United States will still have a little bit of racism in it no matter what. However, I think it has gotten way better.
I agree, every time we think of black people, we think of gangster, fried chicken, Kool-Aid, drug dealers. Why cant we just think of them as being like us?
racism will never stop because there will always be ignorant people that just have a hole in their life without the feeling of hate towards someone. Some people like to complain about things.
Welcome to Reality. There are many people out there who are still racists or discriminate others. It's not fair. Some people think they aren't racists and discriminating but mostly half of the time they are the ones who start it.
I think racism is also a big problem. I think that racism will always be present. We really can't stop it. People are going to think what they want to.
I agree with you, people will always say and think what they want to about other people. wether they discrimnate by race, sex, or skin color. It is always going to be present
i agree with this, and some people still dont believe that some races have the right to do certain things. Some think that they are much better and that other races dont deserve the opportunity. I also think that many people are bitter towards other races because people in america think that other races come to america to steal their jobs. Yet it shows that anyone is capable of working any job if they are allowed to.
How much different was the food industry before the food reform? Before the food reform food was not good quality at all and all proportions were unequal. Before the food reform spoiled animals were used for meat and chalk was used in bread. Water was added to wine so they wouldn’t have to waste wine and could make it last longer. Something called scientific management came into play and it said that everything had to be the same portions and spoiled animals and vegetables could no longer be used.
I think that after the food reform, the quality of our food has gotten better. I don't get in the first place why people were putting all that nasty stuff into our food and thinking it was ok. It is a good thing we have a food reform becasue otherwise I think we would have more health problems today.
Alot different, food wasn't safe and the only way you could maybe trust it was if you were friends with the butcher and he didnt want you dead. Otherwise it was really dangerous.
I agree and i believe that the food reform has dramatically changed how people looked at the food they were eating before the reform. It also caused people to become sick from the bad quality food provided.
It is so good that they finally made laws to have the meat packing places but cleaner and sanitize the equipment. When the food is spoiled it is very unhealthy and can cause people to die. I think the people at the factories knew that the meat was bad but they just didn't care.
It is great. This made a big change to the whole society and even if there were no medician, it helped save many lives. It saved the lives of others because there was no more spoiling and rotting food that was spread from one place to another like before.
Without thefood reforms food would still be being made very cheaply and most of the time it would not be very sanitary. There would not be the regulations that manufactures would have to follow, they would cut coners that would cut down not only on cost to manufacture it but the quality of the products.
The United States is an imperialistic country. It has been for a long time and it will probably be that way for a long time. In most cases, our imperialism is a good thing. We have given freeedoms to many countries that they didn't have before. According to http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-05-05-boot_x.htm "The history of American imperialism is hardly one of unadorned good doing; there have been plenty of shameful episodes, such as the mistreatment of the Indians. But, on the whole, U.S. imperialism has been the greatest force for good in the world during the past century."
I agree with your post we are an imperialistic country, but sometimes I think that we might push too hard on other countries, it can be good when we do but not all the time.
I agree with you that sometimes we push too hard. Our country need to realize that not everyone is going to agree with us and that's ok. But we have definitely brought good to other countries.
How did the Renaissance change people’s perspectives from a one dimensional view of the world to a more global outlook? People realized there was more in the world to do, people became more creative and started becoming artists and musicians. Big artists like Leonardo De Vinci started to become much more popular.
Even though the journey in the Westward Migration was cruel would you still leave everything you had to get new free land? It would be hard leave everything you have, but if I had people to go with or help me out on this journey I would definitely go out and get new land. Most other places in America had lots of people it would be a good experience to get out and try and start out with nothing such as making your own house and things like that.
I agree. I would have also left because of the jobs currently available weren't the best. Many didnt even really have well paying jobs and the fact that land was free, it would give people a good brand new start to their lives. However i agree about how it would have been hard to leave. I guess it would also depend on how you were living your life. if you had a good job at the time that could pay everything you needed or if you wanted to start a new life or not.
I would leave everything and try to find new land. There is a lot of sacrifices that I would of had to make but I think it would of all paid off. It is like a new begining or a new life. You get a chance to start all over and make the best of it.
Yes I think I would. The population, like you said was less and that means there would be more jobs and less competition for them. Overall, I think moving to the west would be good.
I think that depending on the life you were living at the time it would have been good. If you were doing well and having a sucessful life then I wouldn't move west. However, if you needed more money and a better job to provide for your family then I agree that moving west would be a smart decision.
Thank you! Lots of people got tricked as well to. I mean, look at all those signs that told future lies down the trial, to be exact- the Oregon Trail. People died in the desert from heat and really cold temperatures at night. That had to suck for them.
I believe that the Industrial age was a terrible time for everyone except for the business owners. There were no regulations on time that you can work a day or the safety of the working conditions.
I agree with this. The buisiness owners got to sit back and collect money while people and children worked very hard for hours on end. It was not fair.
How is the situation of the industrial era similar or different to how the business owners act today? even though working conditions and stuff are better, are the business owners still being fair?
I do believe things have gotten A LOT better than how things were back then, but I do agree that bosses and owners still try to find loopholes. The power-hungry owners will try to do the minimum for their workers, and sometimes it goes unpunished.
It goes both ways sometimes bussiness owners will push their workers to their breaking point. Too bad for them they don't realize what has happend in the past. Workers will eventually rebel when they realize that the bussiness owner doesn't own them. The owner needs them to even be able to have a bussiness. Maybe these bussiness owners should check out this site to learn about what could potentially happen to their workers http://www.academicamerican.com/progressive/topics/progressive.html
Great comment. Private sector workers have had better reforms because of unionized public. It is all workers who gain. Since public workers have been attacked, private companies are on the attack of their workers so all workers lose out. Reforms are stripping rights.
Today, owners will still go overboard on thinking that they need to produce their products as fast as they can, without spending as much money. Unfortunately, this just leads to employees being overworked and underpaid. It definitely has gotten better since the Industrial Era, however, some companies have not improved as muchc as others.
the industrial age was a terible time for people but not for the economy. the economy was very good because of all of the big buisnesses and jobs open.
This is very true. The economy of America did make a huge improvement and America was on top of the world making huge amounts of money. This is hard to see because of all the terrible conditions and this is something your rarely hear about in common conversations.
However, at the same time without regulations to keep people from working a certain amount of hours per day families that desperately needed the money were able to work many hours to make enough money to allow their family to survive. Also, if you were careful and did your job correctly the working conditions should be just fine.
I agree with you Brady because this obviously was a really bad time for everyone that might have been unemployed or didn't have a "good enough" job. The working conditions then because ridiculously awful and it didn't change for a while.
What do you think would happen if we pulled away from China instantly and didn’t use them in our economy at all? This would be a bad move to make because we have become so reliant on China that if we backed out and didn’t use them for goods and other things our country would go downhill. We depend on China just like they depend on us we trade each other goods, we might be able to pull away slowly, but even then it would be hard.
I think that the US would be less strong because we depend on them alot. If we stopped relying on them, our country would go downhill and they would rise up.
The U.S. would have many problems if we stopped trading with China. Most of the stuff we buy is made in China and we also are greatly in debt to China.
I think that the U.S. could survive without china. I think that if we had all those factories over here we would not be in debt and everyone would have jobs. United States has all these recources that we are not using. China would be lost without us because we get so much stuff from them that we could make here and support our economey instead of theres.
I agree with you. We depend on China so much and we would just fall apart without it. The get most of our good from them and if we pulled away it would hurt us dramatically.
I think that the United States would fall appart because we depend on china to much and they depend on us equally. Our economy would plunge because we would not have any imported goods we rely on other countries to get us the goods we need if China was not appart of that then we would have some big problems.
i think that the panama canal is a key canal for economic and time saving sucsess. that panama canal has been a key canal since 1912 (According to mr Armstrong)
I agree with you andrew, the Panama Canal is our main shipping source, it made things a lot easier and faster back in the day and still plays such a huge role in our world today.
I agree, the panama canal offered many different advantages such as allowing ships to get from the east coast to the west coast of North America much faster. It also made things much more affordable to ship because the trip would be shorter.
This canal cut of thousands of miles of waterway that ships would have to go through to ship goods from coast to coast. It not only saves time but it saves shipping companies thousands of dollars a year.
I am against child labor because I found a website that told me about some of the facts on it, one in six children are involved in child labor in developing countries. Worldwide, around 126 million children are working in hazardous conditions. My hypothesis is: is children working in their household as their parents slaves still considered child labor?
Me too I don't think it should be allowed and did you know that Nike uses child labor? I dont think this is right if children are working they should at least have better working conditions for them.
Me too, child labor is ridiculous and definitley not needed. They are forced to work in harsh and critical conditions that aren't only dangerous, but life threatening.
i definatly agree. there were too many lives taken for granted. i mean look at us now. We need more jobs, and then we had kids working too. Maybe if we didnt work too hard then and kept the life style the way it was meant to be we wouldnt be under so much pressure right now.
I'm against child labor as well, there are many things showing up on the news today that involve child labor. Recently Victoria secret was accused of using fiber picked from farms that relied on abused child laborers according to fox news. There was another article posted by Bloomberg News that mentioned in 2009 that 25 million garments were made from cotton plucked in the "searing" sun by undernourished children who were supposedly beaten by branches
Know what the east-west axis is and how it contributed to colonization::
this means that if you migrate east/west, the odds are better that the crops and animals you bring with you will be able to survive in your new home. if you migrate north/south, you've got to rebuild civilization every time you move
Many Americans appraised of this assimilation by publicists from the tribes themselves and by missionaries who had long lived among them championed the cause of the Five Civilized Tribes.
This was used during slavery. Countries of Europe began to do a great deal of trading with the nations of Africa. Portuguese, Spanish, English, and Dutch traders were using their boats to sail all around Africa and trading what they bought to people in Europe and Asia.
I think the triangular trade route was good because it allowed us to have a better economy. By trading things like this, we bought things that we could not make or get in America. It was a good thing.
The Progressive Movement was important to America because it helped the country move forward, and become safer. After the Progressive Era, the United States was had safer jobs, food, and drug regulations.
I agree because it was a big step for the US, it helped us move forward by a lot and it did good for us by protecting us. The country did I guess get a lot safer after this but we had new jobs, and regulations.
Very true, the progressive movement saved the US from becoming a rubish pit. But, I think we need another one; we need to become more liberal about immigration and human rights and we need to become more peaceful
Some facts on the panama canal are that it splits the country of panama and unites the atlantic and pacific oceans. Also, the beginning of their travels on the canal would travel them to go over 6,000 miles. The french first started to try to build the canal but it ended up not working out. The canal is 48 miles long and it takes about 9 hours for a ship to pass through.
Many new organizations were created that are still around today. Things like the FDA, According to the textbook "Laborers thought they at least deserved fair wages and decent working conditions".
The progressive era was where Teddy Roosevelt tried to help the workers of the American industrial society. The academicamerican.com website states that back then there were "tensions and problems" during the industrial era and Teddy Roosevelt tried to fix them.
There was so much tension during this time and Teddy Roosevelt's main objective was try to release some of this tension. He did this by creating many laws and acts that improved the life of an average American.
Spain's restriction of the navigation of the Mississippi, the great natural commercial artery of the American continent, was a great annoyance to the settlers on the western slopes of the Alleghanies.
I believe that the Panama Canal was a very good idea for the United States because it saved both time and money for people going from one coast to the other. It really boosted the economy on the west coast.
I think it was a very good choice for America do build the Panama Canal, we got credit for it and it is a huge part of todays world becacuse it is used as our main shipping source in todays world
The Panama canal was a way of showing our countries greatness without going to war. The French tried to build the canal but failed, and we did it successfully.
Exactly. Its like imperialism without killing people. Its an example of how interfering in some world affairs can be beneficial to everyone involved in the long run.
I think that the Panama canal was a good idea because it helped people everywhere get good from place to place much faster and it was for the greater good. Us invading Panama without permission was a bad idea though because we could gave worked out an agreement or asked them to build it.
It was a good choice because it helped with the economy, other countries shipping and it was kind of like U.S. was the hero at solving the problem of the canal. If they wouldn't have done that then the ships would have to go all the way around South America.
It was a good choice because it turned into the main place to travel through to get goods shipped to different places. It saved time and money but it took to many peoples lives in order to make it. But now people dont uses the pamama canal that much mostly things are shipped to different places by planes instead of ships.
Racisim will never end. Whether people start doing things to an extreme to get rid of people who are racist, racisim will always be there. Martin Luther King Jr. fought long and hard for equality, and with his doings it has helped racisim decrese and a rise of equality. However racism will still be there. There will still be people who don't like a certain race for their skin color.
I also agree with you. Racism is a prejudice that people will always have. The fact that a person looks different than you is always a way that people will use to discriminate. Plus, some people cant help it they are raised in a racist family and they grow up with those beliefs.
I agree with you. I don't think it will ever end completely. People these days are, yes, more "tolerant" to other kind of races but you still judge them without even thinking. It is like a reflex to judge people right as you see them. Which, of course, is so wrong. And yes people sometimes don't like people JUST because of the color of your skin. To me that seems so ridiculous.
I agree with you. Also, if people who share the same skin color can't look at someone without judging each other, how is racism any different? People who share the same color skin, share the same similar background still judge eachother upon how much money they reiceve, how smart they are, what they look like. Thats just like racism. If judging one another cant be stopped, what makes people thing racism will be stopped completely?
I agree with you, racisim is wrong,but has been there for thousands of years and is never going to change because there will always be people who dont like equality and think only about them selfs.
