Return to CreateDebate.commrarmy • Join this debate community

mrarmy


Debate Info

Debate Score:1451
Arguments:1429
Total Votes:1455
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 US History Final Discussion (1429)

Debate Creator

mrarmyphs(92) pic



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.

 

Add New Argument
2 points

America was very Imperialistic during the Spanish-American War.

2 points

The Spanish American War let other countries know that they weren’t afraid and would not back down.

http://www.sparknotes.com/history/american/spanishamerican/context.html

jfaust(25) Disputed
1 point

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.

http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/toc.html

1 point

I agree, we needed that so our country would not be messed with and we can live in peace.

1 point

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

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree, we had to show them and let them know that we weren't afraid to keep fighting for what we deserve, and that we wouldn't give up or back down.

Side: Spanish American

And after the Spanish-American War, we are always involved with wars and conflicts. who knows, the U.S. will become a communist country.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

We were not imperialistic, we had to show other countries that we were able to fight against others.

Side: Spanish American
CKlemme(28) Disputed
1 point

I disagree because I believe that the United States was actually very imperialistic during the time of the progressive era.

LInk: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/progressivism/index.cfm

Side: Spanish American
chenning(28) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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?

Side: Imperialism
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
tmalone(29) Disputed
1 point

I disagree because I think that e were imperialistic because we wanted other countries to be like us.

Side: Migration
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

i think that this is very true. Our country is always in a war. Somewhere in the world. stopping or trying to stop other countries from fighting.

Side: Imperialism
cdenzin(26) Disputed
1 point

and by showing other countries we were able to fight we were imperialistic

Side: Imperialism
Holentunder(33) Disputed
1 point

We were very imperialistic because we tired to take over areas and show that we had more power

Side: Imperialism
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
jcravillion(16) Disputed
1 point

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

Side: Imperialism
nreil(30) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
dermer(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, we had to show them that we weren't afraid to fight against other people, and that we wouldn't back down.

Side: WWI
dayton121394(38) Disputed
1 point

I totally diagree with you. The U.S is imperialistic after the Spanish-American War. http://www.slideshare.net/ljhsblog/america-in-the-age-of-imperialism-263912

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree with Zack, we were not imperialistic we just have to show our power.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, we had to show them that we weren't afraid to fight other people and not back down .

Side: WWI
1 point

Us showing that we can fight against other makes us look imperialistic.

Side: WWI
dayton121394(38) Disputed
1 point

WE ARE IMPERIALISTIC, no matter what. It has been in history books and records that have been written about the U.S.

Side: WWI
1 point

The War had now made America transition into a vigorous role in world affairs. The Spanish American War revealed that America had great powers.

Side: WWI
1 point

After the war we became very imperialistic and started taking over land and control of other countries.

Side: WWI
1 point

true but did it show in a good or bad way to the restof the world

Side: WWI
1 point

And that the Spanish is a dieing empire and world power and that a new world powers are needed.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
breinnecain(10) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/joining.html

Side: WWI
jfaust(25) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
jcravillion(16) Disputed
1 point

"Great" Nation? How do wars, colonies and imperialism make a country great?

Side: Spanish American
TommyJay(28) Disputed
1 point

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?

Side: Nationalism
1 point

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.

http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/splendid.html

Side: Nationalism
1 point

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.

Side: Nationalism
1 point

I agree with you because america was making people frantic believing wwhatever they read.

Side: Nationalism
1 point

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.

Side: Nationalism
1 point

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.

Side: Nationalism
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

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

Side: Spanish American
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree because we could use our navy and manuever it alot more quickly than before. We could control other countries easier.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. By showing other countires that we had power, and taking over areas we were very imperialistic

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree by showing our power, it proved that we are imperialistic

Side: Spanish American
1 point

This is very true, but I almost think we are even more imperialistic now than during the Spanish American war.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Yes it was,and that led to more problems afterward because of the imperialism

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Exactly... Imperialism lead to lots more Wars and more probelms.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree we were very imperialistic I think we destroyed the USS Maine to start a war with Spain to get their land.

Side: Imperialism

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree, I think that they wanted to get as much land as they could so they would fight against anyone and wouldnt stop until they won.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I totally agree, America was very Imperialistic in the Spanish-American War.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Yes, your reasoning sounds right, but give examples to prove you are right

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree especialy with the events leading up to it such as the USS Maine got blown up because it was trying to help other nations

Side: Imperialism

Let this link show how America was IMPERIALISTIC in Latin-America.

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/a_f/espada/imperialism.htm

Side: Imperialism
1 point

thats true we were the best according to us...what do you think happened to the maine???

Side: Spanish American
2 points

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.

Supporting Evidence: Why the U.S. entered WW1 (www.thenagain.info)
Side: Spanish American
2 points

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.

Side: Spanish American
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
2 points

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

if the us went to war early we could of prevented alot of deaths.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree if we had not went into the war when we did Germany would have taken the European front and the US would have been screwed

Side: Spanish American
lbreitzman(5) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree because if Britan lost we would be out money. The Germans also shot one of our boats taking them supplies.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

yes and also they probably would have had mexico enter and attack us as well then we would be screwed

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i dont think if mexico attacked us we be screwed i think it be the other way around

Side: Spanish American
1 point

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.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree we entered at a good time because the Russians pulled out in 1918 and if we wouldn't have joined then the central powers may have won the war.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree if we wouldnt have the allies would have surely lost, causing our economy to tank.

Side: WWI
2 points

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

"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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

If that book was never created, there could be a lot more sick people from eating what the say was food.

Side: WWI
1 point

It would be like eating spam at every meal. have you ever had spam? its canned meat, in case you didnt know.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

that book made america open its eyes and wake up it was basicly a slap across the face for some people

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
jcravillion(16) Disputed
1 point

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

Side: Muckraker
1 point

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.

Side: Muckraker
2 points

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.

Supporting Evidence: Ron Paul's political positions (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Muckraker
1 point

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.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

I think he is also the best republican candidate, but I erosnally believe that Warren Mosler is the best choice for president.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

I also do think that Ron Paul is the best for president I think that it will come down not Romney and Paul.

Side: Muckraker
2 points

nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Side: Muckraker
2 points

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.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

I agree Germany was the ultimate nation, they thought that they could concur the world.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree. I think Germany thought they were better than everyone else and were the "top dog". They ended up falling anyways in the war.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, they were very imperialistic trying to take over Europe.

Side: WWI
2 points

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.

Side: WWI
2 points

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

You would get fined and possabley put in prison they law should not pass because many things we be taken away twitter,Facebook,YouTube,ect

Side: SOPA
1 point

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?

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: A timeline of WWI through WWII that illustrates their relation (www.xtimeline.com)
Side: SOPA
1 point

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

Side: SOPA
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree they showed that one scene that the soldier was saying sorry to the man he killed. He did not want to kill him but he was forced to.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/soldiers.html#ixzz1jv2voXFS

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

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

Side: SOPA
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

In WWI nobody knew who started the war, so the soldiers were fighting each other and they had no idea why.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

yes, I agree. The men had no idea what they were getting themselves into, but once they started they found out how horrible it was.

Side: WWI
1 point

I also agree with you. No one knew what they were figthing for. Millions of solders were killed for no reason.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

yes they found out and then wanted nothing to do with it. If they had know what it was like before the go into it. they wouldnt have even bothered.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

All so the dept they had to pay after that lead them to be very poor.Giveing hitler more of a edge to rise in power

Side: WWI
svargas(27) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI

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.

LINK!!! http://www.planetberries.com/child-labour-in-the-19th-century.html

Side: WWI
1 point

Yeah I agree. The main reason children had to work that hard was because their parents and families were paid very little in their jobs.

Side: WWI
1 point

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

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: Child Labor Link!!!! (www.continuetolearn.uiowa.edu)
Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

i agree child lobor is perfect how we have it today. back then it was the worst thing that a parent could do to a child!

Side: Child labor
cdenzin(26) Disputed
1 point

sometimes kids wanted to work to help their families and they werent forced to work

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

all the employers saw was people they could exploit and the people didnt care because they needed the money

Side: Child labor
1 point

I think that the working sites are much more sanitary and safe for kids to work and make money.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

The Child Labor laws made working condtions for children less harsh. They no longer could work in factories and work under harsh condtioins

Side: Child labor
1 point

I agree with you MEGHAN!

The main reason children had to work back then is because they needed to help support their family to live.

Side: Child labor
svargas(27) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
jcravillion(16) Disputed
1 point

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

Side: Child labor
1 point

where did you come from?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Side: Child labor
1 point

I agree child labor is really bad in other countries, but it causes us to have cheaper import products.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

I think that child labor is alot better these days then what they were many years ago when kids worked in factories.

Side: Child labor
1 point

America has a history of being very imperialistic and is only now starting to be less imperialistic

Side: Child labor
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

America was not imperialistic, we were helping other countries out. Like with the Paama canal we helped them build it

Side: Child labor
jfaust(25) Disputed
1 point

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.

http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/impinviet.html

Side: Child labor
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: Link!!!! (www.eclipse.co.uk)
Side: Child labor
MicaylaAnn(20) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
alefeber(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
MarkNovak(23) Disputed
1 point

How are we starting to be less imperialistic? Compare our imperialism now and then.

Side: Child labor
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

We were never imperalistic, we had to show how we could be friends but you dont want to start a war with us

Side: Child labor
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: Link!!!! (www.dailycampus.com)
Side: Child labor
alefeber(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

your right mark if anything we are the some if not more imperalistic compared to before

Side: Child labor
alefeber(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

yes, not every other country thinks that our ideas are the best and in the end there are many lives that are lost.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: Imperialism (www.usatoday.com)
Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
alefeber(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

We aren't imperialistic. We just had to show countries that were able to fight others.

Side: Child labor
trevo185(25) Disputed
1 point

I disagree, america used to not be imperialistic but now is becoming because all of the wars we are getting involved in.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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)
Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

LinK: http://www.academicamerican.com/progressive/topics/progressive.html

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

The Progressive Era helped to form the United States into the way it is today

Side: Child labor
1 point

I agree. Because in today, women’s rights groups and human focused organizations still work actively in the U.S.

http://www.ehow.com/list_7602108_womens-rights-groups-america.html

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: Child labor
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
1 point

America is not imperialistic country, it does not force things on other countries

Side: progressive
chenning(28) Disputed
1 point

According to the Spanish American War America was very Imperialistic.

http://www.sparknotes.com/history/american/spanishamerican/context.html

Side: progressive
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

We were just showing that we are not a country to fight with. That we have power to compete with

Side: progressive
MicaylaAnn(20) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

We are not forcing anything, they need help so we give them our help

Side: progressive
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: Link!!!! (www.commondreams.org)
Side: progressive
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
meghanroelse(30) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

We are not forcing anything on them though. We are helping them when they need help

Side: progressive
alefeber(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
Devlen K.(24) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
bxiong19(21) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

yes, the people didnt need to be treated like they were. Coming to America was a good idea and gave many people a new start.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree we all wanted freedom, but they pushed them to leave because they didn't feel welcome there.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
zbradley(22) Disputed
1 point

We do not think that we are the best, we just want to help other countries to become healthier or better conditions for living in.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

http://articles.cnn.com/2006-12-12/us/racism.poll_1_whites-blacks-racism?_s=PM:US

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/11/cain-charges-some-in-black-community-with-racism/

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.

Side: Imperialism
AZiegler(21) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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:

LInk: http://thinkexist.com/quotations/racism/

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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."

Supporting Evidence: Link to qoute!!!! (www.adl.org)
Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

racism and singling groups out because they are different will never be completely gone.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

yes, i dont think there will ever bee a time that racism is not a problem, everywhere you go there is racism and it needs to stop.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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?

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Exactly, People for some reason have an urge to make fun of groups or races. They just have so vendeta against people and hate them.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree racism is reeally never going to go away it is a very big problem

http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/racism-in-america-faq.htm

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism

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.

LINK http://www.nber.org/papers/w10984

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

After the reform the way that the food was handled was a lot more sanitary and safe for everyone to eat.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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."

Side: Imperialism

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism

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.

LINK http://library.thinkquest.org/15413/history/history-ren.htm

Side: Imperialism

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.

LINK http://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
1 point

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?

Side: Migration
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
1 point

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

Side: Migration
AZiegler(21) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
2 points

I agree because it was not fair of the business owners to operate in that way.

Side: Migration
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
jfaust(25) Disputed
1 point

It was a terrible time, but it was necessary. The terrible things that happened then lead to the creation of things such as the FDA and labor unions.

http://history-world.org/Industrial%20Intro.htm

Side: Migration
1 point

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.

Side: Migration
1 point

It was good for businesses but not for other people. Then the Progressive era came along helped straighten everything out

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/progressivism/index.cfm

Side: Migration
1 point

The Texas governor is telling supporters that he will drop his bid for the GOP presidential nomination two sources familiar with his plans say.

Side: trent

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.

LINK http://www.economist.com/economics/by-invitation/questions/world_too_dependent_chinese_economy

Side: trent
1 point

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.

Side: trent

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.

Supporting Evidence: The U.S. owes China Money (www.chacha.com)
Side: trent
btrakel(27) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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)

Side: triangular trade

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.

Side: triangular trade

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.

Supporting Evidence: Advantages of the Panama Canal (www.ehow.com)
Side: triangular trade
1 point

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.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Child Labor

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?

http://www.compassion.com/child-advocacy/find-your-voice/quick-facts/child-labor-quick-facts.htm

Side: triangular trade

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.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

yes, i also beleive that children should not be forced to work in horrible conditions that present many dangers and illnesses.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I beleive that children during the Progressive era had every right not to work in the horrible and nasty job sites.

Side: triangular trade
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
2 points

However, some families needed the money desperately and their children had to work wherever they can find a job. They had every right to work.

Side: triangular trade
mason(21) Disputed
1 point

well I might of said that wrong.. If they want to work then yes they have the right but if they dont want to then they shouldnt have to.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The Trail of Tears National Historic Trail commemorates the removal of the Cherokee and the paths that 17 Cherokee detachments followed westward.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Identify triangular trade routes::

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Supporting Evidence: Progressive Movement (www.academicamerican.com)
Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

yes, i believe we needed to go through the tought times in order to learn new things and in turn become a better country.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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

Side: progressive
1 point

Panama Canal

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.

http://www.costaricapages.com/panama/blog/information-facts-and-a-brief-history-of-the-panama-canal-165

Side: progressive
1 point

The Progressive Era was a time period when Teddy Roosevelt tried to reform the laws of the 1900s.

Side: progressive
1 point

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".

Side: progressive
1 point

Read part of this article and elaborate how roosevelt influenced the progressive movement

Supporting Evidence: Theodore Roosevelt from Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: progressive
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
1 point

The progressive era was a very good time for us. It gave workers decent wages and hours and also gave us better food.

Side: progressive
1 point

I agree and it also helped americans get enough money to pay for the things they needed for their families.

Side: progressive
1 point

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.

Side: progressive
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Was the panama canal a good choice for America or was it a bad idea?

Side: Imperialism
2 points

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I think its pretty cool. its a good example of how imperialism can have a positive impact on the world.

Side: Imperialism

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

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It was a good idea because it made for much easier travel and it was economically better for the US and Panama

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It is a good thing because you don't have to sail around South America.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I think that is was a good idea that the panama canal was built so that people could travle faster and get from one part of the world to the other.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Did Racism end after Barack Obama became president?

I think it may of been a step in a good direction but i don't think it ended racism.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/04/02-7

Side: Imperialism
bxiong19(21) Disputed
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
2 points

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

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.

Side: Imperialism
meghanroelse(30) Disputed
1 point

No, I don't think that racism ended once Barak Obama because president even if it is minor I feel like we will always have racism, it's right, but it is always there.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree it didnt end racism. There will always be a little bit. Thats not the way it should be but thats just how it is

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree because Barak Obama didnt change racism if anything the reasons most people dot like him is because they are racist. Most people dont really give reasons why they dont like him because hey are embarassed to admit that they are showing racism towards him. Racism is always going to be here and it will never change because people cant except the fact that other people are different and because they are that they should be in a lower class or they find themselfs in a higher position to other people. Its not right and people should just get over themselves for discriminating other races. There never just going to disappear get over it.

Side: Racism
1 point

I totally agree with you Meghan. Racism is always there, no one will ever get rid of it. Just because we have a black president doesn't mean that all of a sudden racism stopped.

Side: Racism
rhernickle(24) Disputed
1 point

Rascism won't end, because even if the majority of the country isn't rascist, there will still be at least one person who is, and because of that single person, there will always be rascism.

Side: Racism
CKlemme(28) Disputed
1 point

I disagree with you because there is no way that racism will ever end, and the fact that Barack Obama became president didn't help anything. People hated him in the beginning and they will continue to hate him. Some may hate him because he is black. But it doesn't matter what color skin he was, it didn't help anything.

Side: Racism
chenning(28) Disputed
1 point

I agree with anyone who said racism will always be a factor in the world. Barack Obama didn't do anything about ending racism he just became the first black president. There are lots of people in the world that are very racists and show lots of discrimination. Racism will always be a factor and will never end.

Side: Racism
1 point

I think that racism got worse when barack obama became preseident. I dont think he solved anything

Side: Racism
1 point

Recognize how Reconstruction policies were to reunify the nation::

Reconstruction had provided freedmen with equal rights under the constitution, and blacks were voting and taking political office. Republican legislatures, coalitions of whites and blacks, established the first public school systems and numerous charitable institutions in the South. Beginning in 1874, however, there was a rise in white paramilitary organizations.

Side: Racism
1 point

I think that the progressive era lead the US to becoming an imperialistic country because the fact that once they got themselves back on their feet and got their country going, they soon realized they were at the top and wanted to help everyone. Because they were growing larger in industries, economy, and their army, it seemed like they wanted to help everyone who needed help. Leading to imperialism.

Supporting Evidence: LINK; (www.digitalhistory.uh.edu)
Side: Racism
1 point

I agree with this because the progressive era did lead us to becoming and independent and imperialistic country because we learned how to get back up again after failing once. We needed to learn how to help everyone and somehow compromise with everyone and give them what they need. They were growing bigger and bigger just like their economy.

LInk: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/progressivism/index.cfm

Side: Racism
1 point

Do you think that this form of imperialism is good or bad, and how does it affect our domestic issues as a nation?

Side: Racism

I think this kind of imperialism was good becuase helping other countries out is a plus for us, then they are on our side if anything were to happen to us.

Side: Racism
1 point

Imperialism, just like everything else, has its goods and its bads. It did help us in many ways but it also gave us an ego. Where we think that we are better than other countries just because of the way we live. Everyone lives differently Everyone IS different. Period.

Side: Racism
1 point

I do agree with this. I believe that the Progressive Era was a good thing, but it went to the governments head. Today, I think that we should focus a little more about what's going on inside.

Side: Racism
1 point

This is a good point. We thought we could solve the world's problems so we got involved into everyone elses business instead of only worrying about ourselves

Side: Racism
1 point

Renaissance

This was considered a time of rebirth for everyone in this time period, this refers especially to the rebirth of learning that it began in Italy in the fourteenth century, spread to the north, including England, by the sixteenth century, and ended in the north in the mid-seventeenth century. During this period, there was an enormous renewal of interest in and study of classical antiquity. I found these facts on this website:

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/cs6/ren.html

Side: Racism
1 point

The Progressive movement helped with child labour, because it helped make working conditions safer and helped regulate a minimum wage.

Side: Racism
1 point

The Spanish-American War was a turning point in the history of the United States signalling the country's emergence as a world power.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

The destruction of Maine did not cause the U.S. to declare war on Spain but it served as a catalyst accelerating the approach to a diplomatic impasse. In addition the sinking and deaths of U.S. sailors rallied American opinion more strongly behind armed intervention.

Side: Spanish American
2 points

I think it was used as an excuse to start a war. Relations with Spain were tense, but we had no reason to fight them. The Maine gave us a reason, no matter who destroyed it.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I think that the United States is very imperialistic. We showed this in Vietnam when we were trying to stop Communism and it wasn't our business. We currently show this by invading Iraq mainly for the oil and other rescues. This link supports this statement http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-05-05-boot_x.htm

Side: Spanish American
1 point

There always seems to be something on the news that has to do Afghanistan and its suicide bombings. Does it really pay to have the United States still in Afghanistan? Are we ever going to win that war? The United states got of Iraq , should we do the same and get out of Afghanistan?

Supporting Evidence: Suicide bomber kills seven near Afghan Airport (www.cnn.com)
Side: Spanish American
zlederer(22) Disputed
1 point

right now america is in Afghanistan because they are trying to help the people and some afghans think that we are there to cause problems which is why there are suicide bombings

Side: Spanish American
epm19(10) Disputed
1 point

Why should we continue to help, all the suicide bombers are injuring our soldiers and others that live there. If some afghans think were the problem then why are we there Helping them out, we could be working on to better our country we don't need to be helping them, when were the ones getting hurt. Were being generous yet there trying to kill us.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Describe the plans for reunifying the country from different people and groups points of view, including Abraham Lincoln's::

Lincoln said that as soon as any seceded state formed a accepted presidential decisions on the subject of slavery and took oaths of allegiance to the Constitution, they would be readmitted to the Union. By the end of the Civil War Arkansas and Louisiana had established governments based on these terms. Radical Republicans opposed Lincoln's Reconstruction Plan because it did not ensure equal civil rights for freed slaves. Andrew Johnson, issued his own Reconstruction Plan. He announced that on the ratification of the 13th Amendment Southern states would be re-admitted into the Union.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USASplan.htm

Side: Spanish American
1 point

From a Japanese point of view, American people have strong thoughts about civil rights.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

CURRENT EVENT: The number of people that are jobless in the United States has decreased. According to nytimes.com, the number of jobless people in America is the lowest it's been since April of 2008. It shows that our ecomony is showing progress!

LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/business/economy/jobless-claims-fall-sharply.html?_r=1∣=tw-nytimes&seid;=auto

Side: Spanish American
1 point

This is very good, there are so many more jobs that started and it gives so many more people oppertunities to earn money and have a good life.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

This is very good. This means that more people have gotten jobs and can support themselves and their families better. YAY!

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Exactly! Our county is finally starting to move forward. Hopefully we don't take one step forward, and two steps back. Our country need to move forward and continue to better our economy!

Side: Spanish American
1 point

that mmeans the economy will boost because they will spend their money and it goes round and round

Side: Spanish American
1 point

america hit rock bottom in 2008 when it came to jobs,its going up now because of the rise in people trying to make jobs and the goverment.

Side: Spanish American
cdenzin(26) Disputed
1 point

It is making progress and starting to move forward but it is still not in a very good place right now and our economy still needs a lot more to be done

Side: Spanish American
1 point

People started moving west for different reasons. Some people moved because of the gold rush, and other people started moving because they were able to buy land for a cheap price. They also wanted farm land and they may not have had jobs.

Supporting Evidence: Reasons to Move West (www.campsilos.org)
Side: Spanish American
1 point

I think it is good that people started moving west. I think that people moving west let them have a new life and maybe get them off on the right foot.

Side: Spanish American

People moving west is what populated our entire country. We got land from many other nations so that we could have a unified country.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

all that still has something in common money people will do so much for money

Side: Spanish American
1 point

List groups that formed for social and political reasons in the west::

Nationalists, antislavery political forces, confederates, slaveocracy, Republican party, Federalists, northerners,

Side: Spanish American
1 point

One of the laws that teddy tried to reform was food saftey. Teddy was trying to show the people about how the meat compinies were putting chemicals such as coal-tar, dye, and boraxto preserve them.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

This led on to apply to all food safety areas. Now every aspect of the food industry is monitored all because Theodore Roosevelt started a movement in the meat industry.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

As Theodore Roosevelt said “A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues”, he could recognize civil rights are real big problems in the U.S.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

People were also adding things to make something the right weight, but it wasn't the real thing.

Supporting Evidence: Food and Drug Regulation (eh.net)
Side: Spanish American
1 point

The U.S. Navy Department immediately formed a board of inquiry to determine the reason for Maine's destruction. The inquiry conducted in Havana lasted four weeks. The condition of the submerged wreck and the lack of technical expertise prevented the board from being as thorough as later investigations.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

When the USS Maine blew up, yellow journalists used propaganda to turn Americans on the Spanish. In reality, the explosion was an accident, and if the journalists had not influenced readers’ opinions just to sell papers, then the Spanish-American War never would happened. We really had no other reason to go to war. Any challengers? http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm

Supporting Evidence: Article about the USS Maine and what happened with yellow journalism (www.history.navy.mil)
Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. Yellow Journalism was only using it's greed to sell newspapers, and in that, they sort of started a whole war. If newspapers would've just reported the facts, then none of that would've happened.

Supporting Evidence: LINK!!!!!! (library.thinkquest.org)
Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. the newspaper did anything to sell papers and make money for themselves without realizes the consenquences of their actions. They lied and, yes, they basically started a whole new war without even realizing it. I agree, Vivien, they should have just reported the FACTS.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Yeah. I dont think that pulitzer and other journalists had bad intentions, they just didnt realize the impact that public sensationalism would have on world affairs.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. I don't get why the journalists did that. Did they want us to go to war? They should have not made up those things about the Spanish people. It was not necessary.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

The Spanish-American War and the subsequent occupation of Cuba can be traced to the rapid growth of the American public’s interest in economic, territorial, and cultural expansion during the 1890s. This interest was due in part to domestic economic distress.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Discuss the reasons migration patterns and population shifts are still moving west in the 21st century::

People still move to the West because of something called the “The 21st Western Cowboy” The population in western states are lower too and have more land.

Side: Spanish American

I agree people also move out west today for different reasons. People with a lot of money move West to buy bigger houses or to be around the ocean or if you are looking for different jobs that pay more going out West will give you that like California.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

There is also a lot less going on economically in western states, meaning that cities there are likely to be less busy. this could be a pull for the population moving from more busy eastern areas.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

World War 1 and World War 2 was completely blamed on Germany, even though they weren't the only countries who had their hands dirty. Because they were soley blamed, they got the responsiblity of paying of the debt. The debt was set at the end of the war in the early 1990's, and it wasn't until last year that Germany finally paid it off. They had to pay a sum of 94 million dollars. Link!!!http://www.defence.pk/forums/members-club/75171-german-debt-paid-off.html

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Germany, along with Adolf Hitler, were killing millions and millions of people. Our country went in to end the insanity. I don't see any reason why Germany shouldn't have to pay for WW2, they were a HUGE part of the deaths of many, many inoccent people.

Side: Spanish American
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

I agree with them for paying for WWII. That was alll Hitler, but the first World War didn't involved him. Adolf Hitler was actually a soldier fighting in the war, but he had nothing to do with starting it. There were other countries involved in the first World War, and some historians believe that because of that, Adolf Hitler started the second World War as a sort of revenge.

Side: Spanish American
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

WW2 was Germany's fault. They are the ones who began the war and they killed Jewish people simply for just being Jewish.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

agreed WW2 was germanys fault at that part. people shouldnt have been killed because they beleived in something different from them. and what a waist for hitler. before he went cooocoo he was actually an interesting person to meet. he was an artist and as we all know he knew what to people. beleive it or not somewhere in europe museums actually have some of his peices.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Current event-I read a link that talks about the rate of doctor performed abortions going down, but behind close door abortions going up. I chose this current event because I think its a very contraversial subject for many people. I personally believe that abortion should be more accepted for those who need it, or these "unhealthy" abortions will continue to rise as our country views the subject as political and not easy to talk about. It also is looked at as wrong, but their are circumstances in which women need this and more women are put at risk if we don't deal with this issue.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

I agree. There are things that support both ends of the arguement. But in some cases aboration is neccesary for the health of the mother. Or, for example, if the woman was raped and got pregnant...she should have a choice on wether or not she keeps the baby. But overall it is the mothers choice. I personally think that every baby deserves to live, if you don't want to be a mother there is ALWAYS adoption.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

I agree. I believe in "woman's choice" and that a woman should be able to do whatever they want with their bodies. If they want an abortion because they were raped or incest or just because they want to use that as birthcontrol than that's their own business. They're going to be the ones who will have to live with it.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

If people think abortion is okay, or if they dont, I think it is their business and I dont think the government should interfere unless theres someone who has way too many abortions over and over again.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

I agree, Abortion should only be a available for those who actually need it, For example if someone happened to be raped they should be able to get an abortion. But i don't think abortion should be allowed to those who made a mistake one night. They should have the child. If they don't think there capable they could do something besides abortion, they could use the adoption route. Ending a life of a child isn't always the answer.

Side: current event-abortion
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

I don't agree. You can't tell someone to get an abortion just because they made a mistake. I personally wouldn't use abortion as birth control, but that doesn't mean someone else shouldn't have that optino. They're the ones who are going to have to live with the fact they aborted their own child for the rest of their life.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

Your right,it shouldnt be looked at as wrong if a women gets a abortion,its there body and they have the right to do what they want to it.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

The progessive era changed a lot of things. One important thing was the sanitary of our meat industries. Back them there were no sanitary precautions. People would smoke in the place, never wash their hands, never wear appropriate clothing. Now, everything is made sure to be kept sanitary.

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

Side: current event-abortion

I agree I was reading things from the Progessive Era and it said that they used to use spoiled animals and vegetable to make food. And added water to wines to make it last longer, along with adding chalk to bread, it's discusting. I'm glad they made that reform because a lot of diseases were cause by unsanitary things too.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

I agree that things were really out of control back then, and that the Progressive Era really improved things for people back then. Heath issues were very common back then, and things were pretty disgusting. Including with the people's health, the progressive era helped protect animals that were in danger and their habitats. Without that, we may not see some of the animals we do today.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

Another reform that Teddy wanted was the conservation and naturla resources. “ beautiful and wonderful wild creatures whose existence was threatened by greed” quote by Teddy Roosevelt.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

I agree with you because I found a list of his quotes too and saw that he mentioned that. A list of famous quotes of his I found here: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/theodore_roosevelt.html

Side: current event-abortion

That's one of the reason we have so many national parks today because he wanted to preserve the land. Yellow Stone National Park hold many things that are untouched, such as land and animals.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

Different people and groups in the west:

People from different countries who migrated to the west, Indians, slaves.

Side: current event-abortion
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

This is true because many people wanted free land, but to survive out west, you needed to hard working and know how to survive in the wild.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

Lots of people migrated to the west when they found out there was gold. It was known as the California Gold Rush in the 1800's. Lots of people came to America once they heard of the value of gold. People went nuts over gold and even died.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/californiagoldrush.htm

Side: current event-abortion
chenning(28) Disputed
1 point

People didn't just migrate to the west but also immigrants came during the Industrialization Era. People were looking for jobs and America was the best place to get a job. Factories always needed workers and that why children worked. So immigrants also came in to work and that solved problems.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

Renaissance French for rebirth perfectly describes the intellectual and economic changes that occurred in Europe from the fourteenth through the sixteenth centuries.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

The effects of United States imperialism have been positive because the ideal of democracy has been spread to the countries of Panama and the Philippines, and other cultures continue to be influenced by American politics, economy, and culture.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

. The United States involvement in Panama has been helpful for both countries. Panama has been helped economically with the building of the canal, and the ideal of democracy made their government democratic. American imperialism is benefiting the world in the cases of Puerto Rico and Panama, but it is also benefiting the world culturally. Ideals of equality, pursuit of happiness, democracy, and prosperity are evident in the attempts to make the world a better place.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

Imperialism is driven by the ideal of equality and it is having a positive impact on the world today. Because other countries are becoming Americanized due to the inability to hold strong in their cultural beliefs, cultural barriers are diminishing and the world is becoming more equal.And if you think about it ,people are moveing from other countries to america for equality, the pursuit of happiness,jobs,schooling,and loads of stuff,so speading our ideas and ways to other places that already have there people moveing there for the same reasion isnt bad at all. http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5444.html http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/joining.html http://unitedstatesimperialism.wordpress.com/puerto-rico/

Side: Renaissance
1 point

WWI was a completely senseless war and could have been avoided

easily through conversation. Instead we got in a huge war over an assignation that no one cared about in the first place

Side: Renaissance
2 points

I agree. European relations were tense and the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was an excuse to go to war. American got dragged into it and should have remained neutral or tried to negotiate. We should have just not gotten involved like Canada did during Vietnam.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

thousands of people could of been saved but instead there were thousands of teenagers that went to war and risked there lives.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

I agree, the teenagers back then didn't know the horrors of war and what it did to people. Their friends and parents urged them to go to war and so they did without knowing what they were doing.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

Explain how industry had positive and negative impacts on the U.S:

A positive about industry was that it helped a lot of people get jobs. A negative was that there was child labor, long hours of work, and little pay. It was dangerous to work in the factories.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

Yes the positive was there were more jobs for people to have to try and earn some money. But I personally believe that the negative over-rulled the positive. The negative was that children of all ages had to work these crazy long hours with little to no pay at all. There were so many accidents on machines and children got hurt. And worst of all, the owners wouldn't pay to fix the machine so more and more kids were more likely to get injured or killed.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

I agree with Micayla. The amount of negative overpowers the small amount of the positive of industry. The conditions were terrible and what those child laborers went through was insane. But now that it's happened, our country has learned from it's mistakes and made factories and other workplaces safer and changed the labor laws to be fair.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

Christopher Columbus first voyage to the Americas in 1492 inaugurated what is frequently termed the Age of Exploration and within 100 years ignited an often volatile competition between the emerging nation states of Europe.

Side: European
1 point

There are many conspiracies talking about how World war one started. Evey one would like to believe it was someone Else's fault, but I agree with what the history books teach, that the war broke out because of the assignation of Arch Duke Ferdinand, and every country just jumped into the war, including the U.S. This war was defiantly one that was fought between the governments, not the people. No one wanted to kill each other, because they really had no reason to kill unlike WW2.

Side: European
1 point

Lucrative European trade with Asia had been severely curtailed by wars in the Middle East culminating with the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453.

Side: European
1 point

The western migration was a very important time in american history. The government was giving away land in the west because of all the over pollution in the easter shore.

Side: European

It was a good insentive to come to America also because we had a lot of freedom and we were rising with painters and writers and many things like that.

Side: European
1 point

The movement west made businesses move went too because of all the people rushing out there. This link will elaborate more on this topic. http://www.tms.riverview.wednet.edu/lrc/ westward%20movement.htm

Side: European
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

Well, I don't think the government was giving away land. They just hadn't claimed it, and whoever got their first and claimed it sort of had dibs. The reason we went west because there was no more option and land anymore in the east shore.

Side: European
1 point

Identify influential people, places, and products that made up the U.S. industrial age:

The Triangle Factory that had a giant fire and women died made up the U.S industrial age because it was in the news and a lot of people started to pay more attention to the dangers of factories after the fire.

Side: European
1 point

Another reform was the railroad regulation. Teddy was successful with this one because the congress was on his side and then they passed the Interstate Commerce Act which is where rich owners can’t divide the area and then share the profits.

Side: European
1 point

Western migration was either a good trip that made you live long and prosper, or a trip where you had to eat your own family. people migrated west because they were sick and tired of being over populated in the big city like the movie we watched. far and away

Side: European

They also wanted to go west because of the news of gold. They thought they could move out west, find a bunch of gold and strike it rich.

Supporting Evidence: California Gold Rush (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: European

I think that the westward expansion was worth even though the journey there was rough you could get a lot a freee land and start from something new and it was a very good experience.

Side: European
1 point

Theodore Roosevelt said "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far." This is said to mean to be cautious and to not be aggressive, but to have the option of violence if it is nessecary.

Supporting Evidence: Meaning behind Quote (www.phrases.org.uk)
Side: European
1 point

It's funny that Roosevelt said that because America doesn't "speak softly" at all. We seem to jump to war when things don't go our way. We "throw tantrums" when we don't get our way. It's very childish.

Side: European
1 point

i agree i think that if anything america is screaming in other countries ear and we need to stop. i think that being impearialistic is a bad habit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism

Side: European
1 point

Wealthy Europeans craved spices from Asia as well as silks and sugar. This trade had helped to further the prosperity of Italian city states like Venice and could be traced back to the time of the Crusades. Columbus himself was born in Genoa the map making capital of Europe.

Side: European
1 point

I believe part of our countries problem is our imperialistic attitude. We need to work on our OWN country before we help others. Our country has so many problems that we need to be focusing on instead of going to war and wasting money on other countries. I think it's great that we help so many countries BUT I feel like we should leave countries alone unless they ask for help. Our country has problems with our ecomony, huge debt, and illegall immigration. We should work those things out before we help others unless they ask for it.

Side: European
1 point

I agree 100%. Who are we to tell other countries how to live. Before we can work on other peoples problems we NEED to work on our OWN. Also, if they want our help and we are nice enough to help them out we should. If they do NOT want our help we should respect that and leave them alone. We are not "in charge" of other countries. We have no business trying to force them to live like us. Because, in fact, we have problems of our own. They have their own culture and way of living, we need to respect that.

Side: European
1 point

We are in debt hugely, but we are still spending money on things like foreign wars in Afghanistan. Soldiers are dying and nothing is being accomplished but we are still spending money. Our economy is terrible but we are still trying to fix middle eastern economies.

Side: European

I agree, if we are ever going to get out of debt we need to focus on are own problems, because as we have been helping others our own country has been deteriorating.

Side: European
1 point

I agree we should worry about our problem before we start to help and fix other countries.

Side: European

The U.S. will never focus with our own problems. The U.S. actually creates own problems.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2002/12/imperialism.html

Side: European

This is very true, it might be good to help other countries out, but we definitely need to get everything figure out in our country first because as of right now we aren't doing to so well and we can't just keep dishing our money out to other countries when we don't even have enough to pay China back.

Side: European
1 point

Exactly. Our country is in so much debt and yet we continue to give other countries money that we don't have. Our country will never be able to get rid of the debt if we contine to constantly just give away our money like we are now.

Side: European
1 point

I agree. Our country is in huge debt and we have a large unemployment rate and we keep focusing on other countries. We need to slow down and take care of ourselves.

Side: European
1 point

I agree we have plenty of our own problems, we need to work on those before we help other countries.

Side: European
1 point

Labor issue events during the 19th centurary:

The 1910 Accident Reports Act was passed and a 10-hour work day and standardization of rates of pay and working conditions were won by the Railway Brotherhoods.

Union membership topped 8 million workers in 1910. On January 5th 1914 the Ford Motor Company raised its basic wage from $2.40 for a nine hour day to $5 for an eight hour day.

Side: European
1 point

Who thinks that racism is a huge problem in america, and other countries?

Side: European
1 point

I think racism is a huge problem in America and in other countries, everywhere you go you see and hear racism.

Side: European
1 point

Racism, has been, will be, and will always be a problem wherever we go. No matter what we do or say people will continue to judge people who are different than them. As sad as it is, I don't think there is really anything we can do or say to fix this problem.

Side: European
1 point

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism. I found this great racism website, CHECK IT OUT!!

Side: European
1 point

I agree, Racism will always be a problem in the world it will never go away, There will always be someone out in the world that thinks there better then someone else. The problem with our world is we always judge. This world that we live in is very discriminating. its not our fault what race we are or what religion we have or what gender we like. We have our own choices. Theses our are decisions. Its our life to live no one else.

Side: European
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

I think that racism is a huge problem all around the world whether it be America against blacks or the chinese and japanese. The whole world has different dislikes of different races.

Side: European

I think it's a huge problem, but the bigger problem is that it won't go away. A lot of jokes are made today and at least half of them are racist, but we don't realize it.

Side: European
1 point

Racism will always be a huge problem where ever anyone goes. People have such high egos about their people that some cannot accept other people for their good. Its just like the economy. Its a topic that will never be done disputing over because there will always be an issue about it. Things can be done, yet the idea of it will still always be there to rise and fall all over again.

Side: European
1 point

Racism will always be a problem all over the world. There will always be people that think they are better and deserve to be treated better. Who knows, maybe in the future Americans will b on the other side of racism.

Side: European
1 point

The racism is the biggest problem in the world. I do not understand how some people can still be racism. I believe that we are all equal, it does not matter the color of your skin or where you come from.

Side: European
1 point

Racism is still a problem in America and these feelings and actions are carried over from our dark history during the civil war. At this time slaves were widely used in the deep south and all over. This was a very long time ago but the ideas that blacks are not our equals is still there because of the past they once had.

Side: European
1 point

I believe that the recall of scott walker is a waste of time. Just because somebody accually did what they said they were going to do you get angry? Maybe your just to accustomed to Obama.

Side: European
1 point

I agree. People want recall him just because they don't agree with his political opinions. Many people don't agree with Obama, but that doesn't mean he should be impeached. This is just part of a democratic election. This recall is also costing the state lots of money. Or economy is terrible and we can't afford to spend money on something trivial like a recall election.

Side: European
1 point

I agree, we are paying millions of dollars to recall walker, and in my thought he did more good than bad.

Side: European
1 point

I totally agree, Just because walker didn't do everything he said that he was going to do, If that's the case then why didn't we impeach Obama he didn't do everything that he said he was going to.Like mason said We are paying million's of dollars to recall walker, we could be using the money towards something else that could actually benefit our state. In my eyes were wasting our time and money.

Side: European
1 point

http://www.wisconsinwatch.org/2011/10/27/walker-recall-could-open-spending-spigot/

In the recall of the nine senators this summer cost the state $44 million, just to validate all the signed petitions will cost wisconsin $1 billion dollars.

Side: European
1 point

They have proof of many forged signatures, and signatures from minors that don't count, there are also signatures from people that are from out of state.

Side: European
1 point

The number of Africans shipped as slaves to America has been conservatively estimated at 10 million. That number doesn't include the thousands who died along the way. Some estimates have concluded that 15 to 25 of every 100 Africans died on those voyages.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I think it was wrong to invade and take PEOPLE who are the exact same as us out of their homes and forced them to be slaves. They split up families, people died or were serverly injured. It was all wrong. There was nothing good about having slaves. It was just lazy people who had money and thought they could do what they wanted just because of that.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Certain african tribes were hired by the spainish to capture other africans from other tribes and sell them to them for very little money and they would take the africans over on the boats to america.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I completely don't agree with the shipping of people over to the US. I think the fact that they were going to be used as slaves had a big reason as to why some people consider African American's to be lesser than them.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Federal Arbitration Act was yet another reform thoughtthat comprised the settlement that miners had 10% pay hike and shorter 9 hour days but had to give up there demand for a cosed shop.

Supporting Evidence: Federal Arbitration Act (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: triangular trade
1 point

Predict how industry in the future will be similar or different to what is happening to industry today::

I think probably in the future with the technology there will be so many machines and new technology that people will just have to supervise to make sure the technology runs well and won’t even have to work because the machines will do EVERYTHING for us! Just an opinion.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

yes i agree, sooner than later all the jobs that were started will be taken over by machines and people will have nothing to do.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I also think that machines and robots will take over the jobs of the future Americans. Nowadays, while technology advances, the jobs of human labor disapear. New technology everyday is getting more helpful for companies because they don't have to pay or give insurance to their employees. So in the long run, I think that if companies switch to machine labor, the will end up saving money down the road.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree. The way technology is progressing, there is going to be a huge job loss because people won't be needed, besides to make sure the machines run right. A huge technological leap could push us back into a time like the Great Depression.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree, pretty soon computers are going to be able to do everything and people and workers won't be needed. Which means we will not get paid so we will not have money. But I also think is is in the far into the future. Yes computers get enhanced almost everyday but it will definitely take awhile before it will be able to do everything people can do.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree. I think its wrong how many things they are replacing with computers. Yes computers and techonology are needed for some things and are very important. But there are some things that need real people to work or the quality just isn't the same.

Side: triangular trade
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

There will be much more machines working on the products being made and a lot of people will think that this will take jobs away form americans, but for every machine taking one jobs, there are 2 people making sure that machine works well.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

The renaissance was when people came out of the dark ages, and finally started to ask what was over the hedge, in more than just a geographical way. The age of exploration started to happen when people decided that it wasn’t really possible for you to fall off the edge of the earth. If this had never happened, it might have been quite a bit longer before people discovered that there was an entire continent on the other half of the world. And this would mean that Americans might not have been angered by unfair tax policies, and we might still be a colony of a European nation today, provided that things went better than they actually did in history.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Was the Spanish American War beneficial and needed for the United States to maybe become something better?

Side: triangular trade
AZiegler(21) Disputed
1 point

i think that the spanish american war was anything but benificial. yes, war gives more jobs, but i dont think that all of the jobs acounts for the money that we had to pay for uniforms, guns, explosives, ect

Side: triangular trade
jfaust(25) Disputed
1 point

It was in no way beneficial. It cost money and was very trivial. We just felt like we had to prove our military power, even though there was no reason to do so. It just ruined our relations with other countries.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree, it was not beneficial at all. We spent so much money on the war. Also, so many people died fighting this war. Family members lost their loved ones during this war, how would that be beneficial at all?

Side: triangular trade
nreil(30) Disputed
1 point

The Spanish American War was basically the first showing of the United States as an imperialistic power. This was the begining of the United States as a huge world power. This power also put a target on our back because we were a large world power. There became a competion between countries everyone wanted to be the best and considering at that time the U.S. was ontop every other couontry wanted to bring us down. Here is a link showing the U.S. as an imperialistic power during the Spanish Warhttp://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n4p4_Ries.html

Side: triangular trade
1 point

How are environmental concerns today traced back to the use of natural resources in early industrialization::

A lot of the enviornmental converns are revolved around the giant need for oil from other countries and for fresh water because there isn’t a lot on the planet.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree. Sometimes we need to focus on some of the resources that are diminesing. I mean, oil and other sources do have their benefits to making life easier, but if we're not careful, we're going to use everything up. There's not much fresh water left in the world, and some people just don't care if they waste it because we have so much.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I think that we didn't know about all the things that can harm the enviroment back then, so we didnt take the precautions neeeded. Soon, we are going to be running out of things that we need.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Yes i agree because we need to make sure that we are trying to save the resources that are important to use. If it is not possible for us to do this then we need to find more ways that will help give us energy to use the things we need.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

The muckrakers were journalists that brought up the truth in the U.S. economy. They talked about many different things, such as unfair working conditions, child labor laws, the food and health of people, and the 40 hour work week. All of these things are a major contributor to what we have today like the FDA, and other laws about labor, and children labor laws. At the time the muckrakers were considered "troublemakers" by the government. Without the muckrakers we would never be as far as we are, and our government would control us way to much.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

i agree with breine on the trouble makrer part. i feel like the muck rakers are like the journalists of today. they make up alot stuff to get people to buy their magazines.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

i strongly agree with this and believe that the muckrakers stories really helped Americans see what was going on in the country and that it changed so much today.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree with Bre. The Muckrakers make up things to get people to buy their magazines. There are still people who do this today. I agree with her point of saying we woulnd't be as far as we are and our government would control us.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Austria-Hungary's reaction to the death of their heir was three weeks in coming. Arguing that the Serbian government was implicated in the machinations of the Black Hand the Austro-Hungarians opted to take the opportunity to stamp its authority upon the Serbians, crushing the nationalist movement there and cementing Austria-Hungary's influence in the Balkans.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

the strike was because the miners wanted a 20% more raise, a 9 hour day, and the right to organize a unions.

Supporting Evidence: coal strike 1902 (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: triangular trade
1 point

Recognize what the progressive era is::

the progressive era was the great age of reform. during this period of time a lot of reforms were made and there were a lot of political issues.

Side: triangular trade

I agree with you Madison there were so many things that changed, like food. Before progessive era spoiled animals and vegetables were used which cause huge outbreak in diseases. Also to preserve things or make things last longer they added water to wine and chalk to bread. GROSS.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Austria-Hungary's expectation was that Serbia would reject the remarkably severe terms of the ultimatum, thereby giving her a pretext for launching a limited war against Serbia.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Which autumnally lead up to World War 1 than World War 2.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Current event: Senators are debating about censoring the internet with the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) or the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA). Do you think that this is fair for the country?

Supporting Evidence: LINK; (gigaom.com)
Side: triangular trade
patrickg(11) Disputed
1 point

Censoring the internet will just hurt the contry more and the world.

Side: triangular trade
jfaust(25) Disputed
1 point

I don't think that this is fair. We criticized countries like China and North Korea for censoring the internet, but now we are proposing the same thing. It is a slippery slope into an over controlling and overpowering government.

Side: triangular trade
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

I do not believe the government should be able to censor the Internet. Our country is built around freedom of speech and expression and censoring the Internet would take that away.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Rascism will always be a problem, because people like to be judgemental. They hate others just because of skin colour, and what they look like, as stupid as that really is.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree. And, sometimes when a person grows up somewhere where they're not as exposed to black people, like Plymouth, then they're more likely to grow the prejudice that comes along with racism. There's nothing wrong with people with a different skin color, and it's just wrong that some people would blame all the gangs in the US on black people.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I think a major part of it is blaming a group of people for what one person did. For example, if a black man commits one crime, then people might think that all black men are the same. This could also cause those people to just live up to those expectations, possibly giving those people a cause to be predjudice.

Side: triangular trade
AZiegler(21) Disputed
1 point

i disagree i beleive that some time in the future people will find out that its insanely wrong to kill, hate, and make fun of people who just have different skin color.

Side: triangular trade
rhernickle(24) Disputed
1 point

But there still may be that one person who disagrees with what everyone else thinks, keeping rascism alive.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I don't understand why people think it is okay today? How can you justify killing someone because of the color of their skin.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

During the progressive era it was very beneficial to us because it protected and regulated a lot of things that were necessary.

Side: triangular trade

The progessive Era was really a great time for the U.S. we made so many more reforms which helped this country to become so much better as a whole. We made a food reform, women's rights, sanitiarty reform, drug reform, and many others.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Russia bound by treaty to Serbia announced mobilisation of its vast army in her defence a slow process that would take around six weeks to complete.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

We had a big spurt of imperialism during the spanish american war. Right after this we slowed down and were not conquering everyone.

Side: triangular trade
VivienTen(27) Disputed
1 point

Well, I sort of agree, but I don't. Imperialism did have a big start in the spanish american war, but we haven't really slowed down. It's different situations, but we're still getting involved in things that doens't involve us.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

The link below describes the book "In the Jungle" which is about the gross meat process during this time.

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

Side: triangular trade
1 point

It was gross, not to mention completely unsanitary. They used spoiled animals and vegetables to make food. They smoked while working, there was guts all over the place. They didn't have appropriate clothes on. The "Federal Meat Inspection Act" changed all of this.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I wonder if Trench warfare really had a benifit or if it was more bad than good?

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I think trench warfare was both bad and good, because it gave people a place to hide. But the trenches were filled with water, mud, rats, and bodies, which is disgusting, and was a cause of trench foot.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist in Sarajevo, Bosnia. An escalation of threats and mobilization orders followed the incident leading by mid August to the outbreak of World War I which pitted Germany Austria Hungary and the Ottoman Empire against Great Britain France Russia Italy and Japan

Side: triangular trade
1 point

The labor unions were like a family because they all wanted the same thing as there coworkers

Supporting Evidence: Progressive Era (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: triangular trade
1 point

The Allies were joined after 1917 by the United States. The four years of the Great Waras it was then known saw unprecedented levels of carnage and destruction thanks to grueling trench warfare and the introduction of modern weaponry such as machine guns tanks and chemical weapons.

Side: triangular trade

Trench warfare was very brutal. Many soliders died because our technology was more advanced than our fighting style.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

This year in the current events we discussed the US pulling out of Iran. Do you think this was a good idea considering all of the oil we get from them.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

It was a good idea. We have plenty of oil here which is cheaper for us. People complain about pumping oil out of the United states and how it ruins the environment, but they turn a blind eye when it is in another country, even though it stills ruins the environment there.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Racism is good. we need racism to remid people who boss. who agrees and disagrees with this post?

Side: triangular trade
AZiegler(21) Disputed
1 point

i only put that post on their to start a disbute. thats not what i actually beleive

Side: triangular trade
awiese(18) Disputed
1 point

People need rights, we are all equal and should be treated as so, not everyone needs to be shown who is boss my friend.

Side: triangular trade
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

I disagree racism is a terrible thing that makes people kill and hate. Racism is responsible for thousands of deaths.

Side: triangular trade
AZiegler(21) Disputed
1 point

Brady how do you think that racism is bad? do you think it will ever end? if it does end do you think it will start up again.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree, racism is terrible. It can make people want to kill and hate other's for the rest of there life's. Even if you were kidding about it.

Side: triangular trade
mgoldbeck(27) Disputed
1 point

I think everyone can be racist at times even if they say they aren't because a lot of people make racist jokes but I disagree because racism is not good. We are all the same people and should not be judged or put down by the color of our skin. It's only okay to make racism jokes if your friend is okay with it.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I understand that you put this to start a debate. But I think racism is wrong. Who says the way they look or act is not "normal". It isn't. There is no deffinition of being "normal" everyone is different. Everyone looks different. The sooner we realize this the better off we will all be.

Side: triangular trade
alefeber(22) Disputed
1 point

Racism is not a good thing. It has brought nothing, but bad. It has seperated countries and caused the death of so many people just because of the color of their skin. Segregation is still an issue today and it's sad that people continue to judge others just because of their race. No race is better! We are all equal!

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I disagree. People are the same no matter what color you are. We are all the same and that how we should be treated. I think that racism should end. Everybody has the same capabillites no matter what race you are.

Side: Racism
1 point

How many people in Wisconsin are for Walker? and How Many are are against?

Side: Racism
1 point

I wish that more people were for Walker because he is actually doing a lot for our state right no matter what other people say. And a lot of people are against him right now because they are fearful of losing certain benefits and actually having to compromise and deal with change. DON'T RECALL WALKER!

Side: Racism
MarkNovak(23) Disputed
1 point

I think that the guy is a jackhole. I think right now he's trying to set things up to make it easier for large businesses and fat cats to make more money, taking advantage of the middle class. You may know more than me at this point, but I challenge you to explain one good thing he has done and how it is good for the state.

Side: Racism
1 point

Im for walker, i think hes doing good for this state.So we shouldnt recall him.

Side: Racism
MarkNovak(23) Disputed
1 point

Like I said above, explain to me one thing he has done for the state, and why it is good. There are way too many people who think he is good, but can't explain why they think he is good.

Side: Racism
1 point

I think that he is in a tough possition because so many people have different ideas of what to do. It is hard to make everyone happy and i don't think that walker is being very successful.

Side: Racism
1 point

With the armistice of November 11, 1918, WW1 was over. However, the world could not return to the way it was, to what was 'normal.' Four empires had disappeared, a new menace labeled "Bolshevism" rose, and millions of people tasted the ideas and feelings associated with nationalism, national self-determination and democracy. The peace that followed the war was not one that was likely to last. The efforts to adjust to the war and what people experienced during and after World War I would haunt every soldier in every area for the rest of the century. For millions, the war would continue for months, years and even decades after November 11th.

Side: Racism
1 point

The working conditions were very poor kids to adults from the age of 7 could start working .

Supporting Evidence: working conditions (www.academicamerican.com)
Side: Racism
1 point

It's ridiculous how young children started working. Children of 7 should be in school, not in extremely dangerous factories!

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree. Because the children weren't in school, they were unable to get an education. Because they couldn't get an education, they were stuck working in a factory their entire life. The cycle continues until conditions are finally improved.

Side: Racism
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

While education is important, many families needed their children to work back then so their family would have enough money to survive.

Side: Racism
1 point

i agree they could work at a very young age and they would have to work for like 60 hours a week. some people had to sleep at the same place where they worked at. triangle shirt waste fire is very big evidence of how dangerouse it is.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree. What the employers did what uneducable. They made sure that the workers couldn't get out of the building thinking about what how they couldn't protest and they weren't thinking about how this is a horrible working environment. Things like this is what started the progressive era.

Side: Racism
1 point

What are kids at age 7 going to do for work. The things they had these kids doing was unacceptable! They really should have banned this or set child labor laws earlier than they did. I know they had to help support the family, but honestly, at age 7!

Side: Racism
kneils(28) Disputed
1 point

They had never thought that it was going to be that bad until it happened. People take advantage of laws until they are made and that's what business men did. They wanted money and they did whatever they could to get more of it. The laws werent going to be made earlier because nothing like it had happened before so they had nothing to make these laws for until children did begin to work

Side: Racism
1 point

Yes the Industrialization Era was very difficult for young children. Children had to work long hours so they were very tired and had to operate heavy machinery. This was very dangerous for them because children got seriously injured. They also didnt get paid squat so they were treated very unfarily.

Side: Racism
1 point

That is just crazy!!!! Parents today would never send there kids to work, they would be sending them to school so they can get a good education.

Side: Racism
1 point

The commonly held notion that it was started out of outrage over the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife Sophie at the hands of Serbian nationalist secret society.

Side: Racism
1 point

If the civil war never happened there wouldn't have been a need for reconstruction. Slavery could still exist or people like Martin Luther King Jr. wouldn't have been relavent.

Side: Racism
1 point

i agree even tho he civil war was a bloody battle,it helped our contry get rid of slavery .

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree. The war ended slavery and gave people the rights they deserved. But there still was racism afterwords. But at least they had some rights, and eventually they had all there rights. I guess it just took awhile for them to get all the rights.

Side: Racism
tatertot1195(28) Disputed
1 point

Just because the civil war never happened doesn't mean that African Americans would have never stood up for their rights. Eventually African Americans would have gotten their rights even without the civil war.

Side: Racism
1 point

I think that the African Americans would eventaully stand up for their human rights. I don't think anyone could live without having rights. The rights of the African Americans happened because of the Civil War however, I don't think that if the Civil War never happened African Americans would never have equal rights.

Side: Racism
1 point

Racism has been present forever on everything. It has been started through rumors or just through hate. An example could be during WW1. The Germans were hated through rumors. During the progressive era many immigrants were hated, such as the irish.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree, and i think that many people were based on their backgrounds and skin color just because Americans wouldnt accept the new changes that were arising. The help of other races have helped America grow and become even better.

Side: Racism
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

Yes this is true it existed with the Jews in Ancient egypt and now with everyone else. There are thousands of stereotypes of every race know.

Side: Racism
1 point

Once a stereotype stars, it is very hard to stop it. Stereotypes of Jews are still around today. There is a snowball effect and one a stereotype starts and is almost impossible to stop it. It is easiest to try to prevent stereotypes from starting.

Side: Racism
1 point

The Provisional Government was opposed right away by the soviets, or councils of workers and peasants, who wanted the right to make their own decisions.

Side: Racism
1 point

the working conditions are very babd because the factories were not safe and very crowded.

Supporting Evidence: bad working conditions (www.ehow.com)
Side: Racism
1 point

The factories were unsanitary, dangerous, and unfit for children as young as 7 working there. Machines caused injuries all the time, and the owners wouldn't pay to get them fixed so more and more injuries and deaths occured. Besides the unsaftey of the factores children also had to work crazy hours with little to no pay at all. It was overall bad.

Side: Racism
1 point

This is very true, I have a post wiwth a link talking about this. Withought the muckrakers, who knows where we would be today.

Side: Racism
1 point

Europeans started to colonize the US due to competion of power. The maps started to fill out. http://michael-streich.suite101.com/causes-of-european-exploration-and-colonization-a258443

Side: Racism
1 point

I believe the sinking of the USS Maine in the Havana Harbor was an accident and just an excuse to go into war like all the people wanted. The yellow journalists just made it look like it was the Spanish.

Supporting Evidence: USS Maine (www.cnn.com)
Side: Racism
1 point

I agree, because there wasn't any real evidence of the Spanish blowing up the Maine, the yellow journalists just wanted to start a war against the Spanish.

Side: Racism
1 point

Westward migration first came into play when people realized all the land in the west that was there for use. I have a link to show that "manifest destiny" was a big part of it. Manifest Destiny was something that the 19th century American belief that the United States was destined to expand across the continent. This wasn't really clear, because though we moved across, and now our west is industrialized, many people died on the way, and many indians and natural animals got destroyed.

http://www.donnerpartydiary.com/WESTWARD.HTM

Side: Racism
1 point

Do you believe that marijuana should be legallized? What are your reasons for wanting it legalized and will it help anybody besides potheads?

Side: Racism
awiese(18) Disputed
1 point

I believe that it should remain illegal, it would truely do the country no good to the government to do and cost them tons of money.

Side: Racism
1 point

i diagree weed should be legal because in our curent events, we learned that smoking weed 1 or 2 times a week isnt bad for you whats so ever so whats the harm?

Side: Racism
1 point

I also believe that it should remain illegal. They say that that study shows no harmful effects to your lungs if you have an occasionsal joint. Honestly if your smoking it already, who is really just gonna do it occasionally i mean we need to get real here. The people that want it legal are the people that don't just do the occasional joint.

Side: Racism
1 point

I believe that it could help people, but it is too easy to be abused. It almost impossible to control it and stop it from falling into the wrong hands. If there was a way to control it however, it could be very helpful.

Side: Racism
tmalone(29) Disputed
1 point

I think if it is legalized or not people will get it if they really want it. I thinkm it should only be legal for medicinal reasons. Some people could live a little longer with less pain.

Side: Racism
1 point

"Far and Away" showed me how hard ot was to get strated in the United States after coming over from another country. People would do anything to make money and get a start.

Side: Racism
BradyLudvik(22) Disputed
1 point

I think your talking about "Far and Away." This is true though. many people would do some very sad things just to get some money to survive.

Side: Racism
1 point

Muckrekers were people who were closely associated with reform-oriented journalists who wrote largely for popular magazines. they are from the Progressive Era.

Supporting Evidence: Muckraker (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Racism
1 point

The gold rush in California brought many people over to the West. People from all over the world came in search for gold and this really expanded the West.

http://www.kidport.com/reflib/usahistory/calgoldrush/calgoldrush.htm

Side: Racism
1 point

Many people died travelling out west and then when they got there there wasnt the much gold and people were killing each other over it.

Side: Racism
1 point

i strongly agree with this. Because many knew that there was a lot of gold people were finding, it made them want to move there to become rich. but what they didnt know was that it was hard to find the gold.

Side: Racism
1 point

When people learned about the gold rush i don't think that they knew how hard it was for them to find the gold. But the people that found the gold did make money off of it.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree that they didn't realize how much effor it would take to recieve the gold. They put many hours in a day trying to get it along with putting their life on the line every time they went to dig it up. Not only was it physically draing, but it was mentally draining for them to knowing that they could die everytime they blew up the ground around them. http://history-world.org/california_gold_rush.htm

Side: Racism
1 point

Muckrackers have helped pass many laws and give different ethnic groups and women freedom. http://www.shmoop.com/muckrakers-reformers/timeline.html

Side: Racism
1 point

all quiet on the western from showed how dangerous the was is and not to take it as a joke about going into war like the high school kids were in the movie.

Side: Racism

WW1 was a very bloody and dirty war. Trench warfare was barbaric and many lives could have probably been saved if different fighting methods were used.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree. Many lives could have been save if people would have thought rationaly and realized trench warfare is one of the worst ways to fight a war.

Side: Racism
1 point

Starting with the Spanish-American War the United States started to become very imperialistic. They started to become a world power by taking land and taking control of other nations.

http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/toc.html

Side: Racism
1 point

"All Quiet on the Western Front" showed the way that people didn't know what they were getting into when they went into the war. They learned that war wasn't all fun and games, that it was serious.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree. When they first wanted to join the war they never knew how hard things would be, they didn't know they would end up seeing their friends and many others die and they didn't know how gruesome everything would be. If the war had been what they thought, they would have never had see death.

Side: Racism
1 point

I wonder how WW1 would have gone if we did not receive the Zimmerman telegram telling the Mexicans they could have a part of the U.S. if they joined the Germans?

Side: Racism
1 point

Child Labor in the Industrialization Era was very difficult for Children. They had to work long hours and didn't get paid a lot.

http://www2.needham.k12.ma.us/nhs/cur/Baker_00/2002_p7/ak_p7/childlabor.html

Side: Racism
1 point

Children would work up to 19 hours a day with only an hour total break sometime. Children that worked in factories worked 12-14 hours and was very dangerous. Children were in many accidents and even got killed. All this was a problem until the factory act of 1833.

Side: Racism
1 point

I believe John D. Rockefeller was extremely important in the United States history. He was known as the “Captain of Industry” but was also known as a Robber Baron. He believed in capitalism and understood how to make money. He was the first person to start selling by-products from crude oil which made him billions. I think he stimulated our economy during the industrialization and he improved oil refining method tremendously. If it wasn’t for John D. Rockefeller the United States might have never became such a capitalist nation. http://www.ushistory.org/us/36b.asp

Side: Racism
2 points

I agree with you, because he did have some good moments and some bad moments, but he showed the nation how to do business.

Side: Racism
1 point

I think that WW1 was very split between the Central and Allied powers, because we had stronger ties with Great Britain, but most of the population in America was German. I think the reason we joined the Allied powers is that the Germans were stopping our trading to Briatain and other countries, and also all the threats they put on the U.S.

Side: Racism
1 point

Without the Zimmerman Telegram we probably would have stayed nuetral, because then we wouldn't have felt under pressure.

http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/worldwari/p/zimmermann.htm

Side: Racism
aron17(16) Disputed
1 point

I don't think that we would of stayed neutral. I believe that the yellow journalist still would of found something to make the germans look bad. The yellow journalist were the reason that we went to war. I don't believe that the Zimmerman Telegram was the main reason for us joining the war.

Side: Racism
kneils(28) Disputed
1 point

I think that even without it we would have began the war because we already had major tension before that. The Zimmerman Telegram did spark the war at the end but other things could have happened besides the telegram that could have possibly sparked it if the telegram was never sent

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree with you but I dont quite understand why germans would fight other germans. What if they killed their brother or someother relative? If i would of been one of the soldiers I would be extremely afraid of killing someone that I cared about.Do you know how many american soldiers that were german fought in the war?

Side: Racism
1 point

That is a good point and I found it surprising when the totla number of traitors from america was 0. It shows how much loyalty people have to one country.

Side: Racism
1 point

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/spanamer/app.htm , This link talks about how the Spanish- American War was started because of yellow journalism and propaganda. I totally agree with this article because the yellow journalist made us hate the Spanish causing us to go to war with them. I’m not saying that the war was a bad thing though because we gained many territories from the war, but the war didn’t need to be started by yellow journalism.

Side: Racism
1 point

I believe that imperialism is a good thing to have within the US. If we did not imperialize other nations we would not get the resources we need and want. Also with the spreading of imperialism onto other countries, it shows other countries that we are strong and can hold an empire.

Side: Racism
1 point

Agreed. Without our resources we can't get what we need at all. We need resources to survive.

Side: Racism
1 point

Well we actually dont need these resources. We just want to take them becasue we are greedy. I believe that the US is one of the most greedy, selfish nations in the world. I think someday our country probably will try to take over south africa just to get their diamonds. We need to improve our morals and learn to care for others

Side: Racism
simone95(28) Disputed
1 point

How imperialisme be a good thing? How do you feel if the people of another country used the resources in your territory?

Side: Racism
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

I think that Imperialism is bad to have in America because all the other counrties should already no that we a very powerful.

Side: Racism
1 point

What if WWI never would have happened? I believe that if WWI never would have happened life would be a lot different than it is now. If we did not have WWI the Holocaust never would have been and Hitler would have never come to power. I think life now would be a lot different if WWI never happened because I think a lot more Germans would have settled here and German would probably be our second language.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree with you because WWI let to the major events of WWII happen. If Germany would have won the first war then he may have never come to power and the second war would never have began since he started it by blaming everything on the jews.

Side: Racism
1 point

Also, millions of people's lives would have been saved and the cost of the war would have been used on things of everyday life. Also it could have been used for research, so our technology may have been better in a shorter amount of time.

Side: Racism
1 point

If there was no WWI then there couldnt be a holocaust and all the painful stories that we have to hear about today. Just imagine though if we never would of fought that war. Life would be different compared today. Hitler wouldnt be in our history books and no one would be recognizing his name.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree with you Aron if WWI never happened the world would feel smaller the it is and there wouldn't be any conflict in the middle east.

Side: Racism
1 point

I think the movie “Far and Away” was the movie that influenced my learning the most. I understood how much people wanted to head west at the chance of having a great life. Also I thought it was a really good movie at showing all the bad morals like prostitution and gambling. This movie also taught me about some of the downfalls from being a landlord is because the families’ house got burned down because they were so mean to their tenants.

Side: Racism
1 point

I also think it shows how hard it was to be an immigrant, because there were so many hardships and you had to work very hard to be able to survive.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree with you that life was hard as an immigrant. The immigrants didnt have as many opportunities as a US born citizen because the immigrants had a tougher time getting jobs and they had to do all the hard and dirty jobs. So i believe that life was hard as an immigrant.

Side: Racism
1 point

I support what you said because immigrants had it harder that the americans abd had to work harder and longer.

Side: Racism
1 point

It was hard to be an immigrant. Could you imagine moving countries and going in with nothing, then be expected to live and get a job. It is really stressful and immigrants are really tough people for being able to do that.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree with you Aron the movie showed the US in its industrial age. The US back then was full of immoral things.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Without Teddy Roosevelt's reformation, business would still have been able to cheat their workers into very low wages and bad working conditions. Another reason is that the acts and laws he passed bettered the quality of life for all people.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1906/roosevelt-bio.html

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I think thaat the movie "All along the western front" showed me how bad WW1 was and that many soldiers struggled to stay focused and not go crazy.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It was a good movie. It should us how war really was and we saw how shell shock was in people actually was. War affected a lot of people, especially the people in the war. THis movie explained and showed that really well.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Our history had some major things happen such as the Industrialization era and without it our lives would be much different. It began what we have today; big businesses and it also brought the world many new innovations.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree that all of our lives would be so different if we didn't have the Industrialization.

Side: Imperialism
balbers(27) Disputed
1 point

But also the businesses were different than back than, because they had a lot less laws, so it is a little different than it is today.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree without the Industrialization era stuff such as food saftey wouldn't be around.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The building of the Panama Canal influenced our history greatly. It allowed people to travel places in sometimes half of the time of what it would normally take to go all the way around the tip of South America. This was much needed and still helps us today.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It also helped our military greatly, because it made a shortcut to the pacific, which eventually helped during WW2

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Without the canal the results of WWII would have been much different. We could have lost WWII if we didnt get to hawaii in time. Also we Japan could have took over Hawaii if we wanted to. Bye Bye pineapples and hula dancing because the japanesse were much closer and could of easily taken over it if they wanted. It took much less time with the panama canal which helps us in the long run.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree, without the Panama Canal it would have taken people more then double the time to send things, trade, and get to other places. This helped form our country into what it is today.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It also helped our economy and Panama's economy because it was a major trade route that people use

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree because without this it would be hard to ship things. I also believe that this helps with Panamas economy because they have so much travel going through there country.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The Panama Canal saved a lot of traveling time, and the trip around South America was dangerous.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree. I think that in building the panama canal we gained many things. We were now able to travel to places faster and we could fit our war ships through there so we didnt have to go all the way around south america to get to places if we were ever in a war. I think the building of the panama canal was a huge sucess in american history.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Exploration and Colonization was probably the most important topic we talked about because it’s the first thing that happened and without it we wouldn’t have a United States and none of our other topics would have ever been talked about.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

All Quiet on the Western Front showed us what happened in World War 1 with the trench warfare. It gives us an image of what really happened and shows how there was a huge stall in this type of war. Armies would penetrate and then retreat and then keep on doing it multiple times and that is why so many people died without anyone really winning the war.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Trench warfare was not the way to go for war strategies. I agree with you that many people died and deaths could have be suppressed with a new and improved fighting techniques like ones used today. The death tolls could have been hundreds of thousands instead of millions. http://www.strategypage.com/the_war_in_iraq/tactics/200531514.asp

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

http://www.genfiles.com/legal/womensrights.htm this site tells how life was without women’s rights back in the 1800’s and also explains what it would be like now if we had never established our women’s rights.

Could you imagine what today would be like if we hadn’t established women’s rights? Well it would be exactly like it was before they were established, maybe even worse. Women would not be working the same jobs that men do, possibly no jobs at all. They would most likely be sitting at home cooking, cleaning, and taking care of children. Everything that was theirs at once now is their husband’s property. One more thing, where you are sitting right now if you are a girl, without women’s rights you definitely would not be sitting there.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree, women's write's were so different from what they are now.

If we still had those same right's we wouldn't be sitting where we are.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

If we never won our independence from Great Britain we would still be in Great Britain, and we definitely would not be speaking English. If our people who traveled and found America hadn’t, and we didn’t fight for our separate “lives” away from Great Britain there would not be such thing as an American. We would be saying things like crumpet or drinking tea every day. Things would be so much different than what they are now.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree that it would have not been the same if we did not revolt, but also there would still be some similar traits we still have.

Side: Panama Canal
aron17(16) Disputed
1 point

I dont agree with you that we would never win our independance from Great Britain. I believe if we would have lost the first war we would of kept trying and never of stopped. We would be having a 300 year war until we would have gotten our freedom. Also I believe that the British would of given up eventually if we would just keeep fighting them.

Side: Panama Canal
kneils(28) Disputed
1 point

I dont agree with you aron because we would have had a much weaker military and wouldnt have been able to compete against the powerhouses like Germany. If Germany would have won the first one we wouldnt have been able to gain Independence back.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I didn't say we would of have a revolution against hem, I just noted that it wuld be different if we did not decide to have a revolution against Britain.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

http://sukritha.hubpages.com/hub/ChildLabourStillExist this tells how children are treated today where there are no child labor laws and how it was back in the day.

There are still places in the world today that make young children work odd jobs and in factories. We can’t imagine that because kids in America don’t usually work until they are 15 or 16 years old and their jobs are just regular everyday jobs that anyone could be doing. They aren’t put into factories and given little to no pay. The weight of supporting a family is not on their shoulders like it is in other countries. Kids here have it so good and we don’t realize it. Other children are working, fighting, and struggling for their lives while we just live ours like nothing is wrong in the world.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree with you because kids in America really have it easy. They don't need to worry about going to work after school to support there families. Plus it is really no possible for kids at the ages of 10-12 to get a job in America.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree with you that kid do work in factories still with such hard conditions. In underdeveloped countries parents force their kids to come work with them in the factory just to survive. Kid in other countries our making the things and clothes that we are wearing. Doesnt that make you feel bad at all? http://www1.american.edu/ted/nike.htm

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Exaclty kids that young should not be put to work. Also, no one ever thinks that kids their age are making our clothes for almost no pay and we take it all for granted. Its horrible. Kids should not be forced to work or allowed to work until they are around the age of 14 or 15 years old.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

https://wikis.nyu.edu/ek6/modernamerica/ index.php/Imperialism/Overview

America has been and always will be imperialistic. We tell other countries what we do and that they should do the same because it is the right way. America is wrong, there is no right way. Each country does their own thing and sees everything in a different way. For example, every single country uses the metric system, except America. Why is that you say? Because we like our way better so we didn’t change. That’s how other countries feel. We shouldn’t be pressuring them into doing what we do if they are functioning just fine by doing what they do.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

The movie All Is Quiet on the Western Front shows how life as a German soldier was like. At the beginning it kind of showed how young boys in school got persuaded into war without knowing what it was or even what it was about. They thought it would be fun, and they wouldn’t have anymore school! But, they soon realized that war was intense and you can’t take it as a joke. Once you are in you aren’t getting out. Surviving without going crazy is another thing they had to figure out. (How to calm themselves down when things got bad). All Is Quiet on the Western Front showed a lot of things you wouldn’t really expect in a war; for example, the huge obsession with boots. It gave you a better understanding of many things dealing with war.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree, the movie did give us a better understanding of the war.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Yeah, I think so too. In fact, with this movie I understood how bad can be the war.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

These soldier were acting like the whole war was a joke until they lost their friend. I don't think the soldiers understood the real importance of this war was. I probably would have gone crazy from shell shock just like they did but I wouldnt ever run out into the open and get bombed. I think the mental effects of the war were worse than the physical

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Yeah at the beggining they were all happy and excited to go to war. They never realized that war is harsh and bad until the friend they pressured into going to war died right away. Then it really hit them.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

What if the Panama Canal was never built?

If the U.S. or any other country never the Panama Canal it would really cause problems with trying to transport goods or products from one country to another. If the canal wasn’t there it would take 68 days to go all the way around South America and 2500 dollars more in fuel. For them to transport goods I think that they would then have to use trains or even planes. When using planes you don’t have as much room as a ship would. If we would have to use trains then it may create a lot of jobs throughout America and that would be that way that everyone would be shipping products.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree! The Panama Canal allowed us to create planes, tranes, and many other forms of transportation. We would still be traveling by horse possibly! It is a very good thing that we made the canal. Who knows what it would be like without it.

Side: Panama Canal
aron17(16) Disputed
1 point

Taylor... would we be really still riding horses? Motors and other things were already being developed and improved. Horses are so out of date and really have no use for us anymore other than show. I think the only difference would be is that it would take a long time to make it to the pacific by boat.

Side: Panama Canal
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

If the panama canal was not built the pacific and Atlantic ocean would not be connected to transport goods.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

If the panama canal wasn't built it would hurt the entire U.S., because there were many different ships that went through there. Examples: Battleships, Tankers, and Freight ships. It would have hurt the U.S. in costs big time.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

This is true because the Canal shotened the trip extremely and let us use less gas which saved alot of money because of the high prices of oil.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

The canal was also great for the economy because of the trade goods that go through there

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Who do you think would’ve built the Panama Canal if the U.S. didn’t?

If the U.S. didn’t build the Canal then I think that the French would have built it. I think this because they were the ones who tried to build it first. If there plans would’ve went thru then they would be the ones building it. The French were then unable so they then sold it to the U.S. http://www.ww2f.com/what-if-other/35672-french-panama-canal.html & http://svocelot.com/Chris/School/panama_canal_control.htm

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

How did Lewis and Clark change things in America?

Lewis and Clark discovered the whole other half of America and allowed them to make maps for other people to travel to the west. With them learning more about this was not just for them to say that they made it to the Pacific Ocean but to lead the way for other people to follow. http://www.pbs.org/lewisandclark/living/ idx_9.html

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

If Lewis and Clark would not have went exploring we probably wouldn't have everything that we do now. Maybe we wouldn't live here, have the same material for clothes, eat the same food, or who knows. It would be so different.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Child labor during the industrialization era was hard on kids. A lot of kids got hurt and or killed when they worked in factories.

http://www.nettlesworth.durham.sch.uk/time/victorian/vindust.html

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

And also they got paid poorly, which made it even worse. Another is that it kept them out of school, so they wouldn't have as good of an education.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I support what you said cody lots of kids walked around with missing arms missing fingers. Even sometimes legs.

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

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

And child labor still exists today in some places. It is horrible, kids should not be put to that hard of work at such a young age. Child labor laws should have been set way earlier than they were.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree Taylor, child laor is terrible. I don't even know how people can make young children work for them when they know they are so young. I wish there was no more child labor anywhere.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

They also worked very long hours, with little or no breaks, while getting paid also very little. Unfortunatley, many children had to work in order to help contribute to the family's food and/or shelter.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

i think America was very imperialistic during the Spanish-American war

Side: Imperialism
kneils(28) Disputed
1 point

Yea this is true but why? why do you think that though? I think that they showed it by bringing the war into another country and by beginning the war in the first place. The yellow journalism began the war and the US could have stayed out of it but instead the went to fight Spain over something that may never have happened. The "explosion" of the USS Maine

Side: Imperialism
nreil(30) Disputed
1 point

This is true America was very imperialistic during this war but what made them imperialistic? Was it the face that they got involved for their own gain or the fact that they by the end of the war they were a huge political power?

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The assasination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, was the spark of World War 1, but many events led up to that, including: Imperialism, Nationalism, Militarism, Alliance, and Yellow Journalism. A link to WW1 "Sparks"- http://library.bhbl.neric.org/msweb/WW1.html

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Nationalism: Pride in one's Country.

Militarism: The building up of one's military powers in preparation of war.

Imperialism: Forcibly taking control of a smaller Country.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

All of these things were good at some point in time, but how come they all were some reasons of wars starting? How did they go from something good to something so bad?

Side: Imperialism
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

But no one carried that Archduke Franz Ferdinand got assassinated. A lot of people think that it was a good thing that he got assassinated.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It was the spark of world war 1 but many people didnt care about the assasination it was just a reason to start the war. They were already having disputes and arguments so it was just the thing that happened to start the war.

Side: Imperialism
aron17(16) Disputed
1 point

I absolutly disagree with you that the assasination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the start of WWI. People didnt even care that he died but nationalism, imperialism, miltarism, alliances, and yellow journalism started the war. The assasination was jsut a excuse for Austria-Hungary to show nationalism and start the war.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

That is a good point, because the Austrians used Imperialsim to try to gain control of the Serbians.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree. There were many things that lead up to world war and lots of conflict going on. They were just looking for a reason to go into war.. and the assination of Ferdinand was their reason.

LINK:http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/harrachmemoir.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

When we talked about child labor, it was hard for the kids working in factories at such a younge age. They should have realized what they were doing to the younge kids, but they knew they had to work to support their family.

Side: WWI
1 point

Kids that age shouldn't have to worry about supporting their family though. That is not right, it is way too much pressure and stress on the kids. Also, they could get hurt or die at some of the jobs that they were put to do.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree with you because the parents should take the blame for having them work in factorys and in the factories the conditions are very dangerous.

Side: WWI
1 point

And also it could create bad health issues for the kids when they grow up and become adults, so they may have diseaes or issues when the are older.

Side: WWI
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

The factory owners new that they could pay the kids not very much because they new that the kids would take the money that they could get.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree that it is all the knew. They were taught that the were doing it for their families and I think that this made them feel more like adults and like they werent children anymore.

Side: WWI
1 point

If there was no progressive era, there would be no strong thoughts about any rights in the U.S. today.

Side: WWI
1 point

Can you please elaberate on the strong thoughts about right in the US that you are talking about. Because I dont totally understand what your talking about.

Side: WWI
1 point

According to this article, the Occupy Wall Street Movement might be a 3rd progressive era.

It is easier to do something if there is a precedent already.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/opinion/sunday/the-new-progressive-movement.html

Side: WWI
1 point

I think if the US didnt make the panama canal we would be a third world country. It was one of our bigger acomplishments and it got our economy up because we wouldnt be making as much money because we wouldnt be getting money from the use of the canal plus we would need to go around south america and all the way around if it was never finished. http://svocelot.com/Chris/School/panama_canal_control.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

The reasion that they built the canal was to connect the pacific and Atlantic ocean to trsde goods.

Side: WWI
1 point

you are right. In fact with the Panama Canal the commerce became faster and became easier go to the Atlantic ocean to Pacific

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree with you because the canal was a major project that dealt with not only our economy but the whole worlds enconomy. Even though the canal costed alot it will save lots of shipping company's money for fuel and time.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, with the Panama Canal built, the US economy got much better. The canal helped every country trade with each other easier. In fact, with trade being easier and less time consuming, other countries had a better economy too.

Side: WWI
1 point

Imperialism is very prevalent to the U.S. now and in history. The U.S. has ideas of their own and they think that everyone should follow it. The united states has shown imperialism as well as nationalism many times throughout history. Some of these times include the spanish american war and the panama canal.

http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/toc.html

Side: WWI
1 point

Is imperialism a good thing though? Nationalism is a good thing but can be bad at times, it can start wars. But what about imperialism?

Side: WWI
1 point

In the movie All is Quiet on the Westward Front, it showed viewers how many people who joined the war had no idea how hard it would be. They hadn't been aware of how gruesome the battles would be and how you could never let your emotions get the best of you. Eventually, the new soldiers viewed death as nothing, even their friend's deaths seemed to be nothing compared to the value of a pair of good, quality boots.

Side: WWI
1 point

my hypothesis is that the united states is imperialistic for money and economic reasons

Side: WWI
1 point

I support your hypothesis because America was always going to war with countries for no reason.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree with this but it isnt all for the money. They also want to gain more control over countries to become the most dominant in the world since China is rising greatly. They want to make sure that we dont lose our 1 spot in the world

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree with you we want to stay the most powerful nation in the world so we are imperilaistic and take control over other nations

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, and i do think they are in it mostly for money. yes they are in it for the land but the majority of it is for money.

http://unitedstatesimperialism.wordpress.com/cuba/

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree with you. The USA wants just to have more money and become the most power in the world... The war in Iraq is an example http://www.dailycampus.com/2.7438/u-s-imperialism-evident-with-iraq-war-1.1057051

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It's not just for the money there its more for the economic reasons. But, I do agree with you, America is very imperialistic.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree, the US had always been greedy for money and anything that would help increase the economy, like other countries resources.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree, it has always been greedy. Some people are never happy with what they have, those are the people that don't deserve it.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

according to http://www.shmoop.com/spanish-american-war/ ''Rapid growth in industry following the Civil War had resulted in greater national wealth, but by the end of the century Americans learned that their economy was far weaker than they could have ever imagined.'' i think that the economy went down because we were soaring so high that we never realized what was happening

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I think the world would be different if Europe didn't go through the Renaissance and create materials to find the New World and start colonizing the world. If they didn't find the New World the world would feel smaller then it is.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

During the exploration era many people would leave their countries in hopes of finding new land and new freedom. For example the majority of the immigrants that came to the U.S. would colonize which would eventually expand to societies. Without these people taking this step of exploration the United States would not be as diverse and great as it is today.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

What if in the begining we all advanced the same way. Like if the indians went about there lives as the english, we all advance at the same pace. Then what would of happened when enlgish saught free land and adventuring to find almost the same life style in america.

Side: Migration
1 point

We wanted to show other countries that we are a force to be recond with and to be scared of us

http://www.sparknotes.com/history/american/spanishamerican/context.html

Side: Migration
1 point

Do you think that drugs should be legalize? how can USA fight the issue of drugs?http://www.unicommons.com/node/22352

Side: Migration
1 point

Exploration and Colonization was very common throughout history. People wanted to leave their countries for many reasons. Some included how the governments treated the people and also the economics of the country. Many people from Europe came to explore America. People were becoming curious of what was out their and wanted to discover and travel it.

http://hmsf.org/exhibits/visions/ec.htm

Side: Migration
1 point

I agree with you because people from other countries wanted to be able to have there own freedom and not have to do what the governement tells them to do.

Side: Migration
1 point

I agree. This history causes every movement which people seek about their rights in today. Because American's thoughts is still based on when they immigrant here.

Side: Migration
1 point

Exactly. People come to America because of the rights and politics that America has.

Side: Migration
1 point

i think that if people wouldn't have thought that the Spanish blew up the USS Maine there wouldn't have even been a war

Side: Spanish American
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

I disagree with you because I think that some of the people on the USS Maine planned to blow up the ship so they could go to war with the Spanish.

Side: Spanish American
zlederer(22) Disputed
1 point

yes but if they would've figured that out instead of blaming the Spanish then there wouldn't have even been a war

Side: Spanish American
kneils(28) Disputed
1 point

There would have still been a war because the newspapers would have found a way to make it happen. It happened to be the USS Maine that they brought up but they could have made anyone believe anything so even if they said the Spanish did it, a war would have began. http://www.pbs.org/crucible/frames/_journalism.html

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Even before the USS Maine exploded, we were on the edge of war. This just happened to be the last thing before we declared war. I think it still wouldve happened even if it never happened

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i also think that yellow journalism and just an accident of organizing ammo right next to the furnace was a big cause to the war

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i agree that the yellow journalists started the war when they blew things out of proportion

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Yellow journalism definitely led to war. The press was feeding readers lies and that quickly changed everyone's views on the Spanish. Immediately people wanted war, even though they knew little about anything that had actually happened.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

If Cristoforo Colombo did not discover the America, what did happened? Did someonelse discover it?

Side: Spanish American
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

There were people already living in America. The Indians were living here peacefully.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Yes and if it wasn't for christopher columbus there might still be the Native Americans and America might still be nice and wildlife everywhere. i think that America would be a better place besides the fact the none of us wouild probably be here right now.

Side: Christophor columbus
BrandenSBui(14) Disputed
1 point

Yes, there were already Native Americans living here. Leif Eriksson and other vikings were said to have found North America around 1000 A.D, and about 500 years before Columbus. Of course, Columbus was the first to discover and spread the news of North America, which is why we recognize his name more than others. - http://shadesbreath.hubpages.com/hub/Was-Christopher-Columbus-Really-the-First-to-Discover-America_1

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

When the union formed it was for the workers, but now they are like any big company trying to make as much money for themselves instead of trying to do what's best for people with goverment jobs. A bill passed about collective bargining, so the union had to work more. You think there is a way to make the Union let the workers have a bigger voice?

Side: Christophor columbus
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

I disagree I think that the government workers should be happy that they even have a job. I know that there are alot of people that would work for what they are being payed and people that are qualified to do that sertant job.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/modsbook34.asp

Imperialism was what I learned about the most because having indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas is what the government does.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

Was imperialism good or bad though? Wasn't it sometimes a cause of war? Should America stay imperialistic?

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

I think Imperialism is a good thing because if you want to be a great country you need power. You can't be the best without the most power. And even though it caused wars, it was countries trying to become the best. Everyone wants to be the best at what they do and you have to be good or powerful to do it.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

After the civil war the United States began to try and reconstruct their country after it was left in ruins. One of the main goalds during reconstruction was to try and create better rights for African Americans, who were slaves at the time. Without this reconstruction era America could still be a very croupt society without racial equality which would have dramaticaly effected our country's history.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

I agree, but I think the US still needs more rights for African Americans.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

I agree. I think that African americans should have the same rights as the White people. We are all the same. The only thing that is different is the color of our skin. That should not determine how someone is treated or what rights we have.

Side: Racism
1 point

why did the white population of the new United States not stretch far beyond the eastern seaboard until the 19th century in the westward expansion.

Side: Racism
1 point

because they heard about the gold rush and that someone found gold in California

http://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion

Side: Racism
1 point

The Gold Rush was a very important even that happened that lead to western expansion in the United States. Who knows, without the Gold Rush, would the western part of the United States ever be discovered?

Side: Racism
1 point

The u.s. became very divided during the civil war. Slavry being the big contraversy caused a lot of destress for the u.s. The government began trying to rationalize and protect the citizens of the u.s. The government began fighting against racial justice. Reconstruction policies were created to try and begin restoring the country. Some efforts succeeded. Some failed.

http://hmsf.org/exhibits/visions/ec.htm

Side: Racism
1 point

The United States at the time, was the only Country with the correct and useful equipment to build the Panama Canal. Ferdinand de Lesseps, who built the Suez Canal, actually had the design of the lock system of the Panama Canal, which allowed the boats to get across the canal while going either up or down the twenty feet or so drop from ocean to ocean.

Side: Racism
1 point

The jungle gave horrible work conditions and diseases to the workers, that is why almost all immigrants were garunteed a job working there. There was also the problem of putting all of the dirt and mud in a canyon, which eventually caused many mud-slides. - http://www.eclipse.co.uk/~sl5763/panama.htm

Side: Racism
1 point

And it's a good thing that we had the useful equipmet to build the Panama Canal because without it who knows what kind of transportation we would have today.

Side: Racism
1 point

With war came along allies. If we didn't have allies some of our resources and protection would be taken away. I don't think it's good to have an allies. Personally if we mess up in a war and get another country involved we might be screwed because of there allies. War is a tricky and is full of strageys but why rely on a another country to have you back at times when one day they could decide they no longer want to take part in a what we have to offer.

Side: Racism
1 point

The muckrakers talked about many different things, one is about unfair working conditions. This is a major contributor to what we have today like the FDA, and other laws about labor. The muckrakers were considered "troublemakers" by the government at this time period. Without the muckrakers our government would control us way to much.

Side: Racism
1 point

Western Migration was a very large part of U.S. history it is was helped expand our country. The U.S. government wanted people to move out west to help expand our country, so as an added incentive they put into place the Homestead act of 1862 which gave free land to anyone and everyone who wanted it. The travel to the west was dangerous and often deadly, but the added incentive by the government was just enough of a push to get the migration going. This is a push and pull situation, the government gave an incentive and it pulled migrationers in to explore. Here is link of a video from the Doner party and their travels. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/donner/player/ This video shows just how dangerous traveling to the west was

Side: Racism
1 point

Westward migration was a very important part of u.s. history. It was a time when people gave up everything to move out west. People spent all their money on supplies to get out their and the journey wasn't east. Many people died from sickness and disease. Specific groups like the Donnor Party had and even harder journey. People became so cold and were so hungry that they resorted to cannibalism. It was a very large part of history that included many struggles.

http://hmsf.org/exhibits/visions/ec.htm

Side: Racism
1 point

you think SOPA will be passed? According to CNN they are losing support in passing the bill.

Side: Racism
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

I think that it will be passed because The bill is divided into two Titles with the first focusing on combating "foreign rogue sites", websites outside U.S. jurisdiction that enable or facilitate copyright infringement, and the second focusing on increased penalties to combat intellectual property.

Side: Racism
1 point

i hope it doesnt pass. i'm finding this bill quite annoying and i've noticed some of the site to be censored will be artist society sites like deviant.

Side: Racism
1 point

What did Woodrow Wilson want for the world in his "14 Point" speech?

Side: Racism
nreil(30) Disputed
1 point

Woodrow Wilson wanted...

1. for there to be no scectrive treaties or agreements bewteen countries

2. Freedom of the seas for all

3. Tarrifs and other taxes should be lowered to encourage trade

4. Arms and weapons should be lowered to reduce militaristic impulese

5. Countries should take into consideration the interest of their people as well as their imperialistic powers.

The next 8 points of his speech were about boundary changes after the war. The 14th and final point was Wilson calling for the creation of The League of Nations. The league would provide a different way of solving disputes between countrie without having to go to war.

Side: Racism
chribenti(29) Disputed
1 point

Which in the end lead up to World War 2 and other conflicts.

Side: Racism
1 point

Is the United States imperialistic?

The government claims that we aren't and are appauled when people think otherwise. In the past, the US had taken control over different areas and countries, sometimes believing that they could help the people in those areas.

Even now the US has set up military bases all over the world and tends to interfer in other countries' buisness, although sometimes our involvment does help.

Max Boot had once defended US imperialism by stating, "U.S. imperialism has been the greatest force for good in the world during the past century. It has defeated communism and Nazism and has intervened against the Taliban and Serbian ethnic cleansing."

Side: Racism
1 point

I believe that United States is an imperialistic country. US just want to use the resources of the other country (the war in Iraq) to become the strongest country in the world

Side: Racism
1 point

This sounds right because they are trying to get oil from the middle east and by doing that they have to take out other countries. They want power all the time and the should come to agreements instead of always wiping others out. http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraq.asp

Side: Racism
1 point

We have been very imperialistic throughout our untire history. even in world history almost every country is imperialistic. in world history there is the examples of chinese empire, the roman empire, japan, russia, china, the u.s, and many more that were very imperialistic

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

Side: Racism
1 point

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 business.

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

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree because the boys from the high school thought that it was a joke and didn't take it seriously. They should've been trained better and told what the war was all about.

Side: Racism
1 point

The Book tales you the same thing CodyH

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

Side: Racism
1 point

They were all told that they were supposed to go to war to support their nation and werent really sure why they were there. This is probably one of the reasons that they lost because with soldiers not knowing what they were supposed to do, they werent going to know how to fight and what they were fighting for

Side: Racism
1 point

should a kid work to help his/her family? Is more important study or immediately go to work when we are young?

Side: Racism
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

I don't think that kids should have to work to try to support their family. They should go to school and get an education.

Side: Racism
1 point

Yes, I agree, but back then with the pay so little, if they didn't work they would most likely not have enough money for food or shelter.

Side: Racism
1 point

The US needs to be Imperialistic to be a world power. They need to be less imperialistic we shouldn't be the police of the world, we should just protect our own land not everyone else's.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

One thing I really followed for current events this year is colective barganing rights for state employees. I think collective barganing is not needed because if the state employees get to bargin why dont other people that work in diffrent places like a store not get bargaining rights? It is time for some of these state employees to pay up like govorner walker said.Tthey have so many rights compaired to the other people to work in this state that we need to get our money back in some way to get the budget deficite lower so we arnt one of the most broke states. So we are going to get money from th bargining rights so we can get some money for more important thing like the roads and more things for the whole state. Here is a link about it. http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/123859034.html

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree with you 100%, we shouldn't be one of the broke states. We all should have barganing rights, yes we may not have the money. But it doesn't mean some people can or can't have the same rights. We all deserve equal bargan rights.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

i think that history would be very different if world war 1 did not happen because thats when the true power of the united states was seen by the world. if that did not happen then world war 2 (in my mind) would not have happened and most of this senseless fighting would not have happened

Side: Imperialism
chribenti(29) Disputed
1 point

We didn't have any world power before World War I, we had power after World War II.

Side: Imperialism
rhernickle(24) Disputed
1 point

History would be different. If World War 1 hadn't happened, World War 2 wouldn't have for that reason, but it still might have happened. It all depends on the way history would have changed if it did change.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

one thing i don't get about the panama canal was that why wasn't it a comunitive effort from all the countries that were going to use why does america have to do everything

Side: Imperialism
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

America was the only country that had the technology to build the Panama Canal back then.

Side: Imperialism
zlederer(22) Disputed
1 point

the french had the technology but they left because of the diseases

Side: Imperialism
1 point

the reason is that the U.S. is the only country that wanted to make a canal to use as a trade route, which helped us out great.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Industrialization had good and bad effects of the united states. As a child their were good points and bad points. The good points were that allowing younger children to work allowed them help to contribute to their families. The bad points were that most of the time the kids were underpaid. They were over worked and if something bad happened like you cut your finger off, there wasn't anything you could do about it. During this time, the morals and view points of many cooperations were being questioned due to working conditions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_(1865–1918) )

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree with you that the morals were absoltutly horrible. The US had problems with gambling, prostituion, and drinking. This was the problem and the downfall for our country during the Industrial revolution. Immigrants were the one getting tied into the bad morals within the US.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree the US needed to go through the Industrial age it was a bad thing that kids were working next to their parents.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Yellow journalism or also known as yellow press is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses moor interesting headlines to sell more newspapers.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

it support what you said because Yellow journalism or the yellow press is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

i agree with you and that the yellow journalists just wanted good headlines to sell their papers

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Yellow journalism was a huge cause of the Spanish-American war.

People truly believed what the press was saying was true and that then caused US citizens to view the Spainsh as horrible and cruel, this then pushed the government to declare war.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

There were many ways in order to get to Oregon during the 1800's, but it wasn't easy, or cheap for the matter. One could simply get a wagon pulled by oxen, with family treasures, food, and sometimes themselves.This allowed for the most capacity of all of your items, but then you also have to feed your oxen. Rivers, were also a huge problem for the wagons; and sometimes they had to take a ferry to cross. One could also travel on horseback, which was a much faster way, and cheaper, but allowed for very few items. The last way was taking a steam-boat around the US. This was very expensive, and few had the money to do this, but I feel this would have been the safest and fastest way to get to Oregon. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Trail

Side: Imperialism
1 point

It was difficult, but the price of going there was worth it, becuase there was a lot of land and gold around the area that they were traveling to.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Going from one side of a country to the other side of the country is very hard. they had to travel 2000 miles and had to cross rivers, and mountains.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The trip to oregon was a very deadly and expensive trip. People that wanted to head west had to be strong and willing to put their lives at risk. Traveling west meant leaving all that you have worked for, for just a chance at stricking it rich within the gold industry. The trip was not easy and was hardly worth going there for some people becasue many people were poor when they reached the west coast.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Worker conditions during industrialization in the united states were terrible. Some owners would lock the workers in the room when they left for a fear that they would get out. People were fed very little and given very little breaks. The places they worked in were very unsafe. They were also very unsanitary and weren't suitable conditions for people to be working in.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The US needed to step in World War I, the war was going on to long and it needed to stop, that was a step for the US to be Imperialistic.

Side: Imperialism
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

Why do we need to step in on the war. It has nothing to do with us so, lets just stay out of it.

Side: Imperialism
chribenti(29) Disputed
1 point

Couse it aficed The US as well more then you know about, the US needed to the money.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

If the twin tower attack never would have happened we would never have gone into war. We went over to Iraq because we thought there were weapons of mass destruction. There really wasn’t so this put us at war for no reason. We are still at war for the event that happened in 2000.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree with you about if we didn't have the twin tower attack we wouldn't of been in war. I don't agree about how you said we went to war for no reason. We did, to fight for our country because of the attack that happend in 2000.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I support what you said because 911 was 1 of the most horific things that has happen to the US, and i think that the war with iraq will not be ending soon even if obama said that the war will be done in a few years and it is still going on.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree with you Chloe. The attacks on the twin towers was the spark for the iraq war. This war that we are fighting is a never ending war that will just put our country into even more debt than we are in now. Iraq war was the biggest waste of money and lives that the US has ever done.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

A little of topic, but the Iranians acutally blew up the twin towers, so you know what Bush said? "Let's go invade Iraq."

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree. I think that was a cause and effect of why we went to Iraq. Right after the attak, the troops headed over to Iraq.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I agree with you that, that was one major reason why we went to war with Iraq. After the twin towers attack we also improved our secturity in airports and things that are suspicious.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

The twin towers was a spark on the war today just like the USS Maine in the Spanish American war. The only difference is that we had evidence that Iraq and the Al Quaida did it and the Spanish were never proven guilty for blowing up the Maine

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Tumblr asked me yesterday if I wanted to shut down my blog for the day in protest against SOPA so I did, other sites asked you to leave a comment to your sennitor. What they put in fine print is that if you use any type of prophanity you can get into serious troublel. You think they will actually do something about the angery words of the public?

Side: SOPA
1 point

If people had never tried to help African Americans gain equal rights as everyone else after the Civil War things would be very different now. Segregation would be everywhere, just like it had been years ago. There would be seperate schools for African Americans and whites, seperate bathrooms, resturants and more. Racisism and segregation would probably be even worse now, if the Civil war didn't end the way it did. It's almost hard to imagine how horrible things could be.

Side: SOPA
lkroon(15) Disputed
1 point

There still isnt equal rights and there never will be. It wasnt only african americans that gained "rights" it was all sorts of people. The only thing people gained was that they were able to sit together and go to the same places.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I know this is a bit old news, but I'd like to express my opinion on this kind of topic, because I believe that your gender and sex interest should not be be be discriminated when entering the military. These people are sacrifising their lives for you people, and yet you're crying and whining and wasting your time on passing a bill whether to allow gays into the military?

Side: SOPA
1 point

Youre right, these people want to fight for our country and defend us. It shouldnt matter what or who they believe. That shouldnt matter when it comes to the military.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree because it does't matter about you sex and gender. Those people are willing to risk there lives for our freedom every day. If you don't support this then why don't you risk go and risk you own life then.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Is there racisme in the United State today? If yes how can US fight this issue?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109258/Majority-Americans-Say-Racism-Against-Blacks-Widespread.aspx

Side: SOPA
1 point

There is still lots of racism in the US today. There are some parts in the country, more towards the south that are very segregated and view African Americans harshly.

And it's not only the African Americans that are viewed unequally. Many other races aren't viewed equally in the eyes of some people.

Side: SOPA
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

we cant really stop racisme because it is all over the US and it would take years to stop it.

Side: SOPA
lkroon(15) Disputed
1 point

There will always be racism in any country. There is almost no way to stop it unless you make the people stop thinking about that.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I sometimes wonder why the U.S. have racism problem. Even though American have the history of slave society, all American are based on other country.

Side: SOPA
1 point

There are some signs of racism seen every day by name calling and the racist jokes that are being said. I believe that it begins with the parents of the children. The children learn from their parents and if they hear their parents talking about it they will bring it to school and spread it to others. The only way we can stop it is by getting the adults so grow up and not be racist

Side: SOPA
1 point

The progressive era was a huge leap in u.s. history. Many different movements and ideas were created during this period that improved many parts of u.s. history. Food safety and drug safety were a couple of things that improved. Other things that improved were reforms in schools, and enviromental preservation and awareness.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree that this was good because it helped make the cities healthier and people in the towns got along because there were laws that were set in place. If they wouldn't have environmental laws i think that conditions would be worse today.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Your right, it was a huge leap and many things improved by it.

Side: SOPA
1 point

This was indeed a huge leap for the U.S. and in adddition to schools, food safety, and drug safety work conditions weere also drastically improved during this era. Workers would go on stikes and unions were also formed. By doing so workers took matters into their own hands in the unions. Some of these ideas have been transfered to todays world unions are still used but are not as common because condtions are not nearly as bad as they were back then.

Side: SOPA
1 point

During World War 1, an estimated around 17 million people died, give or take a few million. This is because a lot of bodies were covered in masses of ground, or never found from explosions. The warefare itself was very brutal, with each side in a trench, and the "No Man's Land" between them, composed usually of potholes from explosions and mud or dirt. The typical day would be firing lots of Mortar attacks and waiting for it to get quite, then have your infantry charge with a counter-attack. If you tried and turned around, you would get shot by your own country, so it was advance and die, or go back and die.

Side: SOPA
1 point

The trench conditions were terrible. With a very clausterphobic feel to it, it stunk of rotten feet, or injured soldiers. Disease spread throughout the trench, and even if you survived the War, you most likely would get a case of "shell-shock", or a terrible combat stress reaction, which caused the soldiers terrible mind conditions. - http://jimmythejock.hubpages.com/hub/World-War-1-Trench-Living

Side: SOPA
1 point

If the United States did not build the Panama Canal, was there another country that built it? If yes which one?

Side: SOPA
1 point

There would be a country that wouldve finished it i dont know which one wouldve but they would be a rich country now.

Side: SOPA
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

I would have disagree because back then i dont think a differant country would want to finish what a differant country started

Side: SOPA
nreil(30) Disputed
1 point

The United States were the ones who finished the Panama Cannal, however it was started by the French. The French stoped their work on the cannal after loosing the majority of their workers to diseases, this was the difference between the Americans and the French. The U.S. realized what was killing their workers and so they took preventive messures like draining swaps and spraying insecticide. Here is a link of an overview of the creation of the panama canal http://www.pancanal.com/eng/history/history/american.html

Side: SOPA
1 point

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

The Panama Canal started in 1880 and was completed in 1914. Yellow fever caused many deaths and delays while on the ship. It wasn't until that threat and a better design for the canal was arrived at, that the canal could be completed.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Do you think Obama is going to fix the economy? When do you think we'll ever be out of debt? Does the Military play a big role of making the U.S. in debt? How can we even fix this?

Side: SOPA
1 point

Do you think the enternet should be censored? I don't think it should, if you don't like a site then you shouldn't have an account on there.

Side: SOPA
1 point

i support that because if a person doesn't want a site why are they on it in the first place

Side: SOPA
1 point

No the internet shouldn't be censored. It's the persons choice on what sites to visit. If you don't want to go to a site, don't.

Side: SOPA
1 point

The Treaty of Versailes was the treaty that was created at the end of the First World War. This treaty established 9 new countries and also gave Germany sole responsibility for the War. There were many problems that the Treaty brought about the main ones being; humiliating germany (this set up the premise for WWII), ignoring the needs of the Bolshevik government in Russia, and it created international tensions about the descions that were made about the colonies after the war.

Side: SOPA
1 point

In the end lead up to World War II, the UN, and the wars after World War II.

Side: SOPA
1 point

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/progressivism/index.cfm

Many 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. At the state level, Progressives enacted minimum wage laws for women workers, instituted industrial accident insurance, restricted child labor, and improved factory regulation.

Side: SOPA
1 point

A lot of people are disscusing about if racism still really exists, and it does. So why do people discriminate others though? I can understand it's because of their skin color, but if that's all people can really answer with then I say that it's a fail.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree with you. Racism is a horrible thing and lots of people look down on others just because of their skin color. Lots of people don't even have a legitimate reason for disliking a certain race, they simply dislike them because they're different.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I believe that there are so many racism people. They just believe to be better then the other... I do not really know how but they just believe that the color of your skin is most important thing ever.

Side: SOPA
lkroon(15) Disputed
1 point

There is also the way the people just act like americans are fat and blacks are in gangs and mexicans are drugies its just how most of them act.

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

I know, but it's not much of a reasoning. For me I look at every person differently. Most people look at things as groups and judge it as it is.

It's like saying "Oh you dyed your hair black and wear dark clothing, you're emo now." Maybe that person liked wearing that way and isnt emo. I find that unfair for others.

People did not choose their own skin color or their culture. The only thing they had to do was accept themselves for who they are.

Judging Is An Option.

Choosing Who You Want To Be Is Not. It's Not Their Fault.

Side: SOPA
CodyH(25) Disputed
1 point

Yes racism still exists. Do you know how many racist jokes there are. We have groups like the KKK and many other groups like that.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Unfortunately you are right!! I do not understand yet how that is still possible. We are in 2011 and the people are still ignorant

Side: SOPA
1 point

Should schools have a blocking system so all phone signals are out of service? I don't think it should if something were to happen in the buliding. On the other hand chances of a serious life threatening situation happen are very low.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Just like during the Industruial era, many children around the world now are going uneducated, mostly because they have to support their families. Some of these children must get a job and others have to stay home to do, what we believe as simple, tasks. For example, some children must walk miles just to get water for their family and must do this every day.

But supporting their families is not the only reason they go uneducated. In some countries, girls can't attend school and in other places language, religion, etc, prevent them from getting an education.

http://childrensrightsportal.org/world/right-to-education/

Side: SOPA
1 point

Yes, because the economy is bad in most parts of the country. If we could help them get water a lot easier, we should. It would be a lot healthier environment because then they wouldn't have to get water from randomm spots.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Is a computer a good way to study USA history? Are there too many distractions or not? tell me what you guy think

Side: SOPA
zlederer(22) Disputed
1 point

i think its a good way to study but if your on other sites and getting distracted then it isnt

Side: SOPA
1 point

I believe that it can be a distraction sometimes but it definately allows you to research more and gain more information from other sites. I think that it depends on the people that are using it.

Side: SOPA
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

A computer can be a good and bad way to find information because some of the information can be true and some can be false.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-learning

Side: SOPA
1 point

I believe that the computer is a very good way to study. In fact, you can find whatever you want on internet, it is the most important discovered of the world ever!!

http://news.discovery.com/tech/internet-history-timeline.html

Side: SOPA
1 point

I think that there are too many distractions and that then people don't end up getting there homework done. But the good side of it is that you can learn about whatever you want in history by just researching it.

Side: SOPA
1 point

WWI was a completely senseless war and could have been avoided easily through conversation. Instead we got in a huge war over an assignation that no one cared about in the first place

Side: SOPA
1 point

i agree with you that it should have never happened because the assassination didn't even matter

Side: SOPA
1 point

I believe that the world would be different without the World Wars, we wouldn't have the U.N. or the countries that we know about.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I think that the world would be better withouth the World Wars... in fact there were not so many people died

http://www.howmanypeopledied.net/2010/10/how-many-people-died-in-world-war-1-one- ww1-wwi/

Side: SOPA
1 point

the world would be a lot different and also the population would be up because of all the men that died and the fact that a lot of views were changed by the wars that would have been changed and all the laws and other things

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree with this because the only cause of this is because everyone is so Biased. No one is neutral. I find it disrespectful how no one listens to each other. It starts out very little and then a few more gather and form groups "Just Becaus They Have Very Similar Opinions". Once the groups become larger, like the countries for instance, the people who disagrees, becomes irritated and backstab each other, and that is how a War is started.

Side: SOPA
1 point

How United States was imperialist during Spanish-American war?

http://www.ehow.com/info_8406197_reasons-imperialism-spanishamerican-war.html

Side: SOPA
1 point

We evolved a lot from our history. What do you think will change when it's the year 5012? Will there ever be flying cars? Will our history still be kept nicely and inpact? Will there be new species? Will we be able to find another earth planet and fly there easily? Will the earth not even exist anymore? Will the new generations help our society to be a better place? Will we be in war again? Will there be a World War 4 and 5 and 6 and 7 and so on? Will Plymouth still be here? What do you think?

Side: SOPA
lkroon(15) Disputed
1 point

We will more than likelly evolve into smarter beings. There are new species being created every year. If we can find out how to harness the energy of a black hole we can transport to diffrent world or universes. And there will be many more wars.

Side: SOPA
1 point

racism is a big part our country still today you see it all around

Side: SOPA
1 point

i agree with you and i dont think racism will ever stop because kid inherit things from their parents

Side: SOPA
1 point

But why is there it yet? we are in a modern era and the people should know that you can have a different color of your skin but you are not different!!

Side: SOPA
1 point

its still there because people think there better than others

Side: SOPA
1 point

It's there because some people aren't willing to accept the fact that we are all different. They think if they have a darker skin color than theirself, that they are below them and don't deserve the same respect. Unfortunately, that is something that will be there forever I think. It has gotten better, but I think that will just be something that we have to live with even if we don't like it.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Yes it is, it is something we can't get rid of, it will be with the US forever.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree. I believe we can understand people are all different regardless any races; we have different cultures, life experiences and ideas each other. Because we already have enough history that people fought for their rights, to understand racism is not needed in the world.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Racism is still going on and this article is on a student who said some "unfriendly" things that made some people upset...

LINK http://collegemediamatters.com/2011/03/22/student-newspaper-apologizes-for-racist- article-about-american-indian-event/

Side: SOPA
1 point

The US needed to go through the Progressive era and the industrial age. We wouldn't have any safety in the work places and other things too.

Side: SOPA
sbartz9(11) Disputed
1 point

i think that we should of not gone through the industrial age because we lost lots of lives because of not good working conditions

Side: SOPA
rhernickle(24) Disputed
1 point

But if we didn't go through the industrialization, how would we have known that lives could have been lost through the working conditions? It's all about learning from our mistakes.

Side: SOPA
1 point

We did need to go through the industrial age or else there would be younger and younger people working in more and more horible places to work.

Side: SOPA
1 point

We needed to go through both the progressive era and the industrial age in order to get to where we are today. In both those periods we made advancements in technology, safety, sanitation and a lot more. We may have hit a few bumps, which caused the deaths of many people, but we had learned from those mistakes.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Did the United State choose the right side for the Worl War I ? Which side do you think could be the right?

Side: SOPA
1 point

Yes they did choose the right side because if the germans would have won the economy in america would have had a downfall

Side: SOPA
1 point

Yes they did choose the right side because if the germans would have won the economy in america would have had a downfall

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

No we did not choose a "right" side, because to be honest there is no right side if you think fighting will solve everything. I mean I know we had to enter in the war sooner or later, because we are allianced with other countries too. But "alliancing" should not always mean you hit my friend I hit yours.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Ocean pollution is still taking place today. Now when we wash our clothes the fibers pollute our oceans?

http://www.naturalnews.com/034020_washing_machines_plastic_pollution.html

Side: SOPA
1 point

i agree with what u said, so we need to find a way to change are way to clean clothes and not pollute the oceans.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Everything we do we are politing some part of the world so cant we just stop talking about poluting this world because you are just always poluting some part of the world.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree with you. We have to be a part of natural ecologycal system but we are still poluting the earth even the pollution of water have became problem since Industrial Revolution. During the construction of Panama canal it was also problem about the U.S. people.

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

We know that everything we do in life is polluting the Earth.

Yes It's True We Can't "Stop" Polluting, but we can at least "Reduce" it so the Earth can at least heal itself.

Side: SOPA
1 point

MTV did a thing on Made where they took guys who had turned 18 but charged as a child sex offender because there girlfriends were under the age of 18. After being charged at that for 2 years, they went to court and got the charges dropped. Do you think someone charged with that should have the charges ever dropped?

Side: SOPA
zlederer(22) Disputed
1 point

i believe that if their 18 and its their girlfriend and not some random person that they should be dropped but if its some random person they should be charged

Side: SOPA
rhernickle(24) Disputed
1 point

I think that they could have the charges dropped, depending on the situation. If the girlfriend consented to it, then yes, the charges should be dropped, if she was nearly 16, which is the age of consent. If she was a around 13, no, because that's just weird anyway. I also think that some people should just make better decisions and then they wouldn't get themselves into trouble like that anyway.

Side: SOPA
1 point

What are the major changes in the industrial era back then and now? Like the working conditions, wages, and working hours.

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

We got better working conditions, because the government now actually checks what business are putting in their products. We also got better pay.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Should the goverment really have control over our freedom of speech? censoring the enternet is censoring what you think and youre own freedom of speech!

Side: SOPA
1 point

The government shouldn't control our freedom of speech, since it is called FREEDOM of speech. But there are certain things that should or should not be said, and I really think that it's up to the owner of the website to handle things if they don't like what is being said.

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

No they should not have control over our freedom of speech. The society helped bring where we are today with just words and words. Without "us" there would have been no good working conditions. Without "us" there would have been more racism to this day. Without "us" women would have never had the same rights as men. Without "us" there would have been diseases from here and there. Without "us" this world would have already been corrupted.

The government has the powers, but we also need the power to direct the governements by telling them as "one" that sometimes they don't always do good things.

Side: SOPA
1 point

How would you feelin if you had to work from dawn to dusk? How would feel if you got paid pennies for your work? This how the children felt during the industrilization. They had to work for little money and they had to waste their childhood away. These kids were not able to live the life like a normal kid but like the lives of an adult. I think that child labor would of been extremly scary as a child. http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/tuttle.labor.child.britain

Side: SOPA
BrandenSBui(14) Disputed
1 point

Actually, almost no kids had what we think of a normal life now a days. They all needed to work in order to help pay for their food.

Side: SOPA
1 point

All kids from every country shouldn't be working hard labor, but they should be a school.

Side: SOPA
1 point

If I was a kid during the industrialization I don't think that i could handle it. Working ten hours or more a day for only a couple dollars a day.

Side: SOPA
1 point

In old Europe, there were no children but small adults. The dicovery of childhood was a great development in the society. I believe children have to be educated, not for working because they have oppotunity to create world better.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Is our Country still under Reconstruction? Of course the Civil War split us into Northern and Southern parts from, simply put, Slavery. The North wanted to abolish slavery, while the south did not, for their fields needed much help to harvest the crops. So from 1861, have we been able to cover up the split that divided our Nation; I don't think so.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Why did the explorers left their country? I believe that they left to find new resources and try to go away from their country for find the freedom

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree wit hwhat you said they did leave because they wanted to find new resorces and a new religion.

Side: SOPA
1 point

some explorers left because they had religious differences or they wanted to leave because of freedom

Side: SOPA
1 point

That is why the explorers left it was for new land and resorces and for new freedoms.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree with you, but some people left their countries for a new life because they felt as if there could be more they could do with their lives somewhere else.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I think that the explorers left their countries because they needed to find more resources and the cities were getting to crowded and there wasn't enough room.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree with you. They had to move from their home countries because otherwise they could not survive.

I believe noone prefer to leave their home countries. But like religion and jobs are most necessary conditions to live as a person. So even there are worry to live new place, they could give up their home countries.

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

They left their country for many reasons.

-some were to travel to the end of the world and hit some kind of black wall to say "hey guys! I found where the Earth Ends! This world is Flat!"

-finding gold

-finding resources

-claiming a land

-religous reasons

-freedom

Side: SOPA
1 point

If everyone has the big american dream, why is it that no one is dreaming anymore. This country has gotten more agressive with money and power. I think the people of America should have a voice and the president listen, form a plan, then get back to us.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I think American dream is a really great concept that every American have in their depth. Even though all Americans had different home country, this concept always can be same among them.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree 100%. It get's me so upset when no one is keeping their words.

But,

I know there are many out there also though who are trying their best to acomplish things to prove everyone wrong, because it takes many years or even hundreds or more for amazing things to happen. Many times our miracle we need does not happen easily, because everyone is putting everyone else down saying you can't do it. Then there goes bye bye to your american dream over and over again.

Side: SOPA
1 point

all countries care about is money and power they dont care about very much of anything else

Side: SOPA
1 point

That is all they care about they dont care about there people they only care about there power and there money..

Side: SOPA
1 point

i agree because all countries have allies and then they dont get along with other countries

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree. Even in this society, big countries tend to move by their own money and their world forces.

Side: SOPA
ebrown(27) Disputed
1 point

Actually I don't think all countries care about is money. If that's all the United States cared about, then I don't think we would be so far in debt.

Side: SOPA
1 point

Do you know Manifest Destiny? It could make the western migration that pushed out Native American as a right destiny. I think imperialistic history started from it. Is this concept still reminds in the U.S. society?

http://socyberty.com/history/problems-with-the-manifest-destiny/

Side: SOPA
PaniaVang5(31) Disputed
1 point

I don't know what Manifest Destiny is. Tell me first, then I'll answer your question (:

Side: SOPA
1 point

in the westward migration people were lied to so much and told that it was so beutiful and then they got stuck with wasteland

Side: SOPA
lkroon(15) Disputed
1 point

They wernt totally lied to because if you went all the way west the land was preaty goo and it was good land with in the middle too.

Side: SOPA
1 point

i feel bad for the donner party how desperate do you have to be and all the suffering they went through and then they were outcasts the rest of their lives

Side: SOPA
1 point

how could be the world without internet? is it a good or bad thing? Can be it dangerous for the people?

http://www.journeytocaring.com/5-reasons-why-the-internet-can-be-dangerous-for-children-and-teens/

Side: SOPA
1 point

Internet can be good or bad depending on what you use it for. If it's your source of news, how you talk to people you already know, use it for work/school projects, the internet can be kind of neccesary. But if you're going around and meeting random strangers online, you don't know who you are really talking to. Someone who says they are your age, or close to, can really be a sexual predator to children or teenagers. When using the internet you just need to be careful about what you are doing, or else there could be serious consequences.

Side: SOPA
1 point

during the progressive area it was rough people had to work long hard hours to get just a little money to feed their families for the night

Side: SOPA
1 point

I agree. In U.S. History my role before, as a Business Owner, would have dispute this, but now this is in my side of the opinion. I actually disliked being the Business Owner and the controlling of everything because for a person like me would get really stressed. I would have gave the job to someone else and lived on my own little farm. I know the families struggled a lot too, but it's hard to help every single family out even if you'r a big company. There are so many people out there in need of help, but that money could be lost so easily even if it's a little. It's like telling 1 million people to hand out to me one dollor each. Yay I'm rich.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I think 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.

Side: SOPA
1 point

How did the Renaissance change people’s perspectives from a one dimensional view of the world to a more global outlook?

Side: SOPA
1 point

Until I learned about the U.S. histtory, I had never thought about Germany American during W.W.I. In fact the U.S. government decided to be Triple Entente side and the Germany Americans became outcasts and was eliminated by other Americans whose home country is not "enermy".

http://www.uta.fi/FAST/US1/REF/germ-ww1.html

Side: SOPA
1 point

Imperialism is one of the biggest things in our country today. Below I have a link that shows what American imperialism really is. It states it is the "economic, military, and cultural influence the US. has on other countries. Imperialism in my eyes is a problem, though our help has saved many countries.

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

Side: SOPA
1 point

The Spanish American war started inn a conspiracy. This link below talks about the battle of Manila Bay, and it is an official report by the Spanish admiral Montojo.

http://www.spanamwar.com/mtreport.htm

Side: SOPA
1 point

WWI was one of the dumbest things the US has ever gotten itself into, probably even worse than the war in Iraq.

Side: WWI
1 point

If US didn't get involvedw/ WWI, there would be no WWII, Korean,Cold, Vietnam, or Middle East wars

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, America should have kept out of the war. It would have saved many lives and the US would have time to reconstruct its own problems.

Side: WWI
1 point

Yes, we could've let the Europeans figure out their problems on their own. We were on the outside looking in and decided to go in.

Side: WWI
btrakel(27) Disputed
1 point

I dont think that WWI was as bad but it was still pretty bad. I dont think that the U.S. was as big in WWI than they are in Iraq. I think that we were fighting for more in the Iraq war than we were in WWI. I think that WWI was kind of pointless and we should not have joined in that war.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree America should have stayed out of WWI we would not have been in any of the other wars that we have been involved in.

Side: WWI
1 point

Lesson in US history: War defines the US, war made the US, war will destroy the US

Side: WWI
1 point

In the time of Colonization & Exploration was it a good idea for explorers to leave their home countries and come to America?

Side: WWI
1 point

It was a great idea and their were many different things that were discovered during exploration. When explorers came to America they found gold, silver, and other precious stones. Explorers wanted to expand there knowledge of the world. Also wanted new land and a larger empire.

http://library.thinkquest.org/J002678F/why.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

Other people that came from different countries also brought different resources. This was good because it led to trading from country to country.

Side: WWI
1 point

The United States need to continue to be imperialistic because without trade from other countries we will not have enough supplies for the entire population.

Side: Imperialism
bbachmann(27) Disputed
1 point

Yes, but is trading with another country being Imperialistic. My opinion is that it is not.

Side: Imperialism
TommyJay(28) Disputed
1 point

Trade is not the same as imperialism. Imperialism doesn't affect trade, it affects the governing power over a country. We trade with china but we aren't imperialistic toward china.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

i agree. if we were imperialistic toward china, we would want all their land or want to take control of them. All we want is to get good from them

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I think that the United States blew up the USS Maine own ship to give them a reason to fight the Spanish.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree they needed the reason to make the Spanish look bad and fight the war

Side: Spanish American
bbachmann(27) Disputed
1 point

I dont think that the United States destroyed there own ship, mostly because the USS Maine was a pre-dreadnought battleship. Which for its time was a very powerful, large ship. The United States had no reason to destroy it.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

World War One is the war to end all wars there will be no more wars.

Side: Myles
Mckenna(28) Disputed
1 point

World War I was not the war to end all wars since there was a World War II.

http://www.worldwar-2.net/

Side: Myles
1 point

This website explains about imperialism in the United States. http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/toc.html

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I think that Woodrow Wilson's power created issues with his honesty and equality view points. He was very racist, as he was born in the south. One time he even said he 'understood' the motives and acts done by the Klu Klux Klan.

Side: Woodrow Wilson
1 point

We wanted the land that the Spanish had so it was a easy way to make it look like we were under attack. It would make sense to create a reason to attack when we wanted land. We knew we could win and if we won we would get the land.

http://www.spanamwar.com/maine.htm

Side: Spanish American
1 point

World War 1 was just waiting to happen, all it needed was something to spark it. The assination of Franz Ferdinand was the spark to the war.

Link:http://www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

I believe that the US staged the Spanish American war with the USS Maine to create conflict for them to become a world power. It was unneccesary for the war to begin and for us to flex our muscles but we can't change the past.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree, i think that they staged it also so they had a reason to start a war. They wanted land and that was a motive for them to start a war.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

We were thinking, "What is the loss in this war?" but what we didn't realize is that we lost a possible ally in Spain with this war. No need to fight

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. we think that we can take everyone on. I think that one day some countries are going to show us whos boss and they are going to teach us a lesson for once. I dont think that it is smart to be getting in all of these wars because i think that they are going to come back to bite us in the butt later on.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Yeah, eventually a world power like china will get fed up with us and attack. How do we defend ourselves with half the army posted around the world.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I think that the Child Labor was the wrong thing to do. There were always better options out there that they could have used. The kids should have been in school so they could learn and get better jobs.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

The world is watching for the new presidential canidate. I think that Obama hs no chance because the accomplishments he promised weren't completed during his time in office.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

While obama has been a pretty good president, I do agree that he may have promised a little more than he could handle.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

The best part about Obama is that he tries and doesn't seem to have a large agenda for himself. He promised to do more than he could handle, yet all presidents do. I don't see why this makes such a big deal that he hasn't done all of it yet.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

I think that people are too literal with their promises. Think about it, what promises, within reason, has he not kept? What promises did he make that he didn't keep that were within his power?

Side: Current Events-General
mlade(29) Disputed
0 points

Obama is a great president he will also be in the next term. All the republican candidates are idiots they don't know what they're talking about. When Obama gets elected again he can do lots more.

Side: Current Events-General
Devin(42) Disputed
1 point

What makes Obama such a great president beyond the fact that he is democratic? I don't think any of the canidates are idiots, or they wouldn't have gotten this far. Obama COULD do a lot more but most likely won't as it is likely that he won't be reelected.

Link to a somewhat biased article about Obama's chances of reelection.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/01/09/poll-americans-2-1-fear-obamas-reelection

Side: Current Events-General
mpellow(26) Disputed
1 point

that man hardely (sorry for spell fail!) anything. he said he would get things done but all i've seen is him leaving for vacations and parties. from the looks of it there is more homeless and less jobs

Side: Current Events-General
majaholcomb(26) Disputed
1 point

I disagree, I think many of the rep candidates are good representatives of the American people. Obama is hypocritical and says things he doesnt mean. I understand that is the way it is but do you really think his election was true? I think that looks and presentations of yourself have become so important in election we fail to see their actual motives. I can assure you that most of his votes were because he was african american. Not to be racist, but I think it's true.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

I think the United States should continue being imperialistic because it is important to have foriegn allies in today's world. http://www.michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html

Side: Current Events-General
Mckenna(28) Disputed
1 point

If the U.S stays imperialistic though people will turn against them and become hateful of them.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

To me, the biggest push in the U.S was the progressive movement because it really showed us that we need to step up all of our laws, safety, and jobs. there was so much improvement and less people were sick or hurt or treated unequal.

Side: Child labor
1 point

The USS Maine explosion caused the Spanish American war.

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I wonder what the outcome of World War 1 would be If America joined Germany and the Austria-Hungarian empire.

Side: WWI
1 point

The trenches used in WW1 were a very hard place to live. The soldiers in the war fought hard and it were many very bloody battles. The soldiers entered the war so that they could stand up for their country.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree! People who lived in the trenchs usually smelled bad from not being able to take shows. Also if the trenches filled with water they were forced to stay in the water and sometimes even lost limbs.

http://trenchescomic.com/

Side: WWI
1 point

The Progressive movement started to develop at the end of the 19th century during the industrial growth of America.

Side: progressive
1 point

I think that the westward migration was one of the roughest things that the United States went through. it all started with the Lewis and Clark's Expedition to the west, with an Indian as their guide, named sacagawea.

the link below is the timeline of events that went into the westward migration.

http://www.flowofhistory.org/themes/movement_settlement/westerntimeline.php

Supporting Evidence: Timeline of the Westward Migration (www.flowofhistory.org)
Side: Migration
1 point

i agree. the westward migration was a rough ride for a lot of people. a lot of people died because they had little experience of the area and how to take care of a wagon. they had to worry about animals and theives stealing their items as well.

Side: Migration
1 point

ya totally...we think of the westward migration we think of a game, or a nice easy ride on a nice looking trail with the sun setting in the backround. but it was not like that many people thought they were taking a short cut but ended up going through a dangerous path. And the trails werent as nice as we think of, it was rough, uneven, and dangerous!

Side: Migration
1 point

The panama canal led a huge door to saving money and making trading easier. Im not sure if it was worth all the lives lost or not, but in the end i think it helped a lot with the u.s. and earning money.

Side: triangular trade
Denton(26) Disputed
1 point

i do not think that it was a good idea. yes it saved money but a life is worth a lot more than a canal.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

http://history-world.org/Spanish%20America%20War.htm The Spanish American war wasn't scared to go around telling other countries around them that they wouldn't back off and back down, they would keep fighting.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

I agree. During the war, they were just worrying about what they were doing to survive and fight for their country. They just wanted to go home and be done.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

The United states was and still is a very imperialistic country.

Side: Imperialism
1 point

"During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the United States pursued an aggressive policy of expansionism, extending its political and economic influence around the globe." quote from http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/toc.html

Side: Imperialism
1 point

Many factories in the United States changed to make supplies for the war. They had to mass produce to make enough to supply the correct amount.

Side: WWI
1 point

I think that if we have not even had westward migration, it would not have been a big deal. Eventually, we would have spread out by ourselves and not had to struggle with the harsh conditions because we would slowly progress our way over to the west side.

Side: Migration
1 point

Wilson appointed many southern Democrats to his cabinet. Is that really fair? It is sort of like picking your friends for a dodge ball game. You would obviously pick the strong and fast friends . This is what Wilson did. The act of his choice ended up with the cabinet supporting segregation. Quite unconstitutional, right?

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/war.crimes/US/Wilson.htm

Side: Migration
1 point

Well during the Child labor the industrialization era was very hard on kids. Most kids got killed, or permanently injured. .

Side: Migration
1 point

i agree, we were way too harsh on the kids. I think having arguments and protests helped a lot with this issue. It just was not fair to the kids they needed education.

Side: Migration
1 point

and to think that some of those kids had to live with a missing limb or a scar for life after working at those places. some kids even picked up nasty habbits like the cigar factory for example. young kids would make the them and even smoke them getting them into the habbit of smoking.

Side: Migration
1 point
1 point

In current events, we talked about Wisconsin and how it went down on drinking and down on smoking cigarettes and up on pot. I think that we need to slow down all of it not just some of it. Wisconsin is still worst for binge drinking so even though it dropped, we really need to stop more of it.

Side: Migration
1 point

WWI was a very bloody war because of advanced weapons such as Machine guns and chemical warfare while using out of date tactics

http://techcenter.davidson.k12.nc.us/group9/tech.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

yes but it was also the fact the most of it was faught very close to one another. A lot of the war was in the trenches and that was just a mess.

Side: WWI
1 point

The Westward Migration helped our country with the Economy and to move west to journey and explore more land which we can call home.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

I agree. This help eveyrone is have more land. It also help the economy because there were more people growing and selling food and goods.

Side: Migration
1 point

I agree. Even though we lost some men to the indians and we removed a native people, I honestly believe if we wouldnt have donw it, Britain or Spain would have.

Side: Migration
jlentz(26) Disputed
1 point

Yeah, especially if we were involved in the revolutionary war, Great Britain would try to gain some of their land back.

Side: Migration
1 point

i agree to disagree, because there was a lot of problems during this journey also. it helped us, but we could ave also slowly expanded.

Side: Migration
jlentz(26) Disputed
1 point

We would not take it slowly for many reasons. The biggest one being that a more dominant country or nation, would come and take it over. Yes people lied about having a better future if you move west, but it was the right call. If we moved west later on, we would probably see France, Germans, who's knows who, and that would start another epic war that would affect america greatly.

Side: Migration
1 point

I believe that the United States sunk there own ship so they had a reason to go to war with the Spanish. I think that the sinking of the USS MAINE was a very dumb way to go to war with someone. You could have just declared war and went to war with them that way, not by blowing up a ship. I think that going to war with the spanish could have been avoided.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

personlly i'm a little neutral about it. but you know i agree with you. someone on the US side couldve easily started something on the ship to make it explode. and it was a VERY stupid way to get into a war that was not needed. it was a recless and ignorant thing on our part and like you said could be avoided easily. maybe even had a allie???

Side: Spanish American
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

I agree and disagree I agree that the us blew up there own ship but I disagree that it was for nothing the we can not just declare war for no reaso we wanted land and wanted to profit of of them so we used the cubans as a distraction to have a reason to go to war and the Spanish were at there weakest so it was a smart idea for a dumb reason

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. We didn't have any evidence of the Spanish blowing the ship up. The war was caused by our imperialistic minded government.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree completely. War with the Spanish was not really needed. It was a very poor choice if the United States did sink there own ship, because honestly that is a terrible way to start a war with someone by accusing them of doing it.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

During the progressive era, child labor was used a lot. Child labor was wrong in many ways. Children as young as 5 were working in dangerous factories, where they could die or be seriously injured.

Supporting Evidence: Progressive Era (www.digitalhistory.uh.edu)
Side: Child labor
1 point

World war one was one of the most imperialistic wars man has ever created it was also one of the bloodiest wars the mortality rate was over 15 Million deaths

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

Side: Child labor
1 point

America has a tough industrial history like forcing little kids to work in hazardous environments, and having no minimum wage.

Side: Child labor
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

Working little children to death is a terrible thing if we didn't have racism or we had a restriction on how old you had to be to work the casualties for little kids would decreased by the hundreds

Side: Child labor
1 point

The Industrial Era changed in favor for the workers. Businesses used to be able to treat people unfairly with low pays, child labor, long hours, but after the era there's new laws in place so the workers can't get abused.

LINK:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

Side: Child labor
1 point

i agree that is the case, that the work places were made safer and hours are limited.

Side: Child labor
1 point

Lewis and Clark:

The expedition was made to find a water route across North America and to explore the uncharted west and was given to Lewis and Clark by Thomas Jefferson. He thought that they would encounter woolly mammoths, erupting volcanoes, and a mountain of pure salt. they found the Rockies, over 50 tribes of native americans and about 300 species unkown to science at the time.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lewisandclark/

Side: Migration
1 point

With war came along allies. If we didn't have allies some of our resources and protection would be taken away.

Supporting Evidence: allies helped (www.bbc.co.uk)
Side: Migration
1 point

Entering the war for us was kind of pointless. All it did was cause problems and get a lot of our people killed.

http://www.thenagain.info/webchron/world/uswwi.html

Side: WWI
1 point

I wonder what if the world never had the war. What would it be like?

Side: WWI
1 point

I feel like if we never would have had the war, America might not feel the need to always get ourselves into other countries business and into wars.

Side: WWI
1 point

I totally agree. The United States always seems to be in other countries bussiness and that always seems to get us into trouble. I think that we need to keep our nose out of other peoples business and just keep to our own problems. We have enough problems to worry about. We dont need to be in wars and fighting for other countries freedom.

Side: WWI
1 point

I totally agree Paige, if there was no war in the first place, where would we be in life?

Side: WWI
1 point

During the progressive era, an income tax was authorized, a direct election was provided for senators, the right to vote was extended to women, and the manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages was prohibited.

Side: progressive
1 point

http://myfivebest.com/five-presidential-lies-that-led-us-to-war/

What did Wilson lie about? A lot actually! One example: There was a ship traveling over seas to Europe. There were 1300 some passengers. When Germans attacked the ship claiming there were weapons on the ship, they killed near 1100 of the passengers. Wilson screamed bloody murder on the germans. He said they were ruthless killers fighting a war to enjoy the smell of blood. Get this, only 118 of those passengers were killed. And he screams bloody murder? Wilson lied to the public about the extent of the war initially.

Side: Woodrow Wilson
1 point

In Westward Migration many people died because the trip was to long and strenuous and people did not have the correct supplies to make the full trip.

Side: Woodrow Wilson
1 point

I agree. The trip was very long and hard and bringing enough supplies to last the entire journey was very hard because you would need ALOT of supplies.

Side: Migration
1 point

Exaclty. Also if people became sick along the way it was hard to make them better since there were no advances in medicine like back then.

Side: Migration
1 point

not only that remember they had to deal with wild animals and bandits and other things trying to steal their supplies. imagine waking up at late at night to find someone digging around in your stuff.

Side: Migration
1 point

Most supplies would have to be found along the way through trading, hunting, etc. People would have to learn quick or die.

Side: Migration
1 point

I agree. People were not prepared at all. Most people were used to their nice life in the city and a 3-4 mounth trip on a wagon was very rough. The Donner Party is a good example of people stuggling on their way west.

LINK:http://www.donnerpartydiary.com/

Side: Migration
1 point

I would have hated to be in that time period!! I would have died before anything!

Side: Migration
1 point

Don't you think if you were close to dieing, you would do anything you could to protect anyone else?

Side: Migration
1 point

today, there is no real relationship between us and iran. its proven that since they disagree with our plans and are in sides more with iraq that there is nothing to even be said between us both.

Supporting Evidence: iran and U.S. (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Migration
1 point

I think spanish american war was kind of foolish. Yes the United States wanted more land but they shouldnt of had to fight for it. They could have made a treaty to share the land. I think that the US is way to greety.

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm

Side: Migration
1 point

I agree. The Spain-American war was very foolish. It was very unnecessary and alot of people died. The war was mostly just a show of the power of the US.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree i dont think this really changed anythin in the u.s. besides showed we had strength, but we already had strength.

http://www.jcs-group.com/military/war1898.html

Side: Spanish American
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

The us couldnt just ask for it because at that time the spanish thought they were the best of the best and they wanted our land at one point but they new we were pogressing a a very high rate and that put them in the place

Side: Spanish American
1 point

In the Industrilzation Era many children ended up having to work in the factories along side their parents to help support their families.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I support this comment. I think back then those children shouldn't have such a hard of a life. That's just wrong how they ended up, either hurt or killed. But the owners didn't really care as long as the job was done.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree. The owners did not care about the working conditons, or working hours of the children and people. I think this caused many of the casulties since people worked really long hours and became tired on the job.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i agree it was wrong. even though some of those kids wanted to go to school and learn they wanted to help their families. children should live a good healthy childhood instead of dealing with hardship. but as we all know that cant always be helped. the owners shouldve cared more instead of being greedy.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Children had to help otherwise they would be left to starve and have no income. Unfortunately, the working conditions for the children weren't the best.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I believe this because if WWII did not happen more lives would not have been lost but also that it could have been the last war ever and therefore would be the Great War. http://www.firstworldwar.com/

Side: Myles
1 point

During the Spanish-American War, America basically wanted nothing to do with it, but tried to make a good impact on the War.

Side: Myles
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

We fought the spanish for landed at that period we were very greedy and we wanted more

Side: Myles
1 point

True very true, but what did we really want is the question.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i agree in my eyes, we did not need to start an argument with them for nothing. it was prolly the most stupidest war ever

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Back in the Progessive Era people were paid very little for working long hours and children got involved int he mix weather they liked it or not. but it was the only way some families were able to pay the bills and put food on the table to feed everyone.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I agree with thiss. Back in the progressive era people really had to fight for survive. the boss's didn't care if people were hurt as long as the job was done. & they were lucky if they made a dollar by the end of the week.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

In the progressive era, i think it was wrong what some of the workers did in the factories. When they gave all the left over meat and dirt, mixed it all together for a couple cents. and thats how most kids or people got sick. They didn't really have much money. And at the time those kids were working in factories to survive.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

In my opinion I think Theodore Roosevelt was the best president we've had because of all the laws he made like food acts and he helped majorly on the forest and national parks he saved the land from becoming a possible company or landfill.

Side: progressive
1 point

During the Progressive Era the work conditions for the workers were very very poor. They had no ventilation, belts and gears were always exposed waiting for an unexpecting victim to get caught.

Side: progressive
1 point

Slave trade was so unfair. I am glad we stopped slavery inthe u.s. i think the war between the U.S was stupid. If we needed workers, we could have hired our own. there were plenty of others that could have done the job without being forced and taking others from their home land. this was so cruel and unfair.

Supporting Evidence: slavery (www.ghanaweb.com)
Side: progressive
1 point

or the owners couldve got up off their lazy tails and done the work as well. not only that light skinned people thought they were supiror (sorry for spell fail) because the africans lived very different lives and looked different from them.

Side: progressive
1 point

In World War I many people lost their minds, limbs, and even lives due to the cruel nature that the war was fought.

Side: progressive
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

Many of the casualties were from toxic gas made from chlorine and acid and from near by explosions

Side: progressive
1 point

Many children had to work in factories to help support their familes. This was very dangerous work and many got hurt or even died working in factories.

Side: progressive
1 point

The machines were made for adults to work on them so they are very tall and large and not made for kids. The kids had to stand on them just to run it. This was dangerous because it was any easy way to get hurt.

Side: progressive
2 points

a lot of kids got killed from working on the michines. there should be no reason that there are children loosing theie lives at the dawn of life and be responsible to help care for their families at such a young age in dangerous situations

Side: progressive
1 point

I agree. It took along time for these things to change and many people held strikes against these conditions and in support of the children.

Side: progressive
1 point

during the westward migration the people left the cites in the east to get the cheaper land in the west and for the riches that came with it, gold. They traveled in wagons pulled by oxen. but it was nothing like the computer game, oregon trail, these people went through hardships that they didnt think they would encounter. like sicknesses, injuries, snake bites, hardships from the landscape.

Side: Migration
1 point

Yeah, I agree. Once you really learn what Westward Migration was all about, you realize that the game you played when you were a kid, or a game you still play was nothing like the real thing. They should create a game, where it is exactly like the real thing.

Side: Migration
1 point

I think that the reconstruction made slavery stop, but there are still some prejudice people in the world.

Side: Migration
1 point

I think World War 1 got the world in to the modern age of war, because all wars fought before WWI, you lined up and you shot, and it was in an open field. But in WWI it introduced the use of chemicals in war, and it used more trench warfare, trench warfare was used in the past but it was used in WWI more than in the past.

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

Side: WWI
1 point

Yes WWI was the war to go modern with tanks and fockers. Trench warfare was a big thing in the war which brought great ease for hiding except for tear gas and napalm.

Side: WWI
1 point

I do think this helped america see that we needed to step up our ammunition so we can defend ourselves a lot more. it is very impressive of how good we keep allies out of our country though i modern days so it proves that this did help us.

Side: WWI
1 point

You can learn using the internet and look up sites that talk about the topic you want to know about.

Side: Myles
1 point

http://americanhistory.about.com/library/timelines/bltimelineuswars.htm The Spanish American war kept fighting and wouldn't give up. They weren't afraid to tell other people that they weren't afraid to keep going and not give up.

Side: Myles
1 point

the westward migration was important because cities were over populated, the west was unmapped territories full with unknown dangers. That needed to be discovered for the country to continue to grow. There was cheap land to attract people there for cities to grow.

Side: Migration
1 point

This helped the economy because there is more food being grown. Many people were also brought westward to find gold in California.

Side: Migration
1 point

Moving west did help us spread out more and be able to find our land and start something over. I think the most important thing in this is we found it so that the land is ours. We didn't have to worry about anyone else taking our land from us. The U.S. is perfectly proportioned

Side: Migration
jkrusiec(16) Disputed
1 point

I agree and disagree...we took land from the Native americans that were there before us. but the land needed to be found and explored.

Side: Migration
1 point

http://4yearsofww1.info/index.html

Here are some non-violent fact about WW1. Did you know Canadian women had to give their husbands permission to join the war in the early days?

Side: Migration
2 points

i did not know that but i think thats a good idea because if thay have families i dont think that the men should have to lose their lives and leave their families behind!

Side: Migration
1 point

I think that the Westernd Ward migrtion was a great time in Americas history. We really need to expand but we did not need to push out all the Indeas.

Side: Migration
1 point

I totally agree, the indians should have kept their land and be allowed to roam the land like they used to instead of pushing them onto a certain amount of land and fenced in like an animal. the westward migration was a great time to explore.

Side: Migration
1 point

my hypothesis is correct because the land was cheap and since the population was growing there was more space in the west.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080228150402.htm

Side: Migration

it was a good thing to have cheap land in those olden days. That i do agree with you.

Side: Migration
1 point

yes, think about fighting for land now and trying to buy land back. this would suck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_vs._fuel

Side: Migration
1 point

In World War I the Germans gassed many people who were in the trenches. By the time the people figured out that they had been gassed it was too late and people lost their lives.

Side: Migration
1 point

Yep and if anyone was still alive they stabbed with the bayonette, or shot.

Side: WWI
1 point

Do you think the 40 hour work week is still in effect today? According to this article, the act is getting reviewed. I think it is a great idea because times have changed so much since then.

http://www.homepages.indiana.edu/040904/ text/workweek.shtml

Side: WWI
Denton(26) Disputed
1 point

yes but i think that you pretty much have to work 40 hours a week to survive. Now a days everything is so exspensive that you have to work to live.

Side: WWI
1 point

We are very imperalistic. We always have to fight, even though it could probably be avoided. We try to make ourselves better then others, when thats not right.

Side: WWI
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

We but in people's problem because of world war 1 and 2 we didn't want to go in and we were pulled in so to not to cause another world war so we but in everyone's bussniess because it's cheaper then a world war 3

Side: WWI
1 point

This website explains about world war. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ww1.html

Side: WWI
1 point

Westward migration/expansion was a terrific thing for the United States. It obtained us more land to live on. We could grow more crops to survive and we had more space to live.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/texas/westward-expansion.htm

Supporting Evidence: Westward Migration (www.sonofthesouth.net)
Side: Migration
1 point

Yes having more land is good and more crops is good being well fed is a fantastic thing that shows streingth

Side: WWI
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

But we also pushed out the indians from there home and many died from that

http://ngeorgia.com/history/nghisttt.html

Side: WWI
1 point

what would Europe be like if WW1 or WW2 didn't happen like if the Nazi Reich still had power or if the Hungarian empire was still in rule.

Side: WWI
2 points

the world would be a happier place!! if everyone would just get along and mind there own buisness there wouldnt be so many people losing their lives to "fight for their country"

Side: WWI
1 point

Germany would be more powerful because they would have had alot more land. The Nazi reich would possibly be taking over more of the world than they already have.

Side: WWI
1 point

If Germany won, then I think they would think they were a lot more powerfull too. Now you don't hear about them as much because they aren't trying to start things with other countries. But if they did win, they could have much more land than they do today. Also, the Nazi's would probably have some impact on the world today if they would have one. People could've followed them because they would have the image of being powerful and people would respect them for that reason.

Side: WWI
1 point

During the Westward Migration I think that people had about three ways of thinking,

1) Lets go explore!!

2) we'll go if we have to.

and 3) why would you go there, we dont even know whats out there!!

I also think that it would have been kind of fun to explore new land that you dont know what to expect!

Side: Migration
1 point

the only thing with that is that they had no idea what was comming and if they would have known how life was going to be and how many people were going to lose their lives they would have rethought going or how they were going to go!

Side: Migration
1 point

i agree, why would you take time out to go expand when you could move but not 1,000 miles away from everything. That just sounded stupid to me. You would die for nothing.

Side: Migration
1 point

During Westard Migration many families left their homes in search of new lives, a better future or in hopes of stricking it rich. Some people searched for gold but those people usually did not get rich te people who became rich were the ones who sold the supplies the miners needed.

Side: Migration
1 point

Westward migration not only improved the land capacity of America but it also forced us to develop great transportation in the need to expand. Trains and roads started to be constructed and improved. Thus improving out infrastructure as a nation.

Side: Migration
1 point

I would like your opinion. Did Christopher Columbus bring about the destruction of the innocence in America?

Side: Christophor columbus
mlade(29) Disputed
1 point

No i don't think that he did plus Columbus wasn't even the one to discover america, Leif Erickson was so no.

Side: Christophor columbus
Devin(42) Disputed
1 point

Leif Ericksson was a person that discovered America supposedly. Some people say Amerigo Vespucci did as well though! I think that people had kept America a secret for as long as they could. Perhaps to better their own standing?

Side: Christophor columbus
Devlen K.(24) Disputed
1 point

He did not destroy the innocence in America because he didn't know what he was going to find. So, how can he have brought destruction with him if he never really did it intentionally. He only happened to bring it over.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

But people say that he is the cause of disease in America! He also brought greed and less peace with nature. He is also the cause of much bad blood between America and Native Americans in the future!

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

The Revolutionary war let the other countries know that we werent going to give up, or back down. And the Spanish war, just showed how careless and mean we are.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

This website explains about the many different causes of WW1. http://www.angelfire.com/mi3/ww1/causes.html

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

I don't think that the government should have control in censoring the internet. I believe that we should have freedom in what websites we go to. Also, I think that if the government blocks websites for plagerism, they will be taking away good sites that students use like wikipedia. Wikepedia is a resourceful website and if the people want credit for what they put on there, they should not post it on wikipedia.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

The SOPA is causing much dispute from the people who make web products. I would personally hate to have SOPA go through. I value my privacy and Google already helps to control this problem. I don't think it will go through. There are too many people who don't want this to go through.

Side: SOPA
1 point

I think that the United States made the good decision on going into WWI on the allies side, because even through the United States has had bad relations with the Brittans, they should still help them so that they can keep trading together.

Side: WWI
1 point

John D. Rockefeller was an American oil industrialist, investor, and philanthropist.

Supporting Evidence: John D. Rockefeller (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: WWI
1 point

Household manufacturing was almost universal in colonial days, with local craftsmen providing for their communities. This new era introduced factories, with machines and predetermined tasks, producing items to be shipped and sold elsewhere.

Side: WWI
1 point

WW1 started because of many reasons. One of these is because of the different alliances. Many countries had alliances with other countries and because of this many different countries entered the war to help out the country they had an alliance with.

Side: WWI
1 point

Life in trenches was not pleasent. There were rodents, people contracted lice and more.

Side: WWI
1 point

Plus they got trench foot from not wearing boots or water in the boot from rain also they got diseases from bacteria too.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree. The trenches were just not very pleasent over all.

Side: WWI
1 point

Yea the trenches were awful. Also remember there was dead bodies everywhere

Side: WWI
1 point

The trenches were definitely not the cleanest. Many of them had runoff and a lot of dirt and different kinds of animals living in there. That just shows you how appreciative we should be that we don't have tohttp://www.firstworldwar.com/features/ trenchlife.htm be in the trenches with the disgusting things.

Side: WWI
1 point

If the US didn't build the Panama Canal would another county have built it? Would there be a canal at all today?

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Would America have a better or worse economy if the Civil War never happened and if we still had slavery today.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

i think if the civil war never happened we would have a better economy because there wouldnt be so much hatrid and everyone saying this is mine and im nomt going to share kind of thing.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I dont know that is a really good thing to think about I trully dont now

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

If there wasn't ever the civil war there would probably be alot of very wealthy whites. There would probably only be a wealthy high class and a very poor lower class.

Side: civil war
1 point

America should have never entered WW1. The only reason we joined in is because Woodrove Wilson overreacted to the death of 300 Americans on the Lusitania. Because of that, we lost more men than if Wilson had not overreacted to it. But, that was just to start the fuse that made America explode and join WW1. There probably would of been less deaths, and less cleaning up for America to clean up.

http://sites.google.com/site/thechamberlinchronicle/jee

Side: WWI
1 point

The trench warfare in world war 1 was very brutal. People used gas to clear out the trenches and the battles were very close quarters. The conditions were very harsh.

Side: WWI
1 point

The warfare was bad, yes but don't forget about the living conditions either. Trench foot and constant flooding of the trenches were awful

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree people that use gases to clear the tranches and hand to hand fighting it was way to bad.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree. The war was very brutal and many people died. It was very hard to get food and many went crazy. Even after the war was over, many people had hullucinations about the war they wwere in.

Side: WWI
1 point

Andrew Carnegie was a Scottish-American industrialist who led the enormous expansion of the American steel industry in the late 19th century.

Supporting Evidence: Andrew Carnegie (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: WWI
1 point

This web site tells everything about WWI

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ww1.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

One of the greatest factor that fueled the progressive movement in America was urbanization. For years, educated, middle-class women had began the work of reform in bigger cities. Jane Addams was a progressive before the movement became popular. The settlement house movement embodied the very ideals of progressivism.

Side: WWI
1 point

Dangers of Westward Migration: Robbers--picked up things that the pioneers left behind

Wild Animals--rattlesnakes, wolves, bears, and lots of other dangerous animals

Illnesses--killed indians, small pox, cholera

accidents--switching wagon parts, hunting

Side: Migration
1 point

The world no matter where you live is always ranking people into certain groups. In the US it was previously a problem with skin color. Everywhere it's a matter of how much money you have. Everyone was created equal. We shouldn't judge eachother on our skin color, how much money we have, or even our sexuality.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree why do we rake people it is so domb but everyone even i do it every day.

Side: Racism
1 point

i agree this "labeling" of people is something that should not exsit. the world is divided into so many things because people want to be judgemental about almost everything. people should be able to walk around without be called names, harrased, beaten or any type of hate just because they prabably look odd to another or like the same gender as them (or like both).

Side: Racism
1 point

i agree 100% everyone is the same were all human wether we have dissibilities money different skin colors or speak a different language. ask yourself what if i would of came out black? you cant say you would have went right back in...because it doesnt work out that way! a person is a person no matter what and we cant judge eachother because we all have our faults and cant help it!

Side: Racism
1 point

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/labor_standards_bureau/child_labor_laws.htm

This is a link about the child Labor Laws in wisconsin.

Side: Racism
1 point

this was my link to the dangers of the westward migration:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2536601290.html

Side: Migration
1 point

In the past we had to be imperialistic to be able to survive in the world because then countries would fight us to try to conquer us and by fighting other countries it showed we were the country to beat.

Side: Migration
1 point

its not a competition on whoes best and whoes not or whoes the biggest and whoes not!!!

Side: Migration
1 point

J. P. Morgan was an American financier, banker and art collector who dominated corporate finance and industrial consolidation during his time. In 1892 Morgan arranged the merger of Edison General Electric and Thomson-Houston Electric Company to form General Electric.

Side: Migration
1 point

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, didnt care about others and our own people

Side: Migration
1 point

This web site discusses women in the progressive era

http://www.nwhm.org/online-exhibits/progressiveera/home.html

Side: progressive
1 point

Sherman Antitrust Act is a landmark federal statute on competition law passed by Congress in 1890. It prohibits certain business activities that reduce competition in the marketplace, and requires the United States federal government to investigate and pursue trusts, companies, and organizations suspected of being in violation.

Side: progressive
1 point

Conservatives were in a for a tough time because if they liked it or not, progressive era was under way. They had little say in many of the debates because the movement became so large so fast.

Side: progressive
1 point

The Industrial Revolution was very pointless in my opinion because if you think about it, all it did was put more workers out of their jobs and employers trying to get whatever they want from the workers.

Side: progressive
mhaese(27) Disputed
1 point

It also help make more products so that all could have the opportunity to have all of the thing that they want. It is also bad though because children had to help work in factories and this was dangerous.

Side: progressive
1 point

In America, during the Spanish-American war the US was imperialistic.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/1907powr.htm

Side: Imperialism
1 point

I would say the USS Maine was a great spark to a war that shouldn't have happened.

Supporting Evidence: USS Maine (www.smplanet.com)
Side: Spanish American
1 point

Many people were fooled by the Westward Migration. People thought life in the west would be a perfect utopia, but it really wasn't. Yes, there was free land but getting supplies and staying alive was very hard. Just the trip going west was very brutal.

LINK: http://www.redfeatherhistoricalsociety.com/westwardmigration.htm

Side: Migration
1 point

This is very true. All of those people traveled west to try and find a better life, when most of them probably realized they had a better life back where they were living than all of the trouble they went through to try and find the perfect life.

Side: Migration
1 point

During the labor unrest of the late 19th century and early 20th century, businessmen hired the Pinkerton Agency to provide agents that would infiltrate unions, to supply guards to keep strikers and suspected unionists out of factories, and sometimes to recruit goon squads to intimidate workers.

Side: Migration
1 point

this is how i use computers: Look up links that will give you accurate information. Things that you already knew, new things, or things that you forgot about!

Side: Migration
1 point

World War I and other Wars can be depicted in todays culture through such games as Call of Duty

Side: Migration
1 point

Good point!! I do agree with that. Boys and men have an army instict distilled in them therefore making games like that attractive to them

Side: Migration
Brooke S.(18) Disputed
1 point

but killing people for real and killing people fake are totally different things!

Side: Migration
1 point

The Renaissance was a cultural movement that profoundly affected European intellectual life in the early modern period. Beginning in Italy, and spreading to the rest of Europe by the 16th century, its influence was felt in literature, philosophy, art, music, politics, science, religion, and other aspects of intellectual inquiry.

Side: Renaissance
1 point

I still believe that the war was the war of all wars and there wasn’t any other until WWII. It had to take a lot of problems to get all the countries to team up and fights against each other let along do it again.

Side: WWI
1 point

I think that WWII was just an extension of WWI because of the short period between and the bad blood with the German people. Hitler may have been evil but we weren't particularly kind to them either.

Side: WWI
1 point

well we weren't kind to them because they weren't kind to the jews so it is pay back but it hurt us because we had to rebuild germany.

Side: WWI
1 point

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.

Side: WWI
1 point

The Lewis and Clark Expedition, or "Corps of Discovery Expedition" (1804–1806) was the first transcontinental expedition to the Pacific Coast by the United States. Commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson and led by two Virginia-born veterans of Indian wars in the Ohio Valley, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, the expedition had several goals. Their objects were both scientific and commercial – to study the area's plants, animal life, and geography, and to discover how the region could be exploited economically.

- from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_and_Clark_Expedition

Side: Migration
1 point

The Progressives were urban, Northernt, educated, middle-class, Protestant men and women. There was no official Progressive Party until 1912, but the idea had already grapsed the nation.

It was more of a movement than a political party, and there was a philosophy for the movement. There were three Progressive Presidents — Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and Woodrow Wilson. Roosevelt and Taft were Republicans and Wilson was a Democrat. What united the movement was a belief that the laissez faire was morally and intellectually wrong. Prgressives were on a mission to change morals and beliefs in americans.

Side: Migration
1 point

Technology has changed my viewpoints on history, becasue what i thought was right, or happened could have happened in a different way than i thought. links and other sites can show what is right.

Side: Migration
1 point

America is very imperialistic in that, we tried to expand our country by getting colonies, for example: the Phillipines

Side: Migration
1 point

If there was no progressive era there would be no regulation on our food. There would be no unions to fight for the job labor. The United States needed the progressive era.

Side: progressive
1 point

Eugene Debs was an American union leader, one of the founding members of the International Labor Union and the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), and several times the candidate of the Socialist Party of America for President of the United States

Side: progressive
1 point

Some say that the war wasn’t good enough to end the world wide conflicts with the other countries.

Side: Myles
1 point

We wanted to get as much land and take over alot of places because we wanted to look big and powerful. That just caused more problems.

Side: Myles
dermer(22) Disputed
1 point

It may have caused problems but then it helped us in a way because when there was a war countries wanted us to be on their side and every war we had helped a country we have won.

Side: Myles
1 point

Trench warfare is one of the most brutal fighting tactics out there. Not just the fighting either, the living as well.

Supporting Evidence: Trench Warfare (www.harris-academy.com)
Side: Myles
1 point

The progressive movement touched nearly everyone. The consumer, the worker the factory owner. It adressed the poor population in the cities. The women were gaining more rights and resoect from others. It changed schools and government too.

Side: Myles
1 point

During the war there were piolets from the british army called the "sucicide club." The piolets had 15 hours of training and took on the germans and the Red Baron. The average piolet lasted just 11 days. I think that being a piolet in the war was the dumbist thing. You were basically flying a treewith guns and wings and a steering wheel.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1283972/Bravery-British-WWI-suicide-club-fighter-pilots-took-Germany-Red-Baron-15-hours-training-lasted-average-just-11-days.html

Side: WWI
1 point

Imagine, you need to survive the fighting in the air and then land the plane with only 15 hours of training. The odds are definately not in your favor.

Side: WWI
1 point

At the end of WWI all the blame went to Germany, so that pretty much started WWII, but at the end of WWII we rebuilt Germany and Japan, but I think its possible that WWIII could start in the Middle East, because I think someone is going to do something to Iran or Iran is going to do something to someone. It's possibly that Israel might be a target.

http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/where-will-wwiii-start-t7751.html

Side: WWI
1 point

Muckrakers were journalists who would expose the abuses of businiess and the corruption in politics. In my opinion, that was not a good idea at all. But who knows maybe some of the things they were saying needed to be said.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

World war 1 was very hard and brutal. The soldiers had to go through alot of harsh things. THey had poor clothing and didnt get much food. THere were rats and diseases also.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

you have to feel bad about the Russians their uniforms were fancy but they weren't warm so, more Russians died from frost bite then bullets.

Side: WWI
1 point

The way WW1 was fought was out-dated because they were using tanks, gas, machine guns, rifles and mortars and If you were one of the men that charged then you most likely would have been killed.

Side: WWI
1 point

In the Spanish American war we promised the Cuba to become there own country and when it happened it went to a dictator ship economy and it is very hard to be really free

Side: WWI
1 point

Knights of Labor was the largest and one of the most important American labor organizations of the 1880s. Its most important leader was Terence V. Powderly. The Knights promoted the social and cultural uplift of the workingman, rejected Socialism and radicalism, demanded the eight-hour day, and promoted the producers ethic of republicanism.

Side: WWI
1 point

The Industrial Era was by far one of the greatest eras in the history of America. It brought out the change that ws needed for America to become what it is today. There was mass production and we were thriving for the first time in a long time.

Side: Industrail Era
1 point

The white population of the new United States did not stretch far beyond the eastern seaboard until the 19th century. The British Proclamation of 1763, the War of 1812, geological barriers and the lack of modern-day transportation all provided resistance against westward migration. But by the mid-1800s, the concept of Manifest Destiny–the belief that Americans had a divine right to expand their territory–gained footing, and Americans began to buy into the inevitability of settling both unexplored and already-claimed western frontiers, including the lands that now make up Texas, California, Colorado and Oregon. The California Gold Rush, the construction of railroads and a growing pioneer spirit all contributed to the expansion of the "wild west."

http://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion

Side: Migration
1 point

THe wars shaped our country and our viewpoints today. All wars changed the way we thought and how we adressed violence in other countries

Side: Migration
1 point

Right our country wouldn't be they way it is now if we didn't have war. we would be still under the queen

Side: Migration
1 point

Most muckrakers would be become investigative journalists, which would weed out corruption and social arguments that had raised.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

When they were fighting in world war 1, the people who had to go in the front most likely were gunna die right away.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

Right thats called the front line and people died all the time those people were the ones who aren't the greatest at thing, not even really shooting a gun.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

Right isn't that why is was called the front line? Also if you didn't put your life in danger for others, then who will?

Side: Muckraker
1 point

Families that moved west during the westward migration over came many struggles. But they helped with our countries growth.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

The Revolutionary war let the other countries know that we were not going to give up, and possibly back down.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

Hay market Riot was a demonstration and unrest that took place on Tuesday May 4, 1886, at the Haymarket Square in Chicago. It began as a rally in support of striking workers. An unknown person threw a dynamite bomb at police as they dispersed the public meeting. The bomb blast and ensuing gunfire resulted in the deaths of eight police officers, mostly from friendly fire, and an unknown number of civilians.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

the "straight" society needs to stop giving gays,bi's, and lesbians so much trouble about who they want to love! because of people hatting on it there has been suicides/murders. i mean people like liek the opposite gender are allowed to marry and love right? why cant it be the same for them?

Supporting Evidence: Suicide Surge (www.cbsnews.com)
Side: Muckraker
1 point

If the civil war never happened, would there still be slaves today? Would everything still be segragated?

Side: civil war
1 point

The Industrialization Period brought a brand new economic system to the United States. Rights, money, and jobs were all changed. With all of these new improvements, corruption made its way through many aspects of American life. Reformers responded during the Industrialization period by wanting to better the culture by following three goals that consisted of economic reform, social welfare, and moral improvement. Citizens thought they needed to have some measure of business and government guidelines and restrictions to protect social welfare. Progressives worried that uncontrolled and concentrated corporate power threatened republican government.

Side: civil war
1 point

Yellow Journalism was a type of journalism where the writers would use incredible headlines, typically false, to pull the reader in.

http://www.pbs.org/crucible/frames/_journalism.html

Side: Yellow Journalism
1 point

During the Spanish war, it basically showed us how cruel we were and mean to everyone. It was just a bad time for most people.

Side: Yellow Journalism
1 point

World war one proved how violent people can really get we fought the war for no cause really there was an old story that people from different country's would come over to the opposite side and have a party on Christmas the shared story's and had good time and the next day they went and killed eachother mostof the time the soldiers didn't even no why they were fighting

Side: Yellow Journalism
1 point

The Donner Party were among the wave of emigrants who would bring the US its "manifest destiny" to stretch from the Atlantic to the Pacific. they were trying to go a short cut into the mountains and a snow storm stopped them in their tracks, they first ate the animals, leather, then the started eating eachother...but family members werent supposed to eat other family members! EWWWW!!!!

http://www.donnerpartydiary.com/WESTWARD.HTM

Side: Migration
1 point

Cannibalism is generally frowned upon in society. But they survived. It's not like they murdered each other but they ate their dead. I guess it saves the trouble of burying them!

Side: Migration
1 point

Blacks did not have the same rights as whites and many racial groups tried to keep the blacks from gaining the right to vote and other things.

Side: Migration
1 point

Yes the African Americans were not treated fairly. the Americans treated them as property and not like humans

Side: Myles
1 point

i think that we should worry about our own problems before helping other countries. all the millions of dollars and tons of water and food we send to other countries that have natural disasters. We have millions of people that are starving and homeless that could use all of that aid

Side: Myles
1 point

The Muckrakers were a good thing during the Progressive Era. They told the truth about the hard times and dangers of the work conditions that they had to work in. Even though they decided that they were going to risk themselves to let people know what the workers are going through.

Side: Muckraker
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

They released the evil sided of many factory's and company's in general I agree they were very helpful

Side: Muckraker
1 point

Theodroe Roosevelt helped with saving the nations wildlife resources and setting aside nation parks.

Side: Muckraker
1 point

National parks was a good idea, the younger generations will be able to see what a forest looks like instead of pavement and metal.

Side: Myles
1 point

The Panama Canal helped us gain money for our country. If it were not for that canal, traveling across the globe would be harder than ever, we wouldn't have a better protection of enemies if they came to Mexico, and would not gain money.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree. Without the Panama Canal, it would be a lot harder for trade and trade routes. It would also take a longer time for items to get from one side of the world to the other. The Panama Canal was a great structure to build since it is the passageway from one ocean to another.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Racism has always been a problem in the United States and always has. During the civil war the Union army would not allow black slaves to fight along side white men. The black soldiers would have to be in serpent group.

Side: Racism
1 point

I agree, people will always be racsit to others. The civil war did help segragation alot though.

Side: Racism
1 point

Migration was a huge part of the USA in our history and is partly the reason why we eventually got into the western half of the US

Supporting Evidence: Migration (www.connerprairie.org)
Side: Migration
1 point

i think that slavery was one of the worst things that happened in America.

Side: Migration
1 point

Yes slavery was terrible the way the African Americans were treated just wasn't right they're human just like you and me.

Side: Myles
dermer(22) Disputed
1 point

Slavery was bad but it helped the southern economy, and for the north they had industries.

Side: Myles
1 point

yes but it also caused a war which killed thousands of Americans. i think that it distroyed our country

Side: Myles
1 point

The progressive era touched everybody. WOmen then got to work in the factories with the men and the children didnt have to work so much in the poor conditions.

Side: Myles
1 point

Nationalism has a few good points, people tend to work for the good of the state, which allows people to come together with like interests and accomplish their goals. The cons are many, as illustrated by Hitler's Germany, nationalism almost always ends with one group of people being vilified.

Side: Myles
1 point

Trains and boats helped with the transportaion of materials from place to place. More materials could be transported and faster.

Side: Myles
1 point

Yes boats were great because the supplies got across to other countries and send troops to fight instead hanging around and shooting the people who invade.

Side: Myles
1 point

One of the biggest project that the United States every had during westward migration was to make the transcontiental railroad. This train went from sacremento to omaha.

Side: Myles
1 point

If the westward migration never happened then how populated would the East coast be?

Side: Myles
1 point

The east coast would have over 3billion people but they would eventually make to the west.

Side: Myles
1 point

The Civil War was started by one part of our country wanting slaves, while the other opposed them in their beliefs. The south got so mad because they couldn't have slaves so they just broke off and started a war that in all reallity could of been avoided. They just had a little temper tantrum becuase they wanted all the slaves to do all their work. So,they started the war because the North didn't want any slaves anywhere in the U.S.

Side: civil war
1 point

The north didn't want slaves. They didn't want people to become products. The slaves in the south had a very hard life and they didn't get paid for it. They had to do everything that their masters wanted them to do.

Side: civil war
1 point

Yeah, that was a difficult war for us.

http://civilwar.com/

Side: civil war
1 point

Trains helped in trading as well. we upgraded from horses to trains. horses are cheaper, but they cant go as far with goods or as fast. they also can die along the way. trains were made sure they were built right and could carry tons. including people

Side: civil war
1 point

with that being said horses can get hurt and its going to take a long time to get things places and they can get sick

Side: civil war
1 point

Trains took quite a while to catch on. But when they did they became a very useful method of transport. They took a while to replace horses. But horses are easier to grow. They are also easier to maintain!

Side: Myles
1 point

Yes trains were a great transportation until cars came then there began to have no use for train and horses because cars could go farther.

Side: Myles
1 point

Did the US entering World War 1 make the US more powerful? Or make it weaker?

Side: WWI
1 point

To be honest I don't know, but for whatever the reasoning- probably got made at someone for killing one of their allies.

http://home.earthlink.net/~gfeldmeth/chart.ww1.html

Side: WWI
1 point

Manifest Destiny

noun

the belief or doctrine, held chiefly in the middle and latter part of the 19th century, that it was the destiny of the U.S. to expand its territory over the whole of North America and to extend and enhance its political, social, and economic influences.

Side: Migration
1 point

Women became fed up with being treated unfairly at the factories and strarted to strike so they could work less hours for a higher wage.

Side: Migration
1 point

During the west ward migration many settlers would get hurt and become infected or attract some type of disease that would, in the end, kill them.

Side: Migration
1 point

Westward Migration was as good of a thing as some people thought. They dreamed of a better place to live, but in the end some of them didn't even get to see it.

Side: Migration
1 point

During World War 1, many soldiers spent life in the trenches. It was a rough life to live. They had to worry about rats, catching diseases, shellfire, and body lice.

http://techcenter.davidson.k12.nc.us/group9/trenchwar.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

The panama canal was very important. It helped for transportation and it was very difficult to build.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree, without the Canal ships would still be going all the way around South America though the dangerous seas.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I agree. The United States took alot of time and effort to build the canal. Many people got sick doing this because of the diseases that spread between workers building it. This made it dangerous.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

Some American men went to Great Britten and France to become pilots and Solders in WWI, but this was before America joined the war. I think it’s because of the money you can get from flying and fighting. But when the United States joined the men who came before joined the American forces.

Side: WWI
1 point

so did that mean when they went there that when the us went to war they were fighting against the us?

Side: WWI
1 point

This is a movie that explain how the railroad was built. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/tcrr/

Side: WWI
1 point

Progressive movement strived to deminish the church as the driving force for poilitical choices. They are chagning the way we operate as a nation with our morals and tradititions.

Side: WWI
1 point

Snipers are trained men carrying rifles with telescope sights. They could find trees in the no man's land. They would hide away in that tree and wait for people to come by. They wore camouflage clothing to blend in with their surroundings.

Side: WWI
1 point

There were alot of causes to WWI, both sides are to blame

http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW1/causes.htm

Side: WWI
1 point

The movie All Quiet on the Western Front was very good at showing how devestating the war actually was and what the men in the war were thinking of and dwhat they wanted.

Side: WWI
1 point

Current Events is fun, especially for extra points! You get to learn lots of things, some of which cannot be explained on here. But an example was that orangutan that stop smoking after so many years. That's why computers help, to find information faster, to express yourself clearly, and simply its the way of the future.

Side: WWI
1 point

Current events is fun! We get to learn more about the world or Wisconsin by fun little questions. That Orangutan story was very bizzare!

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

The government over exaggerated on how other countries were so bad and what they were doing even though it wasn't.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

The trail of tears was caused because of the western migration and we thought it was a new start by going back to what we were good at forcing and killing

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

Westward migration was a big deal. alot of people left their homes and took everything they had with them so they could get away.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

a lot of people had to move because they didnt have anything and so they wanted a fresh start

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

In the trenches, soldiers would also dig tunnels. Through these tunnels they could destroy an enemies trench and then attack while the enemy was confused.

Side: WWI
1 point

During the Industrial era the United States was working like mad. There was child labor, food disease, and drug problems. That is why at the time we needed a progressive reform

Side: Industrail Era
1 point

WW1 was a tough war to win and the casualties were very high. It's foolish of everyone in the world to continue to go to war. What is the gain? Death?

Supporting Evidence: Casualties (europeanhistory.about.com)
Side: WWI
1 point

Think about if there was no progressive era there probably be no regular food that is here for us now. There would be no such thing as unions too fight for the job labor and such. I believe that The United States pretty much needed the progressive era. It did us good.

Side: WWI
1 point

The Yellow Journalists were the reason the Spanish-American War happened. They told a their version of the truth. They had added things that they didn't know what happened which sparked a war that was not really need. There were really 3 ways Maine could have blown up; error of the crew onthe ship causing an explosion, the Cubans wanting to frame the Spanish so the would leave Cuba, or the Spanish really blowing the Maine up for being in Spanish Territory.

Side: Yellow Journalism
badskater47(16) Disputed
1 point

I agree if we went for another cause it still would have been the Journalists fault on be half of not being there

Side: Yellow Journalism
1 point

What do you think about the Govner recall this is going to be a thing that everyone will remaders for yearsd to come.

Side: Yellow Journalism
1 point

I think the recall is stupid because they are wasting so much money when walker did nothing wrong plus they can wait another year when his term is up.

Side: Myles
1 point

Sacagawea assisted the lewis and clark expedition of 1804-06, but joined them in november. she was thier interpereter, she was 16 and pregnant! she was from the Lemhi Shoshones tribe. she became sick in th spring of 1805, Lewis was worried for her, and the expendition since she was their dependence for a friendlly negotiation with the snake indians on whom they depended on for horses to assist them!

http://www.historynet.com/sacagawea-assisted-the-lewis-and-clark-expedition.htm

Side: Migration
1 point

http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW1/causes.htm

This site gives a lot of good info on the causes of ww1 and the meanings of many of the vocabulary words we have learned. ww1 was a combination of many things and this site tells of some of the lesser known reasons.

Side: Migration
1 point

Propaganda was a big part of they way we look at past wars and present the news and the Internet and the newspaper uses propaganda

Side: Migration
1 point

everything uses propaganda to make people think that everything is better than it really is

Side: Migration
1 point

I think that the progressive era was the era that shaped the United states into what it is today. I think that getting people working was the best thing for america. I think that there were many bad things that happened during it but we fixed those things. I think that that shows how america can overcome challenges and move on to bigger and better things.

Side: progressive
1 point

The progressive era was a time of growth and change in America and it created a lot of the base to how we function as a nation today.

Side: progressive
1 point

In the World War I battles, they weren't allowed to try and save their friends if they were about to die.

Side: progressive
1 point

Yeah because they would die to and they would lose to many casualties.

Side: Myles
1 point

Why did we enter WWI did we really have to be in a war at that time I do think that it would have been better if we stayed out.

Side: Myles
1 point

I agree. We should have just left ourselves out of it. It would have been better to just keep to ourselves.

Side: WWI
dermer(22) Disputed
1 point

If we didn't enter WW1 then we would've have been in the depression and the allies most likely would have lost.

Side: WWI
1 point

The panama canal helped america and other countries by making the shipment of goods shorter then going under South America, and It helped America by having the countries paying tolls to get though the canal.

Side: WWI
1 point

Trench Warfare is the worst kind of warefare there is other than chemical warfare. You were always close to the enemy, and the trenches were very cramped. Mortar fire landing in the vasinity of your trench. Most men became shell shocked because of all the explosions and mental stress of knowing that there was certain death waiting for you just outside the trench.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree chemical warfare is the worst way to die in war it was a slow painful death.

Side: WWI
1 point

Chemical warfare sucks there is no way i would want to die that way because it is slow and painful.

Side: Myles
1 point

During the progressive era, there was disgusting job sites, where people would go to the bathroom or spit on the ground right here everything would go into this big thing, and made into left over meat. That is seriously gross.

Side: Myles
1 point

westward migration was important because cities were over populated, also the west was unmapped territories full with unknown dangers. That needed to be discovered for the country to continue to grow.There was cheap land and people wanted gold.

http://www.flowofhistory.org/themes/movement_settlement/westerntimeline.php

Side: Migration
1 point

During westward migration many people got sick with innfections and diseases.

Side: Migration
1 point

they did not know the things that we know today which is like weather conditions medical things etc...

Side: Migration
1 point

Exactly, things like measles and other sicknesses were very common. People died from this all the time.

Side: Migration
1 point

Were do you think that WWIII would take place if there would be a WWIII

Side: Migration
1 point

if your talking exact location wise i think it would be here in the us we fight with all the other countries in their countries i think its going to come back on us some day!

Side: Migration
1 point

I think WW3 will start in Russia or North Korea because Russians are threatening to fire missiles at Poland and Lithuania and North Korea test fired short range missiles one again.

Side: Migration
1 point

I think World War 3 will start because of counties cutting each other from their resources. Like if counties stop giving the US oil the US will have to rebel.

Side: Migration
1 point

The Spainish-American war was all about the US and imperialism

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i agree imperialism was one of the biggest factors that mad the us fight in wars!

Side: Spanish American
1 point

i think that in the world war 1, both sides were at fault.

Side: Spanish American
dermer(22) Disputed
1 point

Why do you think both sides were at fault the Serbians wanted war to get Independence how can you blame them we did the same thing with the British.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

We think that we have the best military in the world there for we are imperialistic and as well as thinking we have the best for freedom

Side: Spanish American
1 point

Ww1 could have been avoided if the country's would have not assassinated leaders and have the whole dispute

Side: Spanish American
1 point

also i dont think that countries having alies was a good idea because that just created conflicts with countries that had nothing to do with the reason it started

Side: Spanish American
jjwolf6(27) Disputed
1 point

I dissagree. I think there was no way to avoid WW1. There was lots of conflict people the assinations. The assination of the Ferdinade dude was just a spark to the war. There was lots of other reasons for why the war started.

Side: WWI
1 point

The panama canal was a great investment for the United States because it brought a lot more trading and it connected our Easter Navy and our Wester Navy

Side: WWI
1 point

i think tha panama canal created a lot of good things for the us (being civil)

Side: WWI
1 point

Racism is still out there and it's no starting to go the other way but also stilling be racist by letting colored people into college for less of a cost

Side: WWI
bbachmann(27) Disputed
1 point

If you look at the world now the issue of racism isn't as bad as it use to be.

Side: WWI
1 point

Its sad because people who traveled to the west were wrong to think that it was gonna be an easy journy, becasue im sure that the media of that time drew pictures of a beautiful land with a nice trail traveling into the distance with the sun setting behind it. and didnt show the hardships that they faces throughout the journey!

Side: Migration
1 point

The triangle trade routes from the americas to Europe, then to africa was an area where they could trade spices slaves and other goods.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

Sopa should not be passed because the Internet would almost be pointless to the world many people are most likely are going to decline the law

Side: triangular trade
1 point

What year do you think WW3 will happen and where will it take place.

Side: triangular trade
1 point

i think it will happen within the next couple of years and i think it will be in the us

Side: triangular trade
1 point

i think it will happen at the end of this decade when everyone is all upset that the world didn't and it will happen in the middle east.

Side: Myles
1 point

This is a very good website to explain about the Civil War. It explains every aspect of the war from the start to the finish. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/tcrr/

Side: Myles
1 point

The western migration progressed the change of the united states in such a matter that we pushed more to the cause

Side: Myles
1 point

I dont think that Christopher Columbus was not the founder of the New world. I think that Leafericson who traveled to North America in 1000 ad was the real founder of the new world.

Side: Christophor columbus
Devlen K.(24) Disputed
1 point

How do they know that he was the first person to find North America? Why didn't he settle here and create a colony of his own. So by all rights Amerigo Vaspuchy gets all the credit im my opinion.

Side: Christophor columbus
1 point

The real sucky part of entering the panama canal was how big the ships had to be. Come all the way to this canal, and you find out your ship is to big, ouch! There goes your raise for your job in the bottom of the sea.

http://www.canalmuseum.com/

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I think that the Cubans destroyed the USS Maine because they wanted to be free from the European Colonies.

Side: Spanish American
1 point

I think that during the pergressive era we learned alot about bissiness. I think that we learned that we cant work kids as long as we did. I think that we need to learn how to balance our work hours and our workers so that they dont die working. I think that we learned how to keep our factories clean and safe.

Side: progressive
1 point

That was rediculuos how that NBA lockout handled matters from NBA players, you know, "This player can't go here due that...." We learned this from current events.

Side: Current Event topics
1 point

This is a great web site on Muckrakers.

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

Side: Current Event topics
1 point

That map project was fun. For Westward Migration, we colored a map. The fun part was that we got to tear the map apart.

http://tripgeo.com/

Side: Current Event topics
1 point

Racism is one of history, because it is morally wrong in the way it is. People have discriminated different races, and how they look and how their cultcure. People have always tried to make them their slaves, and prosecute them for their beliefs. There should never have been racism because all men are created equal.

Side: Racism
1 point

Building the panama canal was one of americas greatest achievments. I think that building this not only gave them advantages but also gave them the mentallity that they can build anything they put their mind to and if they work hard on somthing then they might actually accomplish it.

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

I believe that abortion is a good and bad thing. I think that if you dont want a baby than you should be practicing safe sex or just dont do it. In the case of rape or somthing like that i think that having an abortion is ok. I think that if you are not able to take care of the child then i dont think that you should have the baby in the world and make it go through a rough life. i think that it is completely up to the mother. whatever she thinks is best is probablly right.

http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/29/abortion-right-when-pregnancy-due-rape-or-incest/

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

The today show, with John Stewart, was hilarious! Making fun of fox nation. Man, fox needs to get there act together! We talked about main topics with him, but in a fun way.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

In the Trenches, they had no way of eating, drinking, sleeping wherever they wanted. They were on a strict schedule and had to follow it. If they didn't follow it, they would be immediately killed.

Side: current event-abortion
1 point

World War 1 had to be very difficult as a mother and as a wife. Taking care of your child, doing chores, getting food, going to work at your job, etc. The hardest part though is to know if he is still alive or not.

Side: WWI
1 point

I agree with you, the wife and mothers have the hardest time when the Husband or son went into World War 1. They didnt know if they would ever see each other again so it was a particularly hard time for them. If the husband died the wife would be depressed and have a lot more work on their hands than they should have.

Side: WWI
1 point

Computers help us in so many ways today. I highly doubt anyone can despute about this. Finding information, playing games, to see what the wheater is like, or who one the Super Bowl. So this is only one fraction of what is in store for America.

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

World War 1 is probably one of the bloodiest wars in the world besides the American Civil War, and World War 2. There was always close quarter fighting but the thought that you might only be sleeping about 100 yards from the enemy is stifling. So close that you can look into their eyes.

Side: WWI
1 point

Western Migration was one of the biggest things that have formed the US as a country. Western Migration led to the US almost doubling in size. And once we were there we found gold and started the gold rush.

http://www.connerprairie.org/Learn-And-Do/Indiana-History/America-1800-1860/Western-Immigration.aspx

Side: Migration
1 point

I believe that current events is a good thing. It lets us know what is happening around the world. And how everything happens and revolves around what we do and how everything plays a part.

http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr084.shtml

Side: Current Events-General
1 point

The panama canal is probably one of the greatest man-made canals in all of history. It connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans together. The way the canal works is amazing for its day. It has 3 sets of locks that allow the sea level to rise to allow it to get across Central America.

http://www.cotf.edu/earthinfo/camerica/panama/PCtopic4.html

Side: Panama Canal
1 point

The Westward Migration was very rough and hard to get through on your own. If you ran out of food, you had to find more food before you died of hunger or thirst. You also had to find shelter and warmth otherwise you would either freeze to death of starve to death.

Side: Panama Canal