Monday, October 27, 2014

The Major Ideologies

The major ideologies of the 19th century were conservative, liberal, nationalism. These ideologies socially and economically impacted actions during the French Revolution.  Conservatives like the Catholic clergy, the aristocrats and the monarchy did not want the French Revolution to take place because that would result in their power being taken away and they saw the revolution as chaotic due to their fear of change.  Liberals such as members of the bourgeoisie believed that people had natural rights and should be able to vote for a government based on their citizenship, not bloodlines. The teacher sorted the class into groups and assigned every group an ideology. The teacher assigned two groups in the class the same ideology so when it was time to present the class voted which group had a better presentation of their ideology. This activity gave a visual idea of what each ideology was and it help better understand the ideologies.

 https://www.educreations.com/lesson/view/liberlism/25528786/?s=fMuzU5&ref=app

Above is a link to the group’s liberalism presentation. The presentation helped define liberalism because the pictures showed a visual on what liberalism was. Also, throughout the presentation group members and I described what each picture meant and the how it relates to liberalism Liberals believed in natural rights and supported individual liberty. They also voted constitutional meritocracy over absolutism. This ideology influenced social and political action in the vote for a rule based on the bias of their ability and not their family.


Conservatism is another important ideology as long as Nationalism. Conservatism supported a higher monarchy and they did not like change and wanted to keep the church in control. They influenced social and political actions in the 19th century because they liked to keep innovations and they felt like if change was to happen then there would be a revolution and violence.  Nationalism believed that people should be united under one custody because it protected them from invasions.  Also, they wanted people to be brought together as a nation and progress humanity. They had a social impact by bringing together nations through the share of customs, shared language, culture, and history.


Thursday, October 16, 2014

Marxism vs Smith, who was better?

In class the teacher passed out Hershey kisses to everyone. Everyone in the class received three Hershies but only two people received ten Hershies. After the teacher distributed the chocolate, classmates versed each other in rock, paper, and scissor. The rule was that only one round was played and if a classmate lost they had to give a Hersey to the person they lost to. If a student lost all their chocolate they sat down. The second time the teacher recollected the Hershies from students and re-distributed them that time, making sure everyone had an equivalent amount of chocolate. The teacher then gave the options of staying seated or facing other classmates to gain more chocolate. The frustrating parts were giving up the chocolates and having to be seated if people lost all their chocolate. Also, in the beginning when the teacher handed out a large amount of chocolate to two students it was frustrating for other students because the two students received a superfluous amount of chocolate. The fun part of the activity was by the end, the class was able to eat the chocolates. The purpose of that activity was to show the class an idea of Communism, socialism, and capitalism.  In the beginning of the activity when students were playing against each other and there were two students with a lot of chocolate they were considered the rich people in society and as they went around and people lost that represented how rich people gained more money and poor people got poorer. The second round when the teacher recollected the chocolate that represented how the government would recollect money and evenly distributed the chocolate. Overall, the activity was a fun way to begin a topic and it gave some type of experience on how capitalism, communism, and socialism played its role in society.


 Karl Marx and Adam Smith were both economic philosophers whose economic theories intended to benefit the poor.  Both Marx's and Smith's theories aimed to attain a stability within the economy and government. Marx's theory, Marxism, assumed that capitalism would falter because the proletariat would no longer stand for industrial exploitation.   As a result the Proletariat would revolt and take over the government and industrial production.  Proletarians, following their revolution, would produce a self-sufficient economy and they would manufacture all of what they need within a Socialist system. A socialist system is the first step to eliminate socio-economic classes. Over time, they would become a classless society due to the wearing down of societal barriers to form a more extreme form of Socialism, Communism. The poor no longer get exploited because they share the same socio-economic level as industrialists.
http://historyguide.org/intellect/marx.html

  In contrast, with Smith's theory a capitalist society operates with no government.  Thus, the theory was a natural phenomenon that modeled free markets and capitalism through a rivalry for scarce resources. Smith assumed that people try to augment their own goods to become wealthier. By doing that through trade and entrepreneurship, society as a whole would be best off. There's no "visible hand" directing companies in Smith's theory. Smith's theory benefited the poor because eventually when prices dropped it could be available to more people and  the poor would be able to afford what they wanted to buy.


http://www.newrepublic.com/book/review/adam-smith-nicholas-phillipson

I think that Marx's theory is a better solution because it would be a classless society and people wouldn't have to worry about whose making more or whose making less. Also, with Marx's theory the government would provide everyone what they needed and so there would be no competition to who has it better. With Marxism society is a better place because everyone's power is equivalent.

here are links to videos to learn more about Karl Marx and Adam Smith
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulyVXa-u4wE&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16IMc5mhbZk&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqMK3LmHPZs&feature=youtu.be

Was Napoleon's impact a good one or nah?

Many people looked at Napoleon as an influential figure. In a document called The Lost Voices of 
Napoleonic Historians, a historian describes Napoleon as a great ruler, "He was the greatest genius of his time," she wrote, adding, "perhaps of all time, yet he lacked the crown of greatness -- that high wisdom born of reflection and introspection which knows its own powers and limitations, and never abuses them; that fine sense of proportion which holds the rights of others in the same solemn reverence which it demands for its own."


Napoleon Bonaparte had an influential impact on France as well as the rest of Europe. With his superior rule he was able to change the country politically, socially and economically. Napoleon’s biggest impact occurred through military and political innovations. Changes in this area are because he had control over countries such as Belgium, Egypt, France, Rhineland, Holland and many other countries. With his power, he had the authority to change how countries were run. A major change was the introduction of a new government system called meritocracy, a way of ruling that appointed a leader based on their ability to lead and their knowledge instead of their social class and their past kinns. This system complies with the change in the social economy that Napoleon imposed because it exploited nobility and brought focus to the common man.

Napoleon positively impacted social systems by making all treated and valued equally. To achieve that, he extradited serfdom and got rid of nobility power which ensured the common people of France an improved life. The majority of the people in France supported this new system, except for the high class nobles. The high class nobles were upset with this new system because their power decreased. Madame de Stael was a nobility member and a daughter of King Louis XVI’s former financial adviser. In a document I read she describes her opinion on the new social system. She says, "His system was to encroach daily upon France's liberty and Europe's independce." She disagrees with Napoleon’s system because she loses her power. On the other hand, a man named Michel Marshall Rey benefits from the new system because he was an officer who served for Napoleon. Rey describes Napoleon as an "immoral legend." He benefited from Napoleon's ruling because he gained power and had the ear of France. Napoleon gained both military and political power through appealing to the masses of people.


Napoleon also made enormous economic improvements. He expanded trade throughout the many countries he conquered. He also built many new canals and roads. This benefited the people because it allowed for a faster flow of trade throughout the countries, creating more revenue. Another way he stimulated and enhanced the economic system was through tariffs outside of Europe where he was able to get products for better trade. Along with trade he was able to balance France’s budget.  All of these accomplishments increased revenue for France. 


The Lost Voices of  Napoleonic Historians
http://www.napoleon-series.org/research/biographies/c_historians.html

http://www.mrodenberg.com/category/corsica/

Document sources: Ten Years of exile by Madame de Stael and The French Revolution and Napoleon:An eye witness history by Joe H. Kringberger


Friday, October 3, 2014

The MOSI is a all about being industrialized


    My history class had the opportunity to video chat with two men from the MOSI  meusem which stands for meusem of science and industry. Before the video chat, we prepared ourselves by exploring the MOSI website as a class. The website provided information on the types of exhibits in the meusem and industrilized mechines. Also,the class watched a video titled, "Jamie is our explainer." While watching the video the class kept a list of key words that were said throughout the video.  some key words were draw frame, speed frames, power loom and slubbing.  After listing these key terms groups looked up the definition to them. Doing these activities helped the class come up with topic questions to ask the men that worked in the factory for the live  video chat.



    While men from the factory were video chatting the class I learned  a lot about the evolution of textile from the 1700s through the 1990s. There was a hudge amount of improvement  for producing cotton. For example, when families were working in thier homes it took them up to a week to produce the cotton while in the factories it took 20 minutes. Although the process was faster it was a dangerous process. Factory accidents happened very often. In the video chat Jamie, the historian, mentioned how if a bell on a mechine snapped children had to replace it and if a light child was to replace they they easily got lift up because the were so light. A lot if times children's arms or legs would get caught in the machines.
    Children and women worked very hard in the factories. Ladies and children made thread on the spinning wheel. The children would brush the fibers into a straight line into the right direction while also trying to pick fibers. If they were distracted they could easily mess up which would be bad because them the got punished. A punishment that I thought was harsh that Jamie mentioned was that they would strap children to a mechine so that they wouldn't run away. Another thing that caused accidentes were when children had to crawl under mechines to pick up thread. For example the cabin engine was a type of mechine and children would fix the thread so that they went into the right direction. If a the children  Essex up or missed a thread they would be finned. Also, some children had to crawl under the mechine to pick up thread but had to be quick because there were carriages that went back and forth under the mechine. Some positive impacts the factory had on family and children were that they produced cotton faster and they didn't have to worry about their look being broken because they were at factories. Some negative impacts were the factory accidents and how factories punished the children.
    Overall, I enjoyed the video chat. I thought it was cool how a actual historian showed the class around the meusem through video chat. Also, I learned a lot of suprising information like how in Manchester, there were no birth certificates so some children were sent to the factories to work before the factory working age. The only thing that I disliked about the video chat was sometimes, the connection was poor in parts if the factory so I wouldn't be able to hear Jamie. I definitely recommend the live video chat in the future for a different unit or lesson because I learned a lot of interesting facts .
    This a picture of an industrialized machine from www.thehistoryofenglish.com/history_late_modern.html


Don't mess with thier money!



The Industrial Revolution was a time when new machines were being invented. Mostly women and children worked in the factories. There were boarding houses that provided young women a temporary job but they had to work in the factory. In the 1800s during the Industrial Revolution young women would be convinced to go work in the Lowell mills. The way they convinced the young women and their families were through the Lowell experiment. This experiment was an industrial project that tried to avoid the negative aspects of industrialization in England. This project was successful because it was a way to persuade girls to come to Lowell  mills so the owners  could maintain mortality and dignity of temporary workers. The project would emphasize family dynamic because there was a mother and father figure in the boarding house. The mother figure was the boardinghouse keeper and he regulated outside behavior when the girls were on breaks or on their day off. The father figure was the corporation and he would set the rules. The girls had church on Sunday and had a curfew of 10. Also the girls couldn't date or hang out with boys. The project was successful and went well for a while because it was a safe place for young women.

The Lowell experiment created less work for young women especially with the new transportation that was invented during this time. There were many benefits of this experiment. The girls were able to make extra money to send home and help their family. They had freedom from their families but not so much where they were able to do anything they wanted. Also the girls experienced a new way of living while in the boarding house and the job was only temporary 
so they went back home when the job was over and didn't have to worry much about being away from their family for long. Although there were many benefits there were also cost of the girls working in Lowell mills. It was expensive to live in the boardinghouse and they girls worked long hours. Working at the factory put some girls at risk for injury and the rules of the boardinghouse were very strict so they limited the girls' freedom. Even though there were many benefits of working in Lowell mills there were also costs. 

In the beginning of the Lowell project, conditions were fair  but later there were opportunity restrictions on the young womens' working life. This was because the girls were only females and they were predicted to obey any rules that was set. In Frank Leslie's illustrated newspaper written on March 17, 1860 read, " The first Lowell 'turn-out' or strike, took place in 1834, when owners announced a 15% wage cut." After a while, the young women wages were cut by their owner but the owners still tried to increase productions in the factory. In reaction to this, about 800 girls went on strike through Lowell. The owners quickly replaced the girls as it says in the newspaper, " From the surrounding countryside, and the strike was defeated." The girls strike didn't succeed  at first because it wasn't  a proper way to start a strike.  Two years later in 1836, the owners attempted to force the young women to pay higher prices for the rooms and to board. In the article it says, "After several weeks, most owners conceded the rates and re-adjusted the boarding rates." The women succeed with this strike  because they were more experienced,educated, and organized . After that strike most of the owners made changes and made boarding prices the same again.





By Hammer and Hand All Arts Do Stand.”
The artisan’s symbol adorns an announcement in New York’s General Trades’ Union newspaper,The Union, calling for a demonstration to support union tailors convicted of conspiracy in 1836.