The History of Burial and Funeral Customs

The history of funeral service is a history of mankind. Funeral customs are as old as civilization itself. Every culture and civilization attends to the proper care of their dead. Every culture and civilization ever studied has three things in common relating to death and the disposition of the dead: Some type of funeral rites, rituals, and ceremonies; A sacred place for the dead and Memorialization of the dead. In the beginning, early humans would drop the dead into a hole and cover it with a stone. Some of the dead's possessions may have been placed with the body. Prehistoric humans also might purposely bury their dead in a shallow hole with a heavy stone to prevent the dead from coming back to life. It is believed that between 20,000 and 75,000 years ago, Neanderthals began to bury their dead. Evidence of many of our contemporary customs appears at Neanderthal sites. At Iraq's Sharindar Cave, for example, flowers were left with a burial. Personal effects accompany other burials. The first cities may have been cities of the dead, complexes of grave mounds whose walls were adapted to other purposes. Saxons, which were skilled at digging, buried their dead. The more important the person, the more dirt was piled on top of their grave. These graves were called barrows. Some of the earliest tombs were made in Egypt ,China, and Rome. In Egypt, the dead were wrapped in linen and the pharaohs were buried in huge pyramids.

The earliest known burial ritual is the planting of the deceased that is believed to be for later renewal. In Sumer, the King such as A-Bar-gi, insisted that their advisors and other personal servants join them in the afterlife. While in Egypt the pharaohs substituted statues for the living servants. Many ancient people recognized the burial ground's potential for spreading disease and placed their cemeteries outside their cities or took other precautions. Followers of Zoroaster, known as Parsees, built their Towers of Silence within city walls. Here they exposed their dead. Elaborate drains and charcoal filters purified the rainwater that dribbled off within these towers. Vultures cleaned the bones of the flesh which would otherwise attract maggots and other disease vectors.

Early Christians, who had grown used to spending their religious lives hiding among the dead in the catacombs, forgot the importance of hygienic measures. The dead were often stacked high in churches. Church burial yards were often covered over several times to make room for successive layers of corpses. In the Middle ages and Victorian times, the dead were buried just around the churches. This caused many problems, however. First, these burial plots had limited space, causing the churches to sell the graves multiple times. Any number of corpses might be buried together in a hole only a few feet deep. After the bodies were stuffed into the shallow holes, plagues rose through the soil and infected most people going to mass and the children playing in the areas around the churches. Also, before burial, the valuables were often stolen off the body. Later laws were passed making it illegal to bury bodies less than six feet under the soil, but not after thousands of people were killed from the spreading plagues. Tombstones were first used in this time, most of which depicted death and skeletons. Some time after the law was passed, body snatchers began stealing bodies from their graves to be used in medical research. These people had found a loophole in the laws, and what they did was not officially illegal. The church yards quickly filled and the dead were buried in areas just outside the cities. As cities expanded, the cemeteries would end up in the middle of cities as an area where nature could flourish.

Humans have also long marked graves and commemorated their dead. Stones were used to prevent wild animals despoiling the gravesite. Later, seashells, tools, beads, clothing and other items were piled atop the grave or buried with the dead and funereal rites began. The ancient societies of Egypt, China, and others are particularly noteworthy for their funeral customs, the building of elaborate tombs, and the development of unique types of funerary art and sculpture. When you think of Egypt, the images of mummies, elaborate pyramid tombs, hieroglyphic paintings, and other death-related objects immediately come to mind. The ancient Romans interred their dead in niches beneath the city in what are known as the Catacombs. In fact, studies of all human civilizations reveal that, to some degree or other, they have developed some ritual customs for dealing with death and with the remains of their dead. These include mound building, cremation, launching the dead out to sea in boats, sacrifices (human and otherwise), body painting, hair cutting, keening and wailing, erecting huts or tomb buildings, placing simple or elaborate markers at the death and/or burial site, and a wide variety of other customs. European cultures developed in similar fashion. Pictorial images have been used to commemorate death, with a wide variety of images used. Religious symbols and icons were used and perpetuated by the various sects. Other images came into use during less than cheerful circumstances. The death's head and the dancing skeleton, for instance, became common representations for life's brevity during the epidemics of the plague in Europe. As the centuries passed, more and more graphic representations came into use. During the Victorian era in both Europe and the United States, exceedingly elaborate tombs, gravestone carvings, statuary, funerary clothing and other paraphernalia evolved to commemorate the dead. They also allowed the living to share their sorrow and mourning with one another and for posterity. And entire cemeteries, planned as rural recreational parks, were developed.

Funeral Rites and Customs, observances connected with death and burial. Not only are they deeply associated with religious beliefs about the nature of death and the existence of an afterlife, but they also have important psychological, sociological, and symbolic functions for the survivors. Thus, the study of the ways in which the dead are treated in different cultures leads to a better understanding of the many diverse views about death and dying, as well as of human nature. Funerary rites and customs are concerned not only with the preparation and disposal of the body, but also with the well-being of the survivors and with the persistence of the spirit or memory of the deceased. In all societies, the human body is prepared in some fashion before it is finally laid to rest. Today, washing the body, dressing it in special garments, and adorning it with ornaments, religious objects, or amulets are common procedures. Sometimes the feet are tied together—possibly to prevent the ghost of the deceased from wandering about. The most thorough treatment of the body is embalming which probably originated in ancient Egypt. The Egyptians believed that in order for the soul to pass into the next life, the body must remain intact; hence, to preserve it, they developed the procedures of mummification The purpose of embalming in the United States is to prevent mourners from confronting the process of putrefaction.

The various methods used for disposal of the body are linked to religious beliefs, climate and geography, and social status.

Burial is associated with ancestor worship or beliefs about the afterlife; cremation is sometimes viewed as liberating the spirit of the deceased. Exposure, another widespread practice, may be a substitute for burial in Arctic regions; among the Parsis (followers of an ancient Persian religion) it has religious significance. Less common are water burial (such as burial at sea); sending the corpse to sea in a boat (a journey to ancestral regions or to the world of the dead); and cannibalism (a ceremonial act to ensure continued unity of the deceased with the tribe). The actual funeral—conveying the deceased to the place of burial, cremation, or exposure—also provides an occasion for ritual. In Hinduism the procession to the place of cremation is led by a man carrying a firebrand. The mourners at one point walk around the bier; in former times among some groups, a widow was expected to throw herself onto the burning pyre of her husband . Finally, the cremated remains are deposited in a sacred river. In ancient Greece, Egypt, and China, servants were sometimes buried with their masters. This form of human sacrifice was based on the belief that in the afterworld the deceased continued to need their services.

Fear of death, and to be in awe of it, inspired many peoples from this Neanderthal to modern man. We follow the same 3 customs all the way to the present. Today however, we have devolved, evolved religions, and most people subscribe to one or the other. These religions all seem to have their own set of burial and remembrance guidelines, and some are very elaborate indeed!________________________________________________________________________

Sources:

Funeral customs. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.alsirat.com/silence/history.html

Burial customs. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.sacred-texts.com/etc

Death. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.spiritandsky.com/death-and-funeral

Braudel's Conception of TIME

The writing of history all depends on how the historian will be able to explain and recreate the past. Amongst the past philosophers that I am able to do readings on, Braudel might as well be of those who sparked my interest. History writing as we know is not just about narration or recreation of the past but it has always had an overtone underlying those events. There must be in one way or another reason for an event to happen. When we mean history writing, one of the more familiar schools was the Annales School, which was founded in 1929 by Marc Bloch and Lucien Febvre, where Braudel based his principles.


His essay On History is his take on the Annales School having the imprint of structuralism. For Braudel, history is not just the retelling of the before and the after of an event but also the understanding of the nature of society by carefully examining its structure. When we say structure what he means is the stretches of time that the event has happened and with all its institutions, culture and practices. He tried to examine the development of the society that does not occur at a steady rate but rather in a span of time -- the span of time that can be short or can last for centuries or even thousands of years. These have something to do with three principal time span of historical analysis.


The first of this time span is the history of the event. By this, we mean the events that have happened over a very short period of time. This span of time usually focuses on the events that however short has caused such an effect on the society like the Great Wars, events in politics, and also the study of the individuals who were a\major players in this events. It focuses on the major events that we can actually write a narrative on because it has a beginning, middle and an end. What makes this sort of history interesting is that even if it is short, there’s a dramatic twist to it. There are personalities who evolved out of those events. There’s a particular change that has happened over a very short span of time. Historians usually consider this as traditional history and that it may be from five to seven years or as short as one year.


The second time span would have to be that of the conjuncture. The conjuncture on the other hand is an intermediate time span. It runs around 20 or 50 years and might as well be cyclical because it studies the normal cycles. Economic history, the history of technology can be considered as a part of this life span. There are certain aspects of the society that happens on a cycle. If we are going to study it, an event has happened before. It followed a certain age. We might include the history of science and talk about the age of Galilee, Newton and Einstein. They are all in a conjunctural level in that one follows the other. So in a sense, conjuncture is much deeper than history of the event because it attempts to explain the mind frame of hwy those things happen.


The third one is history and the longue duree or long duration is the longest because it is measured in centuries or even thousands of years. This is the deepest and the most profound. Because the time span is some 100 – 500 years, the longue duree covers even the history of civilizations itself, the geographical history of a nation, the wars and how they relate to one another as sort of a wave of conflicts. The changes may be slow or gradual but there is unity in some way. The pace being so slow that it covers an immense stretch of time and space. But there’s a sense of richness studying these events. It focuses not just on the event by itself but rather the thematic approach to it. The transformation is slow but the collective thought is there.



Now, the three time spans basically differs but they are still about the study of the humanity and of how mankind stepped up and change over time or became stagnant in some way. There is what Braudel calls a structure that is a pattern of relationships between man and the institutions and entities. There’s a particular behavior for a specific time frame. And from these behaviors we can make a model of these structures. Braudel was also able to mention three relatively rigorous uses of language for the recreation of the past. These he calls the language of necessary facts where there is a model, contingent facts where there is some sort of a hypothesis and no exceptions and the last being the language of conditioned facts where there is a theoretical model of strategies and outcomes.

The three time span is an obvious showing that history can happen at different rhythms or different pace. We may have different approach to the study of history but as always we talk about the event, the people, and the relationship of these events to us and how it has affected our lives. Lucien Febvre said to have repeated and I quote “History, science of the past, science of the present.” I would have to quip that this explains Braudel. History no matter how short or how long is the time span that has happened is still history. It covers all the ages and the entire time span and along with it the story of humanity. The story of all our struggles, all our victories and how each one of us was able to survive the change.

____________________________________________________________________

Sources:

Braudel, F. (1982). On history. (S. Matthews, Trans.).

University of Chicago. (Original work published 1969).

Staloff, D. (1995). The search for a meaningful past philosophies, theories and interpretations.

NY: The Teaching Co.

Annales School. Retrieved October 14 2008 from http://www.wikipedia.com/ Annales

The Black Death

The work of William McNeill “Plague and People” is an attempt to explain the past through a sort of biological means. It is in some way an explanation of historical event by taking a look at the influence of nature. McNeill is a naturalist and that he considers the environment as a big factor in history. It’s a naturalistic approach to the study of history. If we examine closely the work of McNeill, we might be able to get the idea that human beings and the history of humans is in a way related to the environment and that we play a role.


The Black Death is one example of how a civilization or a society can be swept away by an epidemic. If McNeill’s argument is correct, a certain society will adapt to it but certain parts of the population will definitely be gone. It had caused millions of death. The Black Death seems to have arisen somewhere in Asia and was brought to Europe from the Genoese trading station of Kaffa in the Crimea (in the Black Sea). The story goes that the Mongols were besieging Kaffa when a sickness broke out among their forces and compelled them to abandon the siege. The Mongol commander loaded a few of the sick dead onto his catapults and hurled them into the town. Some of the merchants left Kaffa for Constantinople as soon as the Mongols had departed, and they carried the plague with them. It spread from Constantinople along the trade routes, causing tremendous mortality along the way.


The disease was transmitted primarily by fleas and rats. The stomachs of the fleas were infected with bacteria known as Y. Pestis. The bacteria would block the "throat" of an infected flea so that no blood could reach its stomach, and it grew ravenous since it was starving to death. It would attempt to suck up blood from its victim, only to transfer it back into its prey's bloodstreams. The blood it injected back, however, was now mixed with Y. Pestis. Infected fleas infected rats in this fashion, and the other fleas infesting those rats were soon infected by their host's blood. They then spread the disease to other rats, from which other fleas were infected, and so on. As their rodent hosts died out, the fleas migrated to the bodies of humans and infected them in the same fashion as they had the rats, and so the plague spread. The disease appeared in three forms:bubonic [infection of the lymph system -- 60% fatal]; pneumonic which can be through a respiratory infection -- about 100% fatal], and septicaemic which the infection of the blood and probably 100% fatal].

The plague lasted in each area only about a year, but a third of a district's population would die during that period. People tried to protect themselves by carrying little bags filled with crushed herbs and flowers over their noses, but to little effect. Those individuals infected with bubonic would experience great swellings ("bubos" in the Latin of the times) of their lymph glands and take to their beds. Those with septicaemic would die quickly, before any obvious symptoms had appeared. Those with respiratory also died quickly, but not before developing evident symptoms: a sudden fever that turned the face a dark rose color, a sudden attack of sneezing, followed by coughing, coughing up blood, and death. The disease finally played out in Scandinavia in about 1351but another wave of the disease came in 1365 and several times after that until -- for some unknown reason -- the Black Death weakened and was replaced by waves of typhoid fever, typhus, or cholera. Europe continued to experience regular waves of such mortality until the mid-19th century.

What did the society do the control the plague and how has it affected the population? The effects of that plague and its successors on the men and women of medieval Europe were profound: new attitudes toward death, the value of life, and of one's self. It kindled a growth of class conflict, a loss of respect for the Church, and the emergence of a new pietism (personal spirituality) that profoundly altered European attitudes toward religion. Still another effect, however, was to kindle a new cultural vigor in Europe, one in which the national languages, rather than Latin, were the vehicle of expression.

These were natural disasters, but they were made all the worse by the inability of the directing elements of society, the princes and clergy, to offer any leadership during these crises. In the next few lectures we will examine the reasons for their failure to do so. The 14th century became an era of catastrophes. Some of them man-made, such as the Hundred Years' War and the Great Schism. These were caused by human beings. But the Black Death caused millions of deaths, and had in its way demonstrated a dramatic fashion the existence of new vulnerabilities in Western European society. The plague subjected the population of medieval Europe to tremendous strains, leading many people to challenge old institutions and doubt traditional values, and, by so doing, these calamities altered the path of European development in many areas.

____________________________________________________________________


Sources:

Black Death. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.wikipedia.com/black death

Great famine. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from ttp://www.vlib.us/medieval/lectures/black_death

McNeill, W.H. (1998). Plagues and peoples. New York: Anchor Books.

PLagues and People

The work of William McNeill “Plague and People” is an attempt to explain the past through a sort of biological means. It is in some way an explanation of historical event by taking a look at the influence of nature. McNeill is a naturalist and that he considers the environment as a big factor in history. It’s a naturalistic approach to the study of history. If we examine closely the work of McNeill, we might be able to get the idea that human beings and the history of humans is in a way related to the environment and that we play a role. There is a sort of ecological niche that we are to find. Humans play a link between environments. There is a continuum or a series of things that humans should play his part so as not to break the series. From this, we will find that even the littlest of the organisms like the parasites play a role. These parasites that live off another organism are related to humans. This relationship is a balance between the micro and macro parasitism that humans tend to work in between. Let us take a look between the so-called macro and micro parasitism


Micro parasitism according to McNeill (1998) is an organism that is a parasite on us. This might include organisms that are inside us feeding on the nutrients that we are taking in. Macro parasitism on the other hand is when we talk about parasitism in a very large scale. In history, it might mean the physical or feeding in some way like abuse of authority to gain more. That is parasitism. But there should always be an equilibrium or balance. Parasites who have had enough that the host is destroyed or can no longer provide would mean destruction or even death. The parasite then will die off. McNeill means this in history to be that sort of abuse that can destroy a society. This became an epidemic because it came to a point that the host is destroyed. On the other hand, if it is just stable we call it endemic.


Humans can be considered the greatest parasite. We have the knowledge that we can think of ways to destroy and hunt even the fiercest creatures that thrive on earth. From the beginning man has been a threat to every species that ever existed. Even to their kind. Man has been ruling since the beginning and it has destroyed quite a number of species along with it are the parasites that live within those species. But what about those parasites that can live on those that humans need for survival and thus humans took care off? We destroyed a great number of small animals to do farming and in so doing killing some plants and animals that once live in the unplowed land.


The growth of population has a lot to do with trying to balance the ecosystem. There are three things that would result from the growth. First is are diseases because the population expands and there are more hosts; second would be war due to conflicts and third would have to be famine because the society was able to consume too much to the point that the ecosystem can no longer provide nourishment. McNeill sees the relationship between these diseases, famine and war to the society. History has given us quite a number of examples of societies that disintegrated because of disease, famine and war. From these, we can say that a society can likely be affected by whatever is happening to the ecosystem. A certain disease can kill off an entire population. Trade and foreign relations of the ancient times had introduced to a certain place a disease unknowingly. What we learned from this epidemic is that human beings tend to adapt to it and battle it out. The method of quarantine would have to be the simplest way that humans battle out the spread of a disease. The advent of these diseases also caused much attention to religion and some belief. We find mystical religious movements that boast of healing.

What McNeill is trying to say is that if there is a sort of an unbalance in the society, it dies off. It can be due to the relationship between the players of the people of the community or a naturalistic approach to it; something might have happened that human beings were not able to react to it. The advent of the diseases upon a shore may sometime affect the delicate balance. Humans are sometimes caught in the middle of an epidemic that no matter how much we try to console it, we are caught by the fact that it is not in our hands anymore. A disease (viral or bacterial) that kills its victims before they can spread it to others tends to flare up and then die out, like a fire running out of fuel. A more resilient disease would establish an equilibrium, its victims living well beyond infection to further spread the disease. This function of the evolutionary process selects against quick lethality, with the most immediately fatal diseases being the most short-lived. Thus both diseases and populations tend to evolve towards an equilibrium in which the common diseases are non-symptomatic, mild, or manageably chronic. When a population that has been relatively isolated is exposed to new diseases, it has no inborn resistance to the new diseases (the population is "biologically naïve"); this body of people succumbs at a much higher rate, resulting in what is known as a "virgin soil" epidemic.

Civilizations thrive and flourish because of this balance. Some may die off because of parasitism within themselves or as a relationship to other beings. McNeill sees the natural method of things that influence history. I might agree with him. Humans have always been in complete struggle of controlling the environment but there are some things that he just might not be able to over turn. History is indeed a balance between all the factors of the society and there should be a relationship established amongst them.

____________________________________________________________________

Sources:

McNeill, W.H. (1998). Plagues and peoples. New York: Anchor Books.

Staloff, Darren (2000) “The search for a meaningful past,philosophies,theories, and
interpretation of human history”. New York: The Teaching Company

population history. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.wikipedia.com/population

The Chronicle of EDSA II

The EDSA Revolution of 2001 OR EDSA II, also called by the local media as EDSA II (pronounced as EDSA Dos or EDSA 2) or the Second People Power Revolution, is the common name of the four-day popular revolution that peacefully overthrew former president Estarda from January 17 - 20, 2001. He was succeeded by his then vice president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on Ocotber 04, 2001. Ilocos Sur Governor Chaivt Singson, a longtime friend of Estrada went public with accusations that Estrada, his family and friends received millions of pesos from operations of the illegal numbers game,jeuteng. What follows is a string of protests calling for the resignation of the President Joseph Estrada. Later, on January 20, 2001 Estrada and his family leave Malacañang Palace, smiling and waving to reporters and shaking hands with the remaining members of his Cabinet and other palace employees. He was placed under house arrest and eventually confined to his rest home in Sampaloc, a small village in Tanay, Rizal. The story however can be told in four different manners following Hayden’s White Metahistory and the use of emplotment.

ROMANCE

The story of EDSA 2 is the struggle of the many people who fought for the resignation of President Estrada. These were the 10 senators who tried to fought for it. A The day-to-day trial was covered on live Philippine television and received the highest viewing rating at the time. Another hero would be Clarissa OCampo, an ordinary person who tried to testify against the president and exposed herself to the dangers of assassination and being thrown out of jail for false accusation of the court is not going to side on her. Among the highlights of the trial was the testimony of Clarissa Ocampo, senior vice president of Equitable PCI Bank who testified that she was one foot away from Estrada when he signed the name "Jose Velarde" documents involving a P500 million investment agreement with their bank in February 2000.


TRAGEDY

The story of EDSA 2 is a tragedy. The country faced the greatest battle after the revolution and that is to resolve the conflict that divided the nation. Those who call for the resignation are faced with the challenge of proving that president Estrada is guilty of treason and the other charges against him. On the other hand, the pro-Estrada people marched the streets and held protests against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. The country then faced the tumultuous task of battling the effects of the revolt. What followed is more protest and the economy of the country was affected by it. Though foreign nations, including the United States immediately expressed recognition of the legitimacy of Arroyo's presidency, foreign commentators described the revolt as "a defeat for due process of law. The Pro-Estrada blamed EDSA 2 of having "inflicted a dent on Philippine democracy".


COMEDY


Former president Joseph Estrada has been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of plunder by the Sandiganbayan and has been sentenced to life imprisonment. At the same time, the anti-graft court ordered the freezing of Estrada’s accounts estimated at $87 million. Fears that a guilty verdict could trigger widespread street protests and possible riots in Manila seemed misplaced. Pro-Estrada activists staged scattered low-key demonstrations in the city of 12 million people but all were peaceful. The crowd was far smaller than the thousands predicted and riot police sent to guard against them snacked and chatted. Some sat down, their shields by their sides. But after being in detention for six and a half years, Estrada who is now 70, was granted an executive pardon by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on Thursday, just a month after he was sentenced to life imprisonment for abuse of power and plunder. In her decree, the president said Estrada was freed under the current administration's policy of releasing prisoners who had reached the age of 70. The six and a half years that he had already spent in detention during the trial was also taken into consideration.



SATIRE


The EDSA revolution is satirical because the heroes failed in their futile attempt to achieve what the preceding era failed according to their criteria. The country at the moment is facing the hardest times. We are faced with economic crisis that no matter what policy the hero, the current president, is doing it proved to not work that much. Estrada was charged with perjury but the country has been on the list of the most corrupt nations in Asia even after the so-called corrupt officials were gone. The country has been trying hard enough to move away from cronyism and the claws of dictatorship but we have our officials who might as well represent the traditional politicians of the past. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo failed in her attempt to win over the masses which had supported Estrada’s administration.

__________________________________________________________________________

Sources:

White, H. (1973). Metahistory: The historical imagination in nineteenth-century Europe. B

altimore: John Hopkins University.

EDSA Revolution. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.wikipedia.com/edsa 2

Hayden White and Metahistory

Hayden White and his take on Post- Structuralism is an attempt to explain the events of the past and that there is a nature to reality. In his work Metahistory, White was able to present history in different facets. There is historical thought for an event and that there is also a way to present it depending on the historians. A historical work is a verbal presentation of events. There is a sense a sort of poetic approach to it.

A historical work is of course poetically constructed. We reconstruct the past in a way that is understandable to the audience. Thus, we drop of some lines that are not as important as the event itself. It is poetic because we are in a way trying to make history as interesting as we want it to be. For White, every historical work takes the form of a narrative prose and I cannot oppose it. History is indeed, a narrative prose essay. To present history, we take a look at unprocessed history. We have documents, evidences, and all those that have something to do with the historical field that we are interested in. We may include in our study of the past, historical accounts. By carefully merging these issues – historical accounts, records and evidences – a historian can present it to an audience. By this, we mean the reader of the work. It will in some way affect the historical writing because the audience should be taken in to consideration. By this, we mean readership. So, history is not just the retelling of the past, it has to deal with a lot of elements and a lot of features. And that is not an easy task. Hayden White in his Metahistory was able to explain the more important elements on history writing. He mentioned five important elements and these are chronicle, story, motive emplotment, and motive argument and motive ideological implication.

The first element being the chronicle is the retelling of an event in a chronological manner. The second element of course is the story. In history, it is the event. Historical writing centers on an issue or an event and that is the story. The retelling will require a beginning, middle and an end. In between there are words such as first, then, finally, ultimately and those transition words differentiate a chronicle from a story. A chronicle is just a chronological timeline while history is different because it takes in a chronicle, put a motif and initiate the events. White mentioned four different modes of emplotment to be the third element. By emplotment, we mean of the manner that a certain story is presented. We have an event and it has a particular undertone or a mood. White mentions four emplotments and these are – romance, satire, comedy and tragedy. The first mode is romance. It is a straight forward narrative of a hero who won over adversity. This is the emplotment that tells us of a hero and how he was able to beat all the odds. It is a sense of spectacle of how a certain person became victorious after all those struggles and in the end he triumphed over all these. The second mode is tragedy satire which is the opposite of romance because it is the evil that has prevailed. This mode is an account of an event that has caused evil in some way. Then we have the third mode and that is comedy. By comedy, we have the adversities and the struggles but in the end, the conflict is resolved by reconciliation. It’s a happy ending. That no matter how painful the struggles have been, the end is always on a positive note. Now, the fourth mode is what we call as satire. Here, we mean that the hero or the antagonist for that matter faced struggles and fail. This shows that in history, the hero is not always victorious. There are struggles that a hero is not able to be victorious. It is tragic.

White’s four mode of emplotment is in itself already a great explanation. Besides these four emplotment, he was able to employ the so-called modes of arguments. These are explanatory techniques and also got four variations – formist, organicist, mechanist, contextualism.

Now, I will turn to the discussion of the four modes of argument. Formism has something to do with form. It is an idiographic take on the historian because it tells of an event and what makes it particularly interesting or different. There is always in some way a particular uniqueness to an event. Organicist on the other hand tells us of events that are probably separate but is seen as unified whole. Some events may be united in one or more of principles. We have the mechanist view that talks about the mechanisms or the elements that has to do with an event. The contextualist view on the other hand is about the context of the event or the contextual background of the event that is being examined.

White also employs the so-called motive of ideological implications in history writing. It is a reflection of ho an event affects life, an individual or even the civilization. By these we mean four ideologies – conservative that tells us that history evolves; liberal that is explains that a change in law or government would mean a change in the present state of affairs; radical that explains that only radical means can effect a change; and anarchist saying that the state is corrupt that a new community must pave the way for change.

To sum up, I see White as a great historian, a great narrative writer and a great philosopher. It is not easy to employ those means in historical writing but he was able to explain and note those mechanisms. As a historian, we can extract one event and make use of the four types of emplotment. There is a lot of method in the retelling of history but as always there is a reason behind the historians mind. His belief may quite be a form of an art but history is more than just writing but it includes explaining and trying to effect change. Over all his work is interesting with all its art and the method that he presented history. He was able to note some of the philosophers view and make an analysis of their works. I believe in so far as presentation and analysis is concerned, White was able to present history as a fun and light. I agree with him and I believe that White did a great job.

__________________________________________________________________

Sources:

Staloff, Darren (2000) “The search for a meaningful past,philosophies,theories, and
interpretation of human history”. New York: The Teaching Company.

White, H. (1973). Metahistory: The historical imagination in nineteenth-century Europe.

Baltimore: John Hopkins University.

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

According to Carl Hempel history can be explained through a general law just like the sciences. A general law is a universal conditional proposition. It says something absolutely without exception and that always takes the form of a condition. If we get this first condition we will get that afterwards. There is a connection of cause and event through that conditional nexus. It produces an effect because of the conditions.

Hempel got a simple law that can be read as A Set of events such as C1, C2 and C3 can cause an event known as E. To further understand what Hempel means I would like to use the French Revolution as an example. The French Revolution (1789–1799) was a period of political and social upheaval in the history of FRance. Then, it is our E.


What causes the E? What is the cause of the French Revolution which are the C’s? C1 would have to be political factor and that is the change in structure of the government. Politics controls the entire society at the time and a change in the structure of the government from absolute monarchy to some other form caused widespread division. C2 would have to be the economic factor including the growth of population causing widespread famine. C3 would have to be the social factors such as the struggle of the masses causing some sort of social upheaval. What are the laws that will prove that our C1, C2 and C3 will cause the E?


In politics, whenever there is a change in government what follows are social upheavals. Our C1 had the law that “evils of society arose from defective social institutions, and that there was more than enough wealth for all, if it were only distributed equally” (Malthusian Theory) which means that the government of the time being a monarchy was not able to provide for the needs of the people and thus the constituents called for another form of government. As always, the conflicting interest of those that are supporting the present state will go head to head with the ideas of the new system. During the revolution, the supporters of absolute monarchy were battling against the Enlightenment and its ideas of nationalism and equality.


The C2 or economic factors as always is one of the most influential events to cause a revolution. According to Adam Smith “increase of population among the poorer classes is checked by scarcity of subsistence.” The poor people not being able to suffice for their needs would resort to other means and cause social upheaval. Malthus also stressed that “population if unchecked grows at a proportionate rate (1..2..4..8..16..32) while food only increases at an arithmetic rate (1..2..3..4..5..6).” The population rate at the time was increasing and the people were not able to produce food supply to provide for their increasing number.


The C3 or the social factors are the struggle of the masses. According to Karl Marx, there is always a struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie that will caused a certain kind of movement. During the French revolution, the masses held up arms to battle the nobles. The Marxists view the entire period (there were numerous revolts led by different groups) as one inseparable and inevitable process that represented the decisive stage between feudalism and capitalism . The Revolution ultimately occurred because of a growing discrepancy between public pretension and economic reality. In the Old Regime, land ownership was the basis of privileged position the nobility enjoyed. This arrangement became increasingly obsolete because of the rise of commerce gave rise to the numbers and economic power of the bourgeoisie. The aristocratic landed order still retained social predominance despite economic eclipse. Although still dominant in virtually every aspect of society, the nobles resented the growing influence of the bourgeoisie and wished to stifle the lower classes


I will agree with Hempel but I also would like to stress that not all laws will apply to a particular event because history is always is unique in some way. It is not always the same. It is changing and we cannot predict the outcome of an event by using a law. It is not like science where one leads to another. History is not.

____________________________________________________________________

Sources:

Staloff, D. (1995). The search for a meaningful past philosophies,
theories and interpretations. NY: The Teaching Co.

Hempel, C.G. (1942). The function of general laws in history. In
The Journal of Philosophy, 39, 35-48.

French Revolution. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from
http://www.wikipedia.com/ French revolution


French Revolution. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.conservapedia.com/French_Revolution


Theories of population. Retrieved Oct 20, 2008 from.http://www.newadvent.org/theories


Malthus. Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.wikipedia.com/malthus

THE SECOND WORLD WAR

The Second World War as it came to be known later on was the largest war in history fought between September 1939 and September 1945. The war was not a single unitary conflict blown out of proportions in one single event. It was n reality a number of different wars gradually drawing the world’s major powers between 1939 and 1941.How did the closing of World War I set the stage for World War II?


Germany took a major role in World War I. After the war, the nation is still a powerhouse and still got some grievances towards its imperial rivals in the region. Since, Germany was not physically occupied in the First World War it did bear the same burden as the other nations. Its infrastructure remained intact because no army occupied German soil. What followed was a country that is gradually gaining power and posing a threat to the European balance of power. But it had lost considerably a large tract of land to Lithuania, France and Poland, notable losses includes the Polish Corridor and the Danzig granted to Poland after the Versailles Treaty of 1919. The result of this loss of land was population relocation, bitterness among Germans, and also difficult relations with those in these neighboring countries.


The German demand for the return of Danzig and part of the Polish ‘corridor but Poland refused to agree to their demands. On September 1, 1939 overwhelming German forces launched the Polish campaign and invaded Poland. Britain and France had guaranteed Polish sovereignty, and in honor of that pledge first demanded that German forces withdraw but the diplomatic approach did not work and so the 3rd of September they declared war against Germany. The immediate cause of World War II would have to be the invasion of Poland by German forces. Britain and France had previously warned that they would honor their alliances to Poland and issued an ultimatum to Germany: withdraw or war would be declared. Germany declined, and World War II began.


This global conflict split the majority of the world's nation into two opposing military alliances: the Allies and the Axis Powers. The underlying dominance of these major powers caused the entire world to take sides. The Axis Powers were the three main countries of the Second World War: Italy, Germany, and Japan. A number of other nations also briefly joined the Axis Powers. Together, these powers managed to take control of other nations. A number of nations joined the Axis, often under pressure, including Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Thailand, and Yugoslavia. The Axis Powers also bolstered themselves with an assortment of puppet states: Imperial Japan in particular had a number of puppet states which it used to control much of Southeast Asia, including governments in Burma, Vietnam, and Inner Mongolia. Iraq and Finland both cooperated with the Axis Powers, offering resources, land, and expertise, although they signed no formal agreements. In opposition to the Axis Powers were the Allied Powers: the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, assisted by a number of other nations including Australia, Canada, Norway, Belgium, and a range of South American countries. What follows are a string of wars that had cost millions of lives and properties.

Some of the most significant wars would include the Russo-Finish War when Finland was defeated by Russia; the Blitzkrieg invasion of France when the German forces swept through Netherlands and Belgium; the Battle of Britain and the North African campaign where the Allies defeated Italian and German forces, the Battle of Stalingrad and the Normandy Campaigns when the Allies steadily advance winnings over the Axis Powers. The pattern of the war resembled a tidal flow. Until the end of 1942 the armies and navies of the Axis continually extended their power through Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Pacific. Toward the end of 1942 the tide turned. The Allies won decisive victories in each theater. The World was enraged by the war where battles happen at sea, on land and even on air. By the end of 1944, Allied victory in Europe began to seem all but imminent, but a number of obstacles still stood in the way. Hitler's scientists had developed the V2 rocket, precursor of modern missiles, and Germany fired several of them against England. The Allies, meanwhile, relentlessly bombed German cities, bringing the Reich to its knees. The Battle of the Bulge in the Ardennes forest in December 1944 was the later major Axis offensive in Europe. The Axis Powers were losing.

With the Soviets surrounding Berlin, Hitler on April 30, 1945, committed suicide in his bunker with his mistress, Eva Braun. Two days earlier, Mussolini and his mistress, captured by Italian resistance fighters, had been shot. The Germans surrendered to the Allies on May 7. The Allied declared victory over Europe. In the Pacific, the surrender of Japan is inevitable. Instead of invading Japan, The Americans unleashed the result of the Manhattan project and had dropped the first atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima and the second one on Nagasaki. The nation surrendered and so the Second World War ended with the defeat of all of the belligerent Axis Powers.

___________________________________________________________________________

SOURCES:

World War II. Retrieved October 15, 2008 from http://www.wiki.answers.com

World War II. Retrieved October 15, 2008 from http://www.history.com/minisites/worldwartwo -

Axis Powers. Retrieved October 15, 2008 from http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/World_War_II

Allied Powers. Retrieved October 15, 2008 from http://www.wiki.answers.com

.

THE BETRAYAL OF BENEDICT ARNOLD

On September 21, 1870, the British warship Vulture slipped up the Hudson River taking a British major to a secret meeting that could change the entire course of the American Revolution. It was moonless and windy as the sloop anchored on the west bank near Stony Point, and a boat set out from the shore. A few minutes later, John Andre – adjutant general to Sir Henry Clinton, one of the British Commanders rowed ashore.

As soon as he reached the land, he was taken to a secret spot surrounded by fir trees. There he met General Benedict Arnold, the commander of the vital riverside post of WestPoint. Andre came ashore in full uniform near Havestraw. The two officers had already exchanged letters in which Benedict promised to surrender WestPoint if the money and terms were right.

At the time the 39-year-old Arnold was one of General George Washington’s most trusted men. It was 1870 and he had just taken up his new post as the Commander of WestPoint. By the time, he was already siding with the British and had been having secret correspondence with Sir Henry Clinton. Why would a person of such a stature side with the British during the time of the revolution? What brought Arnold to deny his being a patriot and became a traitor? It may probably be because of the past experiences he had.

Born on January 14, 1741 in Norwich, Connecticut, he had been a rebellious boy, and at the age of 14 had run away from home to fight in the French Indian War. After serving some time, he deserted and made his own way back to the wilderness. The army forgave him because of his youth. In 1775, on the outbreak of the revolution, he joined the colonial forces. He became a part of the “Green Mountain Boys” that took over Fort Ticonderoga in New York. Later, he took part in the unsuccessful siege of Maine and Quebec. His leg was broken in the battle but his courage gained him promotion as brigadier general.

After this brilliant start to his military career, his fortune went in to a nose dive. In 1777 – after being acquitted of charges of misconduct in Canada – he was disappointed when the Congress appointed five new major generals, all younger than himself. However, he came back victorious when he was credited for the capture of the invading army of General John Burgoyne of the British army. In 1778, Washington gave him command of the city of Philadelphia.

His career sea sawed once more after his marriage with his second wife Peggy Shippen, a beautiful society girl. He lived extravagantly and found himself in debt. He probably thought that he will receive credit for his military exploits and so he lived a lavish life. But things went different. Instead, he soon fell out of the state executive council which brought eight charges against him – including the use of military personnel as personal servants.

The charges were presented to Congress in 1779. Four of them were thrown out. Arnold demanded a speedy trial to deal with the remaining counts but the court martial did not convene until December. He probably thought that the delays were wrong and that it brought injustice to a man who has served the military and had been very good at it. Always a sensitive person, he probably saw this as a motive to side with the British. So he did enter a secret deal with them.

He was acquitted of all his wrong doings but General Washington reprimanded him that might as well be the reason for him to decide on his next move. He asked to be given command of the West Point and General Washington agreed. He took up his post in August 1780.

Having been in debt and having had several blows on his military career, he probably had the resentment about serving the Americans. Thus, when he was approached by the British, Arnold was already receptive to abandoning the patriot cause. He demanded £20,000 and a commission as a major general in the British army for giving up West Point.

And so on, September 21, Major Andre and Arnold met to finalize the agreement. Unfortunately for them, the Vulture then came under American fire and headed away, leaving Andre stranded. Andre donned civilian clothes as Arnold may have wanted it. Arnold was however to wrought up considering that the gesture turned Andre into a spy and would mean execution of caught. Andre headed down the Hudson with a safe conduct pass from Arnold but he was captured by three militiamen, who turned him over to the commander at North Castle. He was arrested as a spy carrying incriminating papers. When Arnold was notified at breakfast on April 23 that a British officer had been captured, he fled by boat to the Vulture. Andre was later hung as a spy on October 2, 1780. On the other hand, Arnold was given his commission and received ₤6315. King George III made him a consultant for American affairs that he probably would have wanted ever since. Most of his remaining years were spent in the West Indies until his death in London in June 1801.

(R.G. Collingwood was then correct about using the a priori imagination to recreate history. In the writing of history the historian has to narrate a story by using common sense and the available evidence.)

____________________________________________________________________

Sources:

Benedict Arnold. Retrieved October 10, 2008 from http://www.multied.com/Revolt/arnold.html

John Burgoyne. Retrieved October 10, 2008 from http://americanrevwar.homestead.com/BURGOYNE.

Peggy shippen. Retrieved October 10, 2008 from http://www.answers.com/main/peggy

Collingwood, R. G. (1946). The idea of history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Pp. 205-334 .

Hyde, Montgomery (1973). Benedict Arnold. In Crimes and Punishments (Vol. 1, pp. 135-136)

USA: BPC Publishing Limited.

The problems of writing Contemporary American History

To write history is not an easy task. But I was able to meet the challenge upon doing my first historical writing of the United States. The first one was quite a great task for I have in my hands, 50 documents about the war, the personalities, speeches of the presidents, acts and treaties and the like. Those are primary sources. Raw and unedited primary sources. The question that I immediately have to answer was how to recreate the past using the documents. What followed was a massive amount of work but I was able to make it.


The next time I was asked to write about American History from 1950 to 2000 was quite a challenge. I belong to the contemporary times and have known the History of the United States for some time now but how to rewrite it again is definitely not an easy task. It got harder knowing that I am allowed to do research and background reading.


The more that I read, the more I got consumed of the articles and the facts and the more that I got confused of what to include. But I remained committed to my task. The historical perspective that I have in mind was not sufficient to put into paper. I did background reading and much to much dismay, I got brain freeze. I was bent on to writing which are the more important and which are not. It is a wrong idea to write history thinking of what I am going to include. In a way, I became biased. So what happened was that I am not able to capture the experiences of the nation that I am writing. Throughout my writing, I tried to focus on including facts but it falls short of my expectations. I was constrained by circumstances that made me think that I am doing a term paper and not a historical writing.


Accomplishing the goal of recreating the past became a tedious task for me. I need s strong chronology and a strong conceptual framework but my writing shows that I failed in so doing, but I am able to include the major themes that I believe is important in my writing. The themes about the presidents although short have given me a sense of a pattern in connecting bits and pieces of history. Each period of American history is signaled by the start of a new presidency. Each of the presidents has shown good and bad leadership that had caused a change in the course of American history.


To put a face in the historical experience of the United States is quite hard. Taken together, it is an experience worth writing. Good narrative is primarily a product of good sentences and a good coherence. On my part, I would say that this is one of my strongest points. The revising process is also an opportunity for me to incorporate my own writing style. But as far as I know, I wasn’t able to resolve the bitter issue that confronts new historian and that is to be biased upon the selection of what is history and what is not.


Being aware of some contemporary events, I was faced with the question of what recurrent events should be included in my work. But I tried to be fair. It will depend largely on how the audience will view my writing. Historian and future historians might also analyze the case of writing history from the context of influence. I believe that writing history is about making choices. Nowhere is this process more difficult than to write about recent events. We are bombarded with headlines and today’s headlines can become tomorrow’s history.


To write about recent events require courage and the all encompassing question of “Is my writing worth the time?” when the newspapers are all writing about it. But as far as I can tell, I was able to connect events and able to evaluate the documents. It is a difficult process that I am able to achieve.

AMERICA AND THE WORLD (1950 - 2000)

In 1945, the United States entered an era of unprecedented international power and influence. The consequences of this power influence the nation’s domestic, political affairs and cultural trends for the next half century. The United States took a leading role in the global and diplomatic affairs arena. When the Soviet Union challenged America’s vision of postwar Europe, the Truman administration responded by crafting policies and alliances that came to define the policies of the nation. The struggle as we know it lasted for more that forty years, spawned two “hot wars” in Korea and in Vietnam, and fueled the nuclear arms race. The cold war mentality prevailed until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.


America’s global commitments had dramatic consequences for American government and politics. But the presidents of the time from 1950 to 2000 pushed for a larger role in the areas of social welfare. Under the administration of Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, the government went beyond their means to provide for the social well-being of the people. What follows is a heady sense of unlimited affluence that lasted until the early 1970’s.


The victory after World War II renewed the calls for America to make good on its promise of liberty and equality for all. In great waves of protests in the 1950 and the 1960s, African Americans challenged the political status quo. As the new century began, the promise of social justice and equality remained unfulfilled. More than half a century after the end of World War II, Americans are living in an increasingly interwoven network of national and international forces. Outside events shape ordinary lives in ways that were inconceivable a century ago. As the cold war fades into history, the country remains a military superpower and is still heads an economic leadership in the new interdependent global system.

THE COLD WAR


The defeat of Germany and Japan did not bring stability to the world. The war had destroyed governments and geographical boundaries, creating new power relationships and new threat to peace. Before the war ended, the United States and the Soviet Union were struggling for advantage in those unstable areas; after the war they engaged in a protracted global conflict – a battle between communism and capitalism, the cold war is in reality a more complex power struggle covering a range of economic, strategic and even cultural issues. As each side tried to protect its own national security and way of life, its actions aroused fear in the other, contributing to a cycle of distrust and animosity for decades to come.


The United States military wielded enormous military power as the sole possessor of the atomic bomb and became powerful in the military arena. The Soviet Union posed a threat to the nation but with no direct engagement on the battlefield. The Cold War fueled a growing arms race. It fostered a climate of fear and suspicion and subversion in the fields of government, education, and even in the media that undermined democratic institutions.


During the war Franklin Roosevelt had worked effectively with Soviet leader Stalin and had determined to continue good relations in peacetime. When Truman assumed the presidency after Roosevelt’s death, he took a stand toward the Soviet Union. As tensions mounted between the superpowers, the nation increasingly perceived Soviet expansionism as a threat to its own interest. The Truman doctrine of 1947, the nation began a fight with communism by helping Greece and Turkey battle communism in their shore. Not only in the Middle East but also in other parts of the world that America and the Soviet Union began to influence their position.

One of the most prominent was the Korean War where both nations helped North Korea and South Korea depended themselves – the North being backed up by the Soviet Union being a communist nation while the South by the United States soon, sporadic fighting broke out and civil war began. North Korea remained firmly allied with the Soviet Union: South Korea signed a mutual defense treaty with the United States in 1954.


The Korean War had a lasting impact on the conduct of American foreign policy. The country had become more global, more militarized and more costly. Even in times of peace, the United Sates functioned in a state of permanent mobilization. But the most dramatic manifestation of t the cold war is its effect on American life.


Post war America saw the deterioration of the relation between the United States and the Soviet Union. The fear of Communism became widespread. The fear even involved the Congress. One of the most prominent people against communism was Senator Andrew McCarthy of Wisconsin who accused the Congress of having 200 people working in the government. In a speech addressed to the Congress in 1950, he challenged the government to take the necessary measures to battle communism. For the next four years, he was the central figure in a virulent campaign of anticommunism. Ultimately, few communists were found in positions of power; far more Americans became innocent victims of false accusations and innuendos. Truman could do nothing to curb the belief of the people about communism. Dwight Eisenhower was elected president in 1952 but he still refrained from challenging McCarthy’s claim.






THE POLITICS OF JOHN F. KENNEDY


John F. Kennedy promised to get America moving again through vigorous governmental activism at home and abroad. Ambitious and hard driven, Kennedy launched his campaign calling for civil rights legislation, health care for the elderly, aid to education and expanded military programs. At forty three, he was the youngest men ever elected for presidency. He turned his age into a powerful campaign asset. Using the power of the media to reach people directly, he relied on professional media and political pollsters.


Kennedy’s greatest priority as president was also with foreign affairs. Kennedy took a hard line against communism. He proposed that the nation must be prepared to deter all wars. Congress quickly granted his military request expanding the country’s military industrial complex. Kennedy adopted a new military doctrine of counterinsurgency. Soon U.S. Army Special Forces were receiving intensive training in repelling guerilla warfare and soon enough, Vietnam would soon provide a testing ground for this technique.


The biggest test for Kennedy’s foreign policy was when Fidel Castro overthrew the corrupt and unpopular dictator Fulgencio Batista. Castro by then had a growing friendliness with the Soviets. In a war that escalated on April 17, 1961 known as the Battle of Pigs, Castro crushed the troops of the U.S. and the Soviets stepped up military aid to Cuba including the installation of nuclear missiles. Kennedy confronted the Soviet Union and they made concessions. On July 1963, the three nuclear powers – the United States, the Soviet Union and Great Britain – agreed to ban the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, in space and underwater.


CIVIL RIGHTS AS A NATIONAL ISSUE

The civil rights movement was definitely the most important force in the change of post war America. The segregation of races is arguable an issue. There are segregations in restaurants, education and even in public transport. The proponents of equality had doubled its effort to combat segregation and in the succeeding years that followed, the African Americans and their white sympathizers emerged victorious.


One of the most significant victories came in May 17, 1954 with the far reaching decision in Brown vs. Board when it was argued that the segregated schools mandated in Kansas were unconstitutional because they stigmatized an entire race. The decision began with “Segregation of white and Negro children in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race, pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation, denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment -- even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors of white and Negro schools may be equal.” The Amendment guaranteed equal protection of the law. Over the next several years, the Supreme Court used the Brown case to overturn a number of segregation customs in city parks, beaches, transportation and in public housing.


Martin Luther King Jr. catapulted to national prominence due to this white-black segregation. The succeeding years saw a resistance by the white people against the integration of the white and the black people but in the face of resistance to the integration, King stood up and became the voice of the black people. On August 28, 1963, about 250, 000 black and white demonstrators gathered at the Lincoln memorial. The march culminated in a memorable speech delivered by King in an evangelical style of the Black church. He ended with an exclamation: “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty, we are free at last!”


Lyndon Johnson was sworn in as president when John F. Kennedy was assassinated. Kennedy’s youthful image, the trauma of his assassination and the collective sense that the Americans had been robbed off a promising leader contributed to a powerful force that overshadowed the nation. Kennedy exercised bold leadership. Perhaps his greatest failure was his reluctance to act boldly on civil rights like his predecessors.

On assuming the presidency Lyndon Johnson promptly turned the passage of civil rights legislation. The Civil Rights was passed on June 1964 and was a landmark in the history of American race. The bill got 7 keystones. The first is about voting rights of the citizens; the second is public accommodation regardless of race; the third is the desegregation of public education; the fourth being the community relations service; the fifth would continue the Commission on Civil Rights until 1967, and endow it with broad new authority; the sixth amends all statutes providing financial assistance by the United States and the seventh authorizes the President to create a "Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity.” But while the act forced the desegregation, the obstacles to black voting rights remained.

In the succeeding years that followed the protest escalated. To resolve the issue, the government signed the Twenty Fourth Amendment to the Constitution which is about “the right of very citizen to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress” and that it “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.”

The counterculture and the antiwar movement were not only the social movements to challenge the status quo in the past. The frustration and anger of blacks boiled over a new racial militance as the struggle raged the entire nation and took on the more stubborn problems of the emerging black power movement. The civil rights movement turned to the more difficult task of eliminating the segregation by itself enforcing the blacks as a second class citizen. Although the Brown decision outlawed separate schools, it did nothing to change the educational system in areas where schools were all-black or all-white because of segregation. As civil rights leader took on racism, the movement fractured along the younger generation. Some younger activists became eager for social change. A more secular black movement emerged in 1966 to call for black power. The Black Panther became a militant self-defense organization dedicated to protecting local blacks from police violence. The organization quickly spread to other cities, where members undertook a wide range of projects and the assertion of black pride. Many young blacks insisted on using the term African American rather than Negro, a term they found demeaning because of its historical association with slavery and racism.

The assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in Tennessee by James Earl Ray, a white ex-convict, set off an explosion of riots. Violence broke out. With King’s assassination the civil rights movement lost the one leader best able to stir the conscience of the white America. The trial of Bobby Seale, the founder of the Black Panther in 1970 caused another blow for the black movement. In a speech given by the Chief of staff David Hilliard on November 8, 1969, he mentioned the continuing inequality and racism and talked about the ideology of the Black Panther that is “the historical experiences of Black people in America translated through Marxism-Leninism.” That the African Americans had realized that “after 400 years we are victims of the oppressive machinery that gags, binds and chains Black men who speak out in defense of their alleged constitutional rights.Many people act as if they were surprised at what's happening to the Chairman of the Black Panther Party, Bobby Seale, but I think a careful examination of who our persecutors are will clear the minds of the masses of people that could not see through the so-called judicial smokescreen of justice. These people that tortured and gagged and chained Bobby are the descendants of pirates. Genocidal murderers of the Red Man; users of the atomic bomb upon the Japanese people. The enslavers and exploiters of Blacks in this country right up until this very day.”


The greatest legacy of the Black Civil rights movement was to spark a new awareness among the whites themselves. Such as Homosexual movement where the assertion of gay pride drew heavily on the language and the tactics of the movement; the feminist groups that has been languishing since the 1920s and the peace movements that were very much against the Vietnam war.

WAR ABROAD AND IN THE HOMEFRONT

Like many new nations that emerged from the fall of the European empires after World War II, Vietnam was characterized by a volatile mix of cultural and religious conflicts and political turmoil. The rise of communism there was just one phase of the nation’s larger struggle, which had climaxed into a civil war. The United States viewed these events as part of an international communist movement toward global domination but it led to a long and disastrous attempt to influence the course of the war.

When Lyndon Johnson became president, he retained many of Kennedy’s foreign policy. He declared support for South Vietnam. In a Presidential Press Conference given on July 28, 1965 the president stressed the reason why the nation had to intervene with the war escalating between the North and the South. He stated that “We did not choose to be the guardians at the gate, but there is no one else.” Believing that the nation committed itself to helping the Vietnam he stressed that “Moreover, we are in Viet-Nam to fulfill one of the most solemn pledges of the American Nation. Three Presidents -- President Eisenhower, President Kennedy, and your present President -- over 11 years have committed themselves and have promised to help defend this small and valiant nation.”

But still the American presence in Vietnam fails to turn the tides of the war. The military intervention accomplished little. The administration was faced in the home front with antiwar movement. Peace activists staged protests, vigils and petitions against the involvement in the war. The war was morally wrong, they argued and against American ideals. American military involvement in Vietnam would not help the Vietnamese people. And it was evident up to the present times.

The 1968 election brought about a new president. Richard Nixon tapped the considerate mood of the electorate and won the race. Vietnam, long Lyndon Johnson’s war became Nixon’s War. But dissatisfaction with the war continued to spread. The defeat in Vietnam prompted Americans to think differently about foreign affairs and to acknowledge the limits of U.S. Superpower abroad. At the same time, the student activists concentrated more on issues such as feminism, gay pride and environmentalism. Ironically, in the midst of this growing dissatisfaction and skepticism, a commitment to social change persisted. Some of the social movements born in the 1960s had their greatest impact in the 1970s. They took struggles with them from streets and campuses into courts, schools, workplaces and community organizations. But like the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the social movement of the 1970s stirred fears and uncertainties among many Americans. The darkening economic climate of the new decade undercut the sense of social generosity that would become a potent political force in the decade’s end.


THE NIXON YEARS

Richard Nixon set the stage for the conservative political resurgence. His election gave impetus to a long standing Republican effort to trim back the Great Society and shift some federal responsibilities back to the states. He embraced the use of federal power to uphold governmental responsibility for social welfare and economic stability.

During his term, he had pledged to reverse the power back to the people. Nixon also worked to scale down federal government programs that had witnessed the expansion of federal power in numerous states. His conservative social values were demonstrated in his appointments to the Supreme Court, The liberal thrust of the court had disturbed many conservatives. Its Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 requiring the desegregation of public schools was followed by other landmark decisions in the 1960’s. The Miranda v. Arizona of 1966 that reinforced the defendant’s right by requiring the arresting officers to notify the suspect of their legal rights. Nixon’s appointees did not always hand down decisions that the president approved, however. The controversial case of Roe v. Wade in 1973 struck down the laws prohibiting abortion in Texas and Georgia. The decision allowed an abortion only if the mother’s life was in danger. It had nationalized the liberalization of state abortion laws and developed a movement of anti-abortion movement.

Nixon’s domestic accomplishments were ultimately overshadowed by the Watergate Scandal which swept him away from office and undermined America’s confidence in their political leaders. Although it began in 1972, the scandal had its roots from the early years of Nixon’s first administration. Obsessed with Antiwar movement, the White House had been opening mail, tapping phones, arranging break-ins of citizens.

The Watergate affair moved into its final phase when on June 30, 1972 the House of Representatives voted three articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon: obstruction of justice, abuse of power and acting to subvert the constitution. On August 9, 1974, Nixon became the first U.S. president to resign. The next day Vice President Gerald Ford was sworn in as president.

It is not surprising that in the wake of Watergate many citizens had become cynical about the federal government and about politicians in general. Nixon’s successor, Ford and Jimmy Carter, did little to restore public confidence. But in the 1980s election, voter apathy persisted, but the victory of Ronald Reagan signified another hope to restore traditional values and its economic and international power.

CARTER AND HIS PRESIDENCY

During the two years that Ford became president, he failed to establish legitimacy as president. He was lacking in leadership. In the election that followed, Carter won as president. Despite his efforts to overcome the post-Watergate climate of skepticism and apathy, Carter never became an effective leader.

The administration expanded the federal bureaucracy in some cases and limited its reach in others. In foreign affairs, Carter made human rights the centerpiece of his policy. He achieved his most stunning and his greatest failure on the Middle East. In 1978 Carter helped to break the diplomatic problem by inviting Israel’s Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Al-Sadat to Camp David in Maryland. He promised additional foreign aid to Egypt and persuaded Sadat to adopt a framework for peace. The framework included Egypt’s recognition of Israel’s right to exist and Israel’s return of the Sinai Peninsula, which and it occupied since 1967.

The succeeding years saw another humiliating time for the presidency of Carter. With Carter embroiled in the hostage crisis of Iran, the election was on going. In November of 1980, Reagan won the presidency. On January 20, 1981, the Iranian government released the American hostages. But the hostage crisis symbolizes the lose of America‘s power to control world affairs. George W. Bush succeeded the presidency of Reagan. The era of Bush were determined by the judiciary rather than the executive branch. Bush also had relatively little control over the economic developments that soon became a key issue. Clinton was elected president in 1992 and won his second term in 1996.

CONCLUSION

The last two decades of the twentieth century brought enormous changes. In the international political arena, the end of the cold war had repercussions that are still evolving. We saw the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 but the threat of a war is still there. The United States is facing a major economic crisis. The world appears into a situation into which power, both economic and military is dispersed among a number of key players. In the 1990s, the United States had dramatically improved its position in the world economy but the present situation is threatening its economic power. In politics, several important trends developed. The intense media scrutinies of the presidents were dramatic examples of how people took on the importance of politics. Despite the unstable world characterized by conflicts and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the change in global economy, Americans were relatively as confident as the century ended.

___________________________________________________________________________

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brody, David ((2002). America. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s

Why We are in Vietnam by Lyndon B. Johnson. Presidential news conference. July 28, 1965


Camp David Meeting on the Middle East by Jimmy Carter. Address to a joint session of Congress. September 18, 1978


The Ideology of the Black Panther Party by David Hilliard
Speech given at the trial of Bobby Seale (Chairman of the Black Panthers)
November 8, 1969


24th Amendment to the Constitution. (Article XXIV), Proposed 1962, ratified 1964


Civil Rights and Legal Wrongs by Virginia Commission on Constitutional Government. Pamphlet. August, 1963


United States v. Richard M. Nixon. Supreme Court case 1974


Roe v. Wade. Supreme Court case 1973


I Have a Dream by Martin Luther King, Jr. Speech given on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial at the March on Washington August 28, 1963


Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. Supreme Court case May 17, 1954


Address on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty by John F. Kennedy Speech given to the nation via radio & television broadcast July 26, 1963

The problems of writing American History

REFLECTION PAPER


The past is not dead; it’s not even the past yet. This according to William Faulkner was a fact. I thought it was just a lame excuse to say that a person has to look back at the past and learn from the past experiences and all those things that goes with it. I was wrong. In the writing of history, I was able to understand what it means. History is not just to recreate the past. It is to live with it. Explain it and be able to understand it wholly.


The fact that I was succumbed to writing history of one of the greatest nation of the world as requirement posed to me a big challenge. To recreate the past of the nation that is the United States in a manner that will show my potential as a historian is a tough job. First, I only have 50 documents in my hand. It is quite a minute amount of documents knowing for the fact that the country has been through a lot since the 1900’s. Second, the challenge lies in how do I recreate it given the very little time that I am suppose to do it. Certainly, people would say that historians do work 24 hours to explain things. Third, what philosophy am I going to apply given the scenario that I would like to have my own. I would want to see things in my own perspective and not to follow a certain model or a certain philosophy.


For the time being I have to. So what I did was to gather all the documents. Make sure that not one of them missing. Some say that I am a very traditional historian because in the age of cyberspace I need a hard copy of the document. I printed everything suffice it to say that I have in my hand almost 300 pages of paper works but still too little as compared to the readings that I have to be able to read to learn about history.


To write about American History is a grave task. As much as I would want to be critical about it, I arguably would not want to end up saying things that is not so true of a nation. I have prior knowledge of the country and that is where I started my writing from. What I did was to sort all the documents from the most distant to the most recent. I have been successful for so doing because the issues were quite related in a number of ways.


And so, I began my writing by stating some details prior to the 1900s. What better way to start but to mention facts about the African American slavery that is one of the reasons of the civil war. I began to cite documents from Du Bois and mentioned details of how the African Americans achieved the status quo. Worth mentioning would be the leadership of Booker T. Washington and how he was opposed by the new and younger groups particularly from the writings of Du Bois. The section on women suffrage is the next stop as it also helped paved the way for the age of progress that followed.


The presidency of Theodore Roosevelt and industrialization focused on the age of progress. What followed through was a string of war documents that I cited just to prove that America is becoming a world power. Chapter II being about the New Era is one section that I had a hard time coming up with an issue. So I just cited that it needs more sources. My prior knowledge of the United States will tell me that prior to the 1930s there was the Great Depression of the 1920s but the problem is that there were no documents to prove my claim. The last chapter dealt with the diplomacy of the nation and the aggression that sparked the war. Given the very little documents to start writing about the war is a tough job especially because we were not allowed to do background reading. So what I did was to use the available resources given to me. The chapter lacks the merit I guess because of the fact that if it’s about the war there should be details and facts but there was none.



As a whole, I tried to be very smart of my writing. I ended up being criticized for my work. I wanted to apply the methods of Nietzsche but I believe that I lacked the proper method to do so. I wasn’t able to be a monumentalist because the writings about the personality were not as grandiose as a Nietzsche should have done it. I wasn’t able to be a critical historian because I did not criticize the writing myself afraid that my authority as a writer of history is not that big given the idea that I am just a student writer.


I love the idea of writing a history from the resources that are available. It made me feel like a real historian. I tried to connect each and every document and made sure that the personalities were given the character that they are. In my writing of the history of the United States, I had the futile attempt to discuss the more important issues of slavery and racism. For me, it was one facet of American History that is of interest to me.


In my next writing, I will be very blunt about every issue as possible. I hope to be able to meet my own idea of writing history. At the moment, I am confined to believing that I am not yet a writer but a researcher. But I know that in time, I will be able to achieve much more. History has always been interesting. I felt the joy and the fun of recreating the past myself. I need more practice but I will get there soon.


To write is really to capture the spirit of the great nation. Given that, to write about the United States is to talk about t great deal of economic, political, cultural and social history. At the moment, what I did was just the retelling of “what happened and then that happened.” It was just an assignment that I went through I guess.

AMERICAN SOCIETY from 1901-1950

At the end of the civil war, the biggest question remained in dispute – what will happen to the United States of America? Being a young nation undergoing a massive change is not easy. There are still issues left unresolved that even a civil war wasn’t able to accomplish. Although the war resolved the issue of slavery through the Emancipation Proclamation, it has still yet to be laid upon the people. Whether the Confederate South would actually accept defeat after a brutal war that has cost millions of lives and whether the Union has actually won and would be able to uphold its territory once more remains in question.


The death of Abraham Lincoln on April 15, 1865 – five days after the surrender of General Lee at Appomattox – caused another event that has changed American history. President Lincoln who wanted the bind the nation was assassinated. It sent Abraham Lincoln to martyrdom, hardened many northerners against the south and the south once more questioning on whether they became conquered by the Union. What about the slavery issue? What rights should the freedmen have after the Emancipation itself?


What the event did was to reveal a struggling road for reconstruction. There were waves of violence sweeping the nation. It took shape in the form of labor unions, women suffrage, and other issues. But the succeeding years after the war paved the way for an emerging world power that is the United States.






Chapter I
The Era of Progress
(1900 – 1914)


We mourn a good and great President who is dead; but we are lifted up by the splendid achievements of his life and the grand heroism with which he met his death. -- Theodore Roosevelt
First Annual Message Address to Congress, December 3, 1901


The Civil War was believed to have bridged the gap between the North and the South. One of the Problems that prevailed after were about the former slaves now known as the freedmen. Before the 1900’s, the African Americans were making themselves known. In so doing, the government created the Freedmen’s Bureau who took its toll in 1865 to provide help for the African Americans in the period after the war. Before it got its final form in 1866 (W.E. Du Bois, 1903). There were strings of organizations that showed interest to the black folks including the Freedmen's Aid societies, the American Missionary Association, sprung from the Amistad, and now full grown for work; the various church organizations, the National Freedmen's Relief Association, the American Freedmen's Union, the Western Freedmen's Aid Commission all of which tend to help the freedmen became an empowered citizen.


But this wasn’t an easy task because the problem had persisted even after the war. The Southern blacks resisted as best as they could. But the African Americans acted on their own way of freedom. One of the forerunners of the need to accept the Black people as a part of the society was Booker T. Washington. He advocated industrial education for the African Americans particularly in the field of trade such as blacksmithing, brick masonry and brick making, and agriculture including dairying and stock raising and horticulture. (Washington, 1903).

Even so, not everybody liked the ideas of Mr. Washington. Those who opposed believed that his ideas were old. The large important group represented by Dunbar, Tanner, Chesnut, Miller, and the Grimkes, seek nevertheless self-development and self-realization and they had the belief that the African Americans can excel in other fields of endeavor. (Du Bois, 1901) What about the more special genius of the black people that W.E. Du Bois celebrated on his essay “The Talented Tenth” in 1903 that talks about the black population. This is in opposition of Mr. Washington’s belief that the black people should focus more on trade, manual and agriculture when the black people can excel in other fields otherwise. Just as what As Maria Weston Chapman once said, (Du Bois, 1903) "a throng of authors, editors, lawyers, orators and accomplished gentlemen of color have taken their degree! It has prepared the white man for the freedom of the black men.


The time prior to the 1900’s was also the time when the women felt the need for suffrage. The death of Abraham Lincoln in 1865 created quite an issue. It had aroused once more the idea on the minds of the anti-slavery people about the abolition of slavery and the suffrage given to the black people. If this was the case then, how come nobody was thinking about the idea of giving women the vote? This was one of the one of the questions raised by C.E. Tibbles in chapter XXXIV of the Book of Letters: How to Make Best of Life vs. Women Suffrage. The women’s right advocate came to the political scene. But of course, the movement met fierce opposition. But there are already states in that has given the right for women to vote such as Wyoming in1860, Colorado in 1893, Utah and Idaho since 1896. (Carrie Chapman Catt, 1915)


The 1900’s entered the 1900’s scene with all the political turmoil of the decade before it. After the bitter struggle and the death of Abraham Lincoln, came another blow in the political arena. But the United States stood up and a great leader stood among the ranks and the challenges of politics were faced by the new president.

Theodore Roosevelt and Industrialization


On September 6, 1901, President McKinley was shot to death while attending the Pan-American Exposition at Buffalo, and died in that city on the September 14 of the same year Fourteenth of that month. He was shot by an anarchist.


Theodore Roosevelt succeeded the presidency. In his Fist Annual Message addressed to the Congress on December 3, 1901 he stated that “On no conceivable theory could the murder of the President be accepted as due to protest against "inequalities in the social order.” He believed that “Anarchy is no more an expression of "social discontent.” (Theodore Roosevelt, 1901)


The death of McKinley had caused uneasiness in the nation. Anarchy has become a government foe. The president believed that anarchy is not the product of social or political injustice but rather of evil conduct and nothing else. This was the third time that a president has been assassinated. The other two being Lincoln and Garfield who were killed by assassins of types unfortunately not uncommon in history; President Lincoln a victim a man who doesn’t believe with the ideals of the North after the Civil War, and President Garfield to the revengeful vanity of a disappointed office seeker. On the other hand, President McKinley was killed by a criminal belonging to that body of criminals who object to all governments, the anarchists who are against any form of popular liberty.


On the face of the political crisis, Roosevelt moved cautiously. He attended first to politics and how to continue the administration that McKinley failed to do so after his death. The McKinley administration devoted itself to progress. These and other economic issues troubled Roosevelt. Big business was a threat to the market. The large scale corporations were not knew. But bigger business meant power to control markets. These big businesses in the 1900’s merge rival firms to compete with growing businesses sweeping the nation. These mergers called trusts greatly increased business concentration in the economy.


As early as his first annual message, Roosevelt acknowledged the nation’s uneasiness to the threat that these big businesses had. He believed that the tremendous industrial development brings the nation face to face with very serious social problems. The question lies on how the government is going to battle corporations and their features and tendencies that is “hurtful to the general welfare?”


The principles that the government had in mind was to regulate these corporations that are engaged in interstate commerce. But Roosevelt was not anti business. He himself believed that that the large scale enterprises are but a natural tendency for a growing nation. Even if there is widespread antagonism over the big corporations, Roosevelt believed that “never before has the average men, the wage worker, the farmer, the small trader, been so well off as in this country and the present time.” (Roosevelt, 1901)


The government sees no reason to stop progress but rather to help it. Roosevelt commanded that there should be a group to inspect and examine the workings of the great corporations. Only firms that abused their power should be punished. He met his interest by accepting the idea of industrial order while maintaining the trust of the general welfare.


It was during the first few years of Roosevelt’s administration that there was a struggle to bring a corporate economy under government control. So, instead of trying to break the growth, it is better for the government to regulate the big business. This was the task that he had. In the interest of the people, the nation should assume power over the supervision and regulation of all the corporations doing interstate business. He commanded the government to create a law that will supervise the administration of the so-called Interstate commerce. He even urged Congress to create an office to take control of commerce in its broadest sense and assign a Cabinet Secretary to handle its affairs. This formulation clarified Roosevelt’s administration. He took up social justice and regulated laws for the welfare of the people. He proposed sharp laws to battle even the nig businesses threatening politics and his people. (Roosevelt, 1901)


In 1912, Roosevelt announced his candidacy for presidency. He ran under the Republican Party popularly known as “Bull Moose.”




Chapter II
Emerging World Power
(1914– 1920)

It will be our wish and purpose that the processes of peace, when they are begun, shall be absolutely open and that they shall involve and permit henceforth no secret understandings of any kind. -- Woodrow Wilson
Address to a Joint Session of Congress/ January 18, 1918


The story of the United States’ involvement in World War I is a story of battles and diplomacy, all of which will have an impact on the nation’s future. America was slowly drawn into a position of world leadership, which it continues to hold up today. World War I provided a major step.


Before the outbreak World War I, the world had been dominated by the powerful countries of Europe, but from that point on the United States moved forward and from then on dominated the world. Increasingly, the nation became involved in security and economic affairs of the world. On the home front, there was a war against the social evils of society. America was in turmoil but it was able to overcome it and emerged as a world power.


But the war back then was not just about the war for peace. On the home front, the country was struggling to keep up with the issues surrounding politics and the entire country as well.

Women Progressive during the War

Fighting World War I required extraordinary mobilization from all sectors. A lot was asked to join the army and become volunteers. The onset of war caused an impact to every sector of the society. Women were the largest group to take advantage of the war time opportunities. Women continued to lobby for a suffrage that they long wanted.


During the term of Abraham Lincoln, when the African Americans were given suffrage after the war, the proponents of women suffrage cry for their own. In a letter published in the Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume XI, page 130, the president stated (appeared in Chapter XXXV from Book of Letters: How to Make Best of Life vs. Woman Suffrage, 1912):

Referring to those who had been in rebellion against the United States Government, be said: "I cannot see if universal amnesty is granted, how under the circumstances I can avoid exacting in return universal suffrage, or at least suffrage ON THE BASIS OF INTELLIGENCE AND MILITARY SERVICE."

The women suffragist believed that the African American was given the right to vote because of their participation during the civil war as a war measure. By carefully reading Lincoln's letter, a part of which is quoted above, it will be seen that he said in substance that he could not grant suffrage without exacting military service in return but women cannot be drafted as soldiers, because they do not have the suffrage.

Supporters of the war hoped that the war would do reforms in their wanting to vote. And so, a constitutional amendment was passed regarding women suffrage on 1919. It took months before it could be ratified. Finally in 1920, the nineteenth amendment was declared. It reads:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. (19th Amendment)

The contribution of women during the war and year’s of hard work fighting for suffrage paid off. The suffragists have always posed a simple but effective challenge. First, is to question the government of its ideals of democracy while denying half of the citizens the right to vote. Alice Stone Blackwell in her essay Objections Answered that appeared in a pamphlet in 1915 strongly argued that:

“In thus taking a vote to get at the wish of the majority, certain classes of persons are passed over, whose opinions for one reason or another are thought not to be worth counting. In most of our states, these classes are children, aliens, idiots, lunatics, criminals and women. There are good and obvious reasons for making all these exceptions but the last. Of course no account ought to be taken of the opinions of children, insane persons, or criminals. Is there any equally good reason why no account should be taken of the opinions of women? “

It is a clear argument that everyone should be given a right to vote to be well represented and to actually have the so-called majority vote. Second, is by using the constitution and citing the sixteenth Amendment that reads:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. (16th Amendment)

It is because the women are being taxed during these times. It is called Taxation without Representation. As stated by C.E. Tibbles in chapter XXXIII of her book: “At the commencement of the agitation for Woman Suffrage, the agitators offered as their main complaint that women who owned property were taxed without representation.” Throughout the war period, the suffragists pushed for moral reforms and so they did. (C.E. Tibbles, 1912)

SOCIAL ORDER and the WAR

The idealistic crusaders of the war era thought that it was a time when there is battle not only for peace but also for social welfare. Besides the women advocates of suffrage, there were also social order advocates. Especially those who view that alcoholic beverages and liquor are a social evil. Most Americans view the legal prohibition of alcohol as a social reform and not a denial of individual liberty.

In an editorial that appeared in the New York Evening Journal in 1918, seeing drunken men on the streets is way out of everybody’s arena during that time. The editorial entitled “Those who laughed at the Drunken Man” showed drinking as a social evil. The reformers, probably concerned about good governance, poverty and morality supported a ban on drinking. During those times, many people see liquor equated with all the evils of society probably prostitution, crime and public disorder.

Finally the government gave in and passed a bill in 1917 and was ratified in 1919 came to be known as the Eighteenth Amendment that states in Section 1 about the “manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.”
The amendment demonstrated not only the strength of the United States on world affairs but also on matters of personal behavior. It has become an example of how reforms could actually benefit from the advent of war. However, it was repealed by Amendment 21st in 1933 after showing weak control over the citizens.

Woodrow Wilson and Peace among Equals

When Woodrow Wilson became president, he was bent on reforming American foreign policy. He intended to foster peace and liberty in the world. Meanwhile, Europe had begun to drift toward World War. Germany was becoming an economic superpower of Europe. Russia was a great threat in Asia. How the United States would fare with these more powerful nations troubled the nation itself.


In law enforcement, officials established values and institutions while the suffragists were winning their battles. One of the main legal tools to banish the hysteria of having spies on the home front, the Espionage Act was declared on May 16, 1918. It imposed stiff penalties on some activities such as “when the United States is at war, shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States…” that is considered an anti war activity. It gave the government the right to ban treasonous materials from wherever it is from if considered as seditious.


In January 18, 1917, Woodrow Wilson proposed to Congress his “Fourteen Points” in the hope that it will be a basis for peace negotiations and peace among equals. His vision was to create an organization that will have the purpose of safeguarding peace among nations. One of the reasons President Wilson made the painful decision to lead the United States into war was his meager desire to influence the peace terms.


The Fourteen Points was like America’s propaganda of peace. On his speech addressed to a Joint Session of Congress he stated that “The day of conquest and aggrandizement is gone by; so is also the day of secret covenants entered into in the interest of particular governments and likely at some unlooked-for moment to upset the peace of the world.” He urged for the “Central Empires” the powerful nations for peace negotiations. It is a tribute that he managed to influence the peace settlements as much as he did. After the war, America emerged from the conflict stronger than ever before. It has become a major industrial power, both economically and politically making the United States a world power from then on.



Chapter III
America and the New Era
(1933 - 1939)

This Nation asks for action, and action now. --Franklin D. Roosevelt
Presidential Inaugural Address ,1933


By this time the citizens of the United States already made a living, probably educated, practiced their religion and have organized communities. The transformation begun with World War I and the nation became powerful and a major player in world affairs. In his bold inaugural address, Franklin Roosevelt told the nation to move forward. His words were issuing declarations of action. Just like fighting in a war. The president promised to “assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.” (The chapter needs more sources)

Chapter IV
The World at War
(1940 – 1945)


Our Armies of Liberation have restored freedom to these suffering peoples, whose spirit and will the oppressors could never enslave. --Harry S. Truman, May 8, 1945

For many Americans, World War II seemed to pave the way for a stronger America. It probably is a good war despite the sacrifices; many people would probably found the war an experience because it ended the dominating powers of that time. Shocked by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, they united in their determination to fight the powerful nations at war. The day after the United States declares a state of war between Japan and the people of the United States. On the 11th, they attacked Germany and World War II has begun.

DIPLOMACY PRIOR TO WAR
Because the United States had become a major world power, it must show neutrality so as not to have conflict with the other major powers during the time. In 1937, the United States approved the Neutrality Act of 1935 designed to prevent the nation from joining another war as what happened during World War I. It states that “it shall thereafter be unlawful to export, or attempt to export, or cause to be exported, arms, ammunition, or implements of war from any place in the United States to any belligerent state named in such proclamation…” It was a provision that aimed to impose an embargo on arms trading from countries at war. Still, the government failed in its attempt not to declare a war with any nation when their nation was attacked willfully. (1935) This allowed the Allies

AGGRESSION

The nation’s neutrality was challenged by the aggressive actions of Germany and Japan all determined to expand their territories and saw the threat posed by the United States as a world power. Japan was trying to control the pacific. Germany on the West was making its power known all through out Europe.

Germany presented the gravest threat to the world order during these times. In the Fall of 1939, Hitler shocked the world when it signed a non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union headed by Joseph Stalin. The pact created such a steer because the two nations had been enemies in the past. Cartoons of these sort showing depicting Stalin and Hitler getting married were prevalent in newspapers. The question that was left unanswered was for how long the pact will last. (Hitler would break the nonaggression pact a few years later by invading Russia).

Hitler and Stalin Anonymous Cartoon/Fall of 1939
The United States even became more involved even if the nation was trying to stay away from joining another war. It was 1941 when Roosevelt and Winston Churchill called for a common policies and principles that will ensure a better future for both nations. This came to be known as the Atlantic Charter signed on August 14, 1941. It supported eight points which supported trade and security and to ensure that “all men in the lands may live out their lives in freedom from fear and want.”

Winning the War

Despite the nation’s effort to denounce the war, it was provoked by the aggression showed by Japan in the Pacific. On December 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. The next day Roosevelt went before Congress calling December 7 “a date which will live in infamy” and asked for a declaration of war against Japan on December 8. Three days later on December 11, the United States declared a war against Germany and Italy.


World War II was far more global than World War I. Two great groups emerged out of the nations desire to win the war and expand its territories. The Allies were composed of Great Britain, Russia and the United States against the Axis Powers composed of Germany, Italy and Japan. However great the nations fought, the war ended with the Allies winning the war. Germany surrendered on May 8, 1945, Harry S. Truman declared victory over Europe.


The nation still had to defeat Japan. The effort paid off but it had cost hundreds of thousands of lives and property when the Atomic bomb was dropped on two Japanese cities -- Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It ended the war but the nightmare of the dropping of the atomic bomb aroused criticisms all throughout the world.

Chapter V
America after the War
(1945 – 1950)


The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.
--NATO, April 9, 1949


In 1945, the United States entered an era on international power and influence. They aggressively pursued interests abroad brought about by the war. The consequences of that struggle influenced the nation up to the present. The United States took a step further in the global diplomatic and military affairs.


Tensions mounted between the superpowers. The Soviet Union became a threat to al nations. Communism was also taking its toll. A crisis in Greece occurred in 1947. The British government asked for help. They could no longer afford to support the anticommunists’ activities in Greece. In response, the president made a speech addressed to the Congress on March 12, 1947 requesting large scale military and economic assistance to Greece and Turkey. Truman asked for $ 400, 000, 000 to be given to Turkey and $350, 000, 000 as an aid for Greece. He even declared that “If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace of the world -- and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own nation.”


Today, more than a century later after World War II, Americans are living in an increasingly interwoven network of diplomatic and international affairs. It has up to now remained a military power while at the same time enjoying economic leadership.



The North Atlantic Treaty Organization

In April 9 1949, the United States entered into a peace agreement called the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The pact had the nations of Belgium, Canada, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States agreeing that an attack on one of the parties shall be considered an attack against them all. The pact also “will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding of the principles upon which these institutions are founded, and by promoting conditions of stability and well-being. They will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.”

POSTWAR CHALLENGES

Post war America saw the deterioration of the relation between the United States and the Soviet Union. The fear of Communism became widespread. The fear even involved the Congress. One of the most prominent people against communism was Senator Andrew McCarthy of Wisconsin who accused the Congress of having 200 people working in the government. In a speech addressed to the Congress in 1950, he challenged the government to take the necessary measures to battle communism.


Bibliography

Adams Jane. (1915) Why women should vote.


Anonymous. Hitler and Stalin. Cartoon Fall of 1939


Anonymous. Those Who Laugh at the Drunken Man. New York Evening Journal 1918


Budd, C. Bull Moose Party. Cartoon. 1912


Churchill, Winston and Roosevelt, Franklin. Atlantic Charter Declaration of Principles. August 14, 1941

Declaration of Victory in Europe by Harry S. Truman May 8, 1945


Declaration of War Against Germany. by Congress Joint resolution. December 11, 1941


Declaration of War Against Japan. by Congress Joint resolution .December 8, 1941


Du Bois, W. E. .Of the Dawn of Freedom. Chapter 2 of The Souls of Black Folk (1903)


Du Bois, W.E. The Evolution of Negro Leadership. Review in The Dial of the book Up From Slavery: An Autobiography by Booker T. Washington. July 16, 1901


Du Bois, W.E. ,The Talented Tenth. Chapter 2 of The Negro Problem (September, 1903)


Espionage Act. May 16, 1918


Mccarthy, Joseph. Communists in Government Service. Speech in the senate February 1950.


North Atlantic Treaty. April 9, 1949


Neutrality Act. May 1, 1937


Roosevelt, Franklin. A Date Which Will Live in Infamy. December 8, 1941

Roosevelt, Theodore. Address to Congress. December 3, 1901


Roosevelt, Franklin D. Presidential Inaugural Address 1933


Tibbles, C. E. Suffrage Given to the Negro - Excitement Caused By the Assassination of President Lincoln. Chapter XXXIV from Book of Letters: How to Make Best of Life vs. Woman Suffrage 1912


Tibbles, C.E. (1912) Taxation without representation. Chapter XXXIII from Book of Letters: How to Make Best of Life vs. Woman Suffrage


Tibbles C.E. (1912) You gave the right of suffrage to the negro - why not give it to us? Chapter XXXV from Book of Letters: How to Make Best of Life vs. Woman Suffrage


Truman, Harry. Truman doctrine. March 12, 1947


Washington, Booker T. Industrial Education for the Negro. Chapter 1, The Negro Problem Sept., 1903


Wilson, Woodrow. Basis of a general peace: fourteen points. Address to a Joint Session of Congress (January 8, 1919)


16th, 18th, 19th, 21st Amendment to the Constitution