Was Andrew Jackson Really A Great President?

Today in class we studied Andrew Jackson his reputation as "the people's president." We looked at three key events he is most known for and decided of he deserves this reputation. The first even we looked at was the Bank War. The Bank War was started when Jackson vetoed the renewal of the Charter of the Second National Bank. He believed that the bank held too much power over economy and trade, and wanted the lower classes to have more of a say. But, this ended up leading to a sort of class war between the rich and the poor and did not improve the economy in any way. The Spoils System is another act Jackson is known for. The Spoils System was the act of a political party giving government jobs to supporters after an election victory to encourage people to vote for them. After Jackson was elected he gave jobs to supporters of his, which ended up filling the government jobs with people unfit for the positions. The goal of the Spoils System was to bring in new opinions and give more people opportunities to participate in government, but it did nothing to improve the system. The last event was looked at was the Indian Removal Act in which Jackson forced 100,000 Indians from their native land to make room for white settlement. He forced them to walk to their new land on what is now known as "The Trail of Tears." Thousands of Indians died on the march. 

Looking at all of to the evidence, I believe that Andrew Jackson's reputation as "the people's president" is not deserved. Although he acted with the well-being of his country in mind, everything ended up leading to more harm than good. After the Bank War the American economy crashed, the Spoils System did nothing to improve the government, and the Indian Removal Act killed thousands of Indians. These outcomes prove that Jackson does not deserve his reputation as the "people's president."

See our presentation on the Bank War here:

Democracy in the United States

Today in class we studied the rise of democracy in the United States. Our essential questions were "How should we define democracy?" and "How democratic was the United States in the early 1800s?" To answer these questions we analyzed documents and primary sources. First, we looked  at a painting called The Country Election by George Caleb Bingham, then we looked at two data charts explaining suffrage requirements and methods of electing presidential electors. Then, we analyzed primary source quotes from Benjamin Franklin and Norton Townshend. And finally we looked at a primary source from the Dorr War. To answer the essential question and show our understanding, we created a ShowMe video using the sources with looked at. 

Here is our video:

http://www.showme.com/sh/?h=5MqTv16

Human Values Regardless of Race

Pie Chart of Race in Latin America

Why is it important to acknowledge human values regardless of race? That is the essential question we studied throughout this week. This question is important to think about because although now we know it is unacceptable to discriminate because of race, it has not always been that way in history. The Latin American revolutions are excellent evidence of this social imperative. We studied the impact of these revolutions on independence in class this week. We started off by creating a pie chart of the social rank of each race in Latin American countries. We found that the highest social class made up less than 1% of the population, and the people they controlled made up the vast majority. Then we split into groups to learn more about the revolutions in Brazil, Gran Columbia, and Mexico, and the impact race had on their independence.

My group created a list of major events that happened during the revolution in Brazil. In 1807, Portugal's monarchy fled to Brazil after Napoleon's troops entered the capital. For the next 13 years, Portugal's king John VI would rule all of his colonies from inside Brazil. In 1821, John VI moved back to Portugal to serve as monarch, and appointed his Pedro as prince of Brazil. Pedro hired Lord Thomas Cochran, a military leader, to enforce his authority in Brazil. Soon Portugal's Parliament was hostile and offensive to many influential Brazilians, which led to revolts hoping to gain independence from Portugal. With few battles, thanks to Lord Cochran, Brazil gained independence in 1825. 

The revolutions of Gran Columbia and Mexico are both similar and different than that of Brazil. For example, all countries' revolutions resulted in independence from their mother countries, and they all had a strong leader high in their society. But, Brazil's revolution ended in an empire while Mexico's ended in a republic, and Brazil was the only country who's leaders went into the colony to deal with the revolutions. Although all three countries' revolutions had different routes to independence, race was an issue in all three. Brazil's people were being discriminated against by Parliament's actions, Mexico's leader Miguel Hidalgo called for the end of Spanish rule and for the beginning of racial equality, and in Gran Columbia, Bolivar's main goal was to liberate them from oppressive Spanish government. 

Although these revolutions happened years ago, it is still extremely important to consider the issue of race in our society today. Even now, judgments are still being made based on race in society. For example, if there's a mostly Hispanic or African American community, commonly people automatically consider it to be unsafe based on racial stereotypes. We only have one black president in the history of our country, and that says something about the issue of race in society today. It is extremely important to acknowledge human value regardless of race, but unfortunately even today people are still being discriminated against because of their ethnicity.

Toussaint Louverture: Liberator of Slaves

Great historical figures are remembered for their many accomplishments and contributions to their society. A great American leader was Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth president of the United States, and the man who abolished slavery in America. Of course, he did more for his country than just abolishing slavery, but when we hear the name Abraham Lincoln the this feat comes to mind first. This is how Haitian revolution leader Toussaint Louverture should be remembered as well. Louverture was a freed slave in Saint Domingue in 1792 when began to lead other enslaved peoples to fight for their freedom. He and his followers won the battle against the French, and slavery was abolished in all French colonies. Louverture became the ruler of Saint Domingue, and their military commander. But, when reinstating slavery was threatened by the French, Louverture stood up to fight again. Throughout his adult life he was a prominent leader in Haiti, and should be remembered just as great American leaders such as Abraham Lincoln are remembered. Toussaint Louverture should be remembered first as a liberator of slaves, but also as a ruler of Saint Domingue and a military commander.

The quality Louverture should be most remembered for is liberator of slaves. For over 10 years, Louverture was head of the slave rebellion in Haiti. Although he accomplished more during this time, his overall goal was always the same, to abolish slavery.  The Timeline of Abolition in Saint Domingue states that in 1794, after two years of fighting against the French, “Toussaint and his troops stop their revolt and now support the French.” But in 1802, when Napoleon sends more soldiers to Saint Domingue to reinstate slavery, Louverture and his troops change sides once again to fight against the French. The reason for this was that in 1794 Napoleon abolished slavery, thus giving Louverture what he wanted and reason to side with them for a short time. But as soon as the freedom of his people was threatened, he fought back for the permanent abolition of slavery. (Doc A) To further prove his determination to reach this goal, Louverture wrote a letter to the French Directory in 1797 in response to rumors that they were about the reinstate slavery. He writes, “Could men who have once enjoyed the benefits of liberty look calmly while it is taken from them!...We have known how to confront danger to our liberty, and we will know how to confront death to preserve it.” Louverture believes that because the people have been able to experience a life of freedom they would rather die than go back to slavery. He believed so much in this that he even threatened the French government with war. (Doc B) It is exemplified in these documents how serious Louverture was about the liberation of slaves. He used his skills as a leader and military commander to work to free the slaves. Still with the goal of liberation in mind, he threatened war because he was confident in his skills as a military commander, and certain that he could lead his troops to permanent freedom.

Although Toussaint Louverture's most important role was as liberator of slaves, he was also a strong ruler of Saint Domingue.  After the people of Saint Domingue received their freedom in 1801, they owed their success to Louverture. The people believed in his abilities as a ruler and they appointed them into their new government. The Saint Domingue Constitution of 1801, signed by Louverture himself, declared that there would be no slavery at all in the colony, and that every worker on every plantation is entitled to a share in the revenues. These decisions made Louverture popular with the people for a time, so much so that the constitution appointed him “Chief General of the army of Saint Domingue...for the remainder of his glorious life.” (Doc C) They trusted in his abilities so much that they wanted him to be their ruler for as long as possible. Although eventually, the people did start to fill with discontent for some of the actions Louverture began taking. He established laws to control the population of people who were supposed to work and the people that didn’t work at all. He instituted consequences for people who ran from their plantation, and people who incited actions against the authority of the newly formed nation. (Doc D) As a ruler of Saint Domingue, Louverture successfully kept slavery at bay, and tried to create a peaceful country for his people. But, as time went on people became discontent with the way he ruled, and his skills as a military commander came into play.

Louverture’s contributions to his country as a military commander should not be overlooked. His courage, and even his ruthlessness, were what made him a successful commander. As Louverture began to be resented for his cruel labor policies and his suspicious friendliness with the white planters, a rebellion was brewing in the rest of the society that tested his skills as a military leader. As workers were allowed to control their own small plantations by Louverture’s nephew Moyse, a hatred for the white planters was stirred up. Soon, a rebellion broke out in the North with the war cry, “General Moyse is with us-death to all the whites.” To put down the revolt, Louverture chose to make a show of those that defied him by forcing rebels to step out of their ranks and kill themselves. This was Louverture’s way of reasonably putting down the rebellion and showing his control as a leader. (Doc E) In 1802, As Louverture began gaining respect from the people of Saint Domingue, the French once again attacked. But Louverture, using his skills as a military commander, found a way to get the upper hand. “The French...landed, but they found nothing but smouldering ruins, where once stood splendid cities. Toussaint and his generals at once abandoned the towns, and betook themselves to the mountains…” (Doc F) Louverture decided to burn their cities so the French would have no place to take over on the island, and fighting in the mountains was what his troops were used to and would catch the Europeans off guard. These decisions exemplify Louverture’s ability to be a strong military commander. They prove that he was able to make decisions that were the best for his colony.

Although Toussaint Louverture was a respected leader of Saint Domingue and an honorable military commander, he should be most remembered for his accomplishments as a liberator of slaves. Louverture was able to free his people from slavery, and keep them free for years under his rule. He became the ruler of Saint Domingue only because he was so successful in the abolition of slavery, and his military skills only contributed to his status as a leader. He was successful in all these areas, but his success only came from his most important achievement. Therefor, Toussaint Louverture should go down in history as the liberator of slaves in the Haitian Revolution.


Picture: Toussaint Louverture (DBQ Packet)

Surveying Europe and Its Revolutions

This week we have been learning about the Revolutions of 1830 and 1848 in Europe. We started the first class by defining what a revolution was. We defined revolutions in Europe as the people rebelling against an unfair government. If the people didn't get the changes they hoped for, then the revolution would have failed, if they did get the changes they wanted it would have been a success. But, not all revolutions fall in those two extremes, so we created a scale to rate them on. There is complete failure at one end, followed by partial failure, then neutral where nothing changed, partial success, and then complete success.

Historians believe that all these revolutions were failures, and our job this week was to decide for ourselves if we agreed. We were put into groups and each assigned a revolution, we read an overview and primary source documents and then created a survey using Survey Monkey. Then, the rest of the class took our survey to learn about our revolution.

My group was assigned the 1848 French Revolution. The 1848 Revolution consisted of working class citizens rioting against Louis Philippe's corrupt government with goals of political reforms, an end to government corruption, and extended suffrage. During February of 1848, Louis Philippe was forced to resign from the thrown, and the Second Republic was proclaimed. During June of the same year, working class citizens rioted for lower bread prices, and were attacking by bourgeoisie and peasants. While fighting broke out in the streets, citizens used building as weapons and protection. One famous building was the barricade of Saint Antoine, and according to Victor Hugo in his Description of the Barricade (http://www.edline.net/files/_5YGnP_/efd5e1bb61c791 f13745a49013852ec4/France_1848.pdf) "all that civil war can throw at the head of society came from it." After the fighting, the National Assembly created a constitution for the Second Republic, and all wealthy men were given the right to vote for their president. They elected Louis Napoleon III, Napoleon Bonaparte's nephew, as their president. But eventually he ended the Second Republic, and proclaimed himself emperor. He states in his Proclamation of 4 January 1852, that he admired the way his uncle Napoleon ruled, and was going to revert the French government back to the way it was when he was in power. This rebellion was over all more of a failure than a success. The rebels did get extended suffrage, but only for the wealthy, and eventually the Second Republic did come to an end under the rule of Louis Napoleon.

The Survey Monkey my group created can be found here:https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/T9SGP5X

Overall, our survey was successful and most of the class got the majority of the questions correct.

As we took other groups' Survey Monkeys, we learned about the other revolutions in Europe that took place between 1830 and 1848. One of the revolutions was the 1825 Decembrist Revolt. This revolt happened in Russia after the death of their leader Tsar Alexander. His death was unexpected, and a delay in arranging his succession opened an opportunity for reform. But, when Tsar Nicholas stepped up and declared himself ruler during the rebellion,  he instituted a law allowing no one to leave Russia or have any contact with the outside world. This caused violence and unrest.  Another revolt was in Germany in 1848. People from the German states decided to meet in the Frankfurt Assembly, where they created a new constitution for Germany. They offered Prussia's Frederick William IV the crown, but he refused because it was written by the people, and not the nobles. This caused conservatives to revolt, and as a result hundreds of Germans were killed, many more were imprisoned, and thousands fled to America. One final revolt we discussed was in 1848 in Hungary. Fighting against their Austrian ruler, nationalists demanded an independent government, an end to serfdom, and a written constitution to protect basic rights. Overwhelmed, the Austrian government agreed to these reforms, but they didn't last for long. Austrian forces were able to take back control over Budapest causing many to be imprisoned, executed, or forced to exile. With evidence from these revolutions, historians were correct in saying the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 were failures. None of the rebels got everything they fought for, and their governments almost always ended up back the way they were from the start.

Balancing the Power of the Five Great Powers

Today in class we learned about the Congress of Vienna, and the changes put in place after Napoleon's conquest as the ruler of France. We worked to answer the question, "What should people in power do when their power is threatened? And in this case, their power was being threatened by Napoleon. We watched a video clip showing a recreation of a conversation between Klemens von Metternich, the ruler of Austria, and Napoleon. (Napoleon-Metternich and Napoleon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJGW0jf-rmU&feature=youtu.be) During the conversation, Napoleon is seeking peace with Austria, and Matternich is stating his demands. Metternich demands that Napoleon gives up his conquest, and when he succeeds, he summons the Congress of Vienna to decide how to fix Europe and eliminate threats to power.

The Congress of Vienna consisted of representatives from Russia, Austria, Prussia, Britain, and France, or the Five Great Powers of Europe. They discussed the problems they were facing in Europe after the defeat of Napoleon. One problem they faced was how to reconstruct the map of Europe after Napoleon's conquest. They decided to solve this problem with the "Balance of Powers." This system brought French territory back to where it was before its expansion, and gave other countries more land as condolences for all they lost during Napoleon's rule. They also wanted to ensure that no country would try to take over the others, as France had done, so they decided that if the Great Powers worked together they wouldn't try to conquer one another. This system did work for a while, and due to the Balance of Powers there was no conflict between the Great Powers for the next 30 years. But, there were numerous revolutions within the countries that couldn't be contained, and eventually led to a revolution. 

I believe that the Congress of Vienna did make the right choice by creating the Balance of Powers. It kept Europe peaceful for a while, and restored land to the countries that lost it. They did the right thing by balancing the major powers, but within their own countries the leaders could have focused more on what the citizens wanted. I believe that people in power should give up some of their power in certain circumstances. For example, if all the people during uprising wanted was some minor changes in government, the ruler should do what is best for the country, not what keeps him in power the longest. Again, the Congress of Vienna made the correct choice to exterminate threats to their power, because if they didn't, Europe may have been at war for those three somewhat peaceful decades.

Picture: "Congress of Vienna." Encyclopedia Brittanica.  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/628086/Congress-of-Vienna

Liberalism, Conservatism, and Nationalism

For the past couple of days in class we have been learning about political ideologies and their impact on social and political action. An ideology is a system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy. It can also be the ideas and manner of thinking characteristic of a group, social class, or individual. The three ideologies we learned about were liberalism, conservatism, and nationalism. In class, we were put into groups and given an ideology to become experts on. My group was assigned liberalism. We started by reading an article on our ideology, and then created a 1 minute presentation describing it.

Our project on Liberalism in the 19th century.

Our project was a Common Craft video describing liberalism, and the influence it had on social and political action in the 19th century. We defined liberalism as a system that supported individual rights, innovation and reform. It disapproved of absolutism and aristocracy. Liberals believed everyone had god-given natural rights, and no one could tell anyone what rights they had based on their social status. Socially, liberalism led to a system of meritocracy, where people were rewarded based on their skills and abilities, and everyone had a chance to change their social class. Politically, liberalism gave way to the idea that government did not have rule over everything, and economic laws would guide people in society.

The other two ideologies we learned about were conservatism and nationalism. Conservatives, in contrast to liberals, did not support innovation and reform. They wanted to keep the church and the monarchies in power, and their belief was that what worked in the past was the best. They didn't want change because they believed that chaos and revolutions would be the result. Different from both liberalism and conservatism, nationalists believed that they should bring together nations with shared ideas. They thought that people with the same ideals and beliefs should unite under one government because it would make them stronger. All three of these ideologies each have a different system of beliefs, but they all had an impact on the political and social system in 19th century Europe.