Module #7 - Insatiable

Many points in the podcast “Insatiable” I agree with and have further commentary regarding. I found it hard to understand the comparison to the star trek metaphor as mentioned in the opening segment of the podcast as I have not seen that episode and could not find a description or version of it to view. If by comparison the reason for its mention is to accentuate the insatiable appetite of the American consumer, I understand its meaning and can relate.

In regard to the mention of Thomas Jefferson and his quote “We want to populate the nation with a thousand generations of Americans” although it was probably stated in a sense of pride, when taken in a different context well describes the intentions of the leaders of America. In its similarity to the “Manifest destiny” of the United States of America the statement decrees the elimination or expulsion of all that is in our way. It remains the same throughout history whether it is Columbus and his mistreatment of the natives upon arrival, Polk and the Mexican war, Jackson and the native Americans, Bush and Iraq, throughout history American leaders are thoroughly insatiable for more power, resources and wealth.

In addition, it is odd the ways that American leaders will justify their actions throughout history. As mentioned that Indians are capable of assimilation and their attributes not fixed as hereditary. While describing African Americans as hereditarily deficient and incapable is disgusting to us. It created the reasoning for the American leaders to feel justified regarding slavery and the removal of the Indians. Therefore the leaders of America fed their insatiable appetites for more land, labor, resources, power and money at the expense of these different cultures.

I agree with the orator in regard to the idea that similar circumstances would reveal similar results; the examples throughout history continue to demonstrate that fact. The examples of men of power using that power to disregard what is in their way and accumulate are many. The ironic statement by the Whig Intelligencer regarding the Mexican war that, “we take nothing by conquest…. Thank god” (Zinn 124) is hypocritical as we had taken half of the Mexican territory by force and conquest in our ever continuing fulfillment of Manifest destiny.

Although all this can easily be justified again by citing American exceptionalism as stated by the orator, American leaders would have you believe all of these atrocities that we commit are for the common good and we are here to show others the right way.

To answer the question stated, do I agree with the orator of the podcast? Yes, I believe that the American leaders throughout history have been insatiable and that greed and justification has been the downfall of many. This class has definitely opened my eyes to truths I did not realize and histories I was ignorant of in the past, our founding fathers and our nation as a whole were not the leaders I was taught about in elementary school.

Works cited

Zinn, Howard. A people’s history of the united states, vol 1, New York: The new P, 2003

Module #6 - proslavery arguments of George Fitzhugh and James Henry Hammond

In both arguments supplied by George Fitzhugh and James Henry Hammond in the assigned reading I disagree with the reasoning, but agree with some of the observational points made by James Henry Hammond.



In the "Universal law of Slavery" by George Fitzhugh, it is stated, "The negroe race is inferior to the white race." This belief was critical as a facet of justifying slavery especially in the manner that Fitzhugh pleads his case, describing the slaves as better off than they would be without slavery and better off the the free laborer. In "Give me Liberty, an American history" Eric Foner quotes Frdrick Douglass as saying "He who has endured te cruel pangs of slavery, is the man to advocate liberty," so in essence slavery itself causes the search for liberty and freedom, considered in the constitution to be one in the same. I think the whole endeavor was proved to be a selfish discussion to necessitate slavery and that Fitzhugh sums up the argument poinently by proclaiming white men "lives by mere exploitations." and article that suports that is inately false.



In "The Mudsill theory" by James Henry Hammond, Hammond states, "All social systems require a class to do menial duties, such a class you must have, or you would not have the other class to lead progress, civilazation and refinement." This seems to be true then and now, Hammond was describing the relationsship between whites and slaves, now however is it not Americans and the imigrant labor force that is compensated poorly? Indeed social systems need these classes however now the big difference is the choice to be who you are rather than the inheritance or bias of slavery being pushed upon you by the American upper classes. Witht htis though however do we believe the underpaid, non insurer, unable to vote migrant worker has liberty?

It seems backwards and crude to try to listen t these to arguments in favor or such a tragedy as slavery in the hopes of justifying its existence.



Works cited



"The Mudsill theory" by James Henry Hammond, speech to senate, March 4th, 1858


Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc., 2009.



"Universal law of Slavery" by George Fitzhugh

Module #5 – Zinn’s ruling elite vs. internal trouble

It turns out that the revolutionary war was making the ruling elite more secure from internal trouble in a number of different scenarios. The war was engineered by the ruling class and fought by the poor hardworking farmers.

The military conflict diminished other issues, made people chose sides in a contest that was publicly important and distracted them from taking issue with the ruling class. There was a large gap between the distribution of wealth and power in the colonies. In addition the poor and slaves outnumbered the ruling class heavily causing worry of rebellion and discourse. In addition the laborers, seaman and small farmers and local townspeople were swept up in the “rhetoric of the revolution, by the camaraderie of military service, by the distribution of land.” Zinn 65

The ruling elite were making immense profits and collecting large portions of land, while this period created terrible hardships for others, mainly the middle to lower class. This caused signifigant conflict between the classes, 1700 tenants closed the courts and broke open the jails in New York in 1766, and many tenants stopped paying rent during the war. Most soldiers in the revolutionary war were not even paid, meanwhile, the revolutionary war officers were given half-pay for life if they stuck until the end of the conflict.

In addition, the distribution of land of fleeing loyalists was distributed mainly to the revolutionary leaders with a little given to the general population in order to appease them and gain their support.

The Indian conflict was partially resolved as a result the revolutionary war also. The Indians could now be pushed out of the way, or killed if they resisted, to make room for the movement west. The Indian’s were swindled or pushed out of thousands of acres of land during this time to make room for expansion.

In summary the revolutionary war made the ruling elite more powerful and wealthy while eliminating some of the opportunities for conflict with the common working people.

Shown here is a picture of George Washington, “The richest man in America” and definitely part of the ruling elite.

Works cited
Zinn, Howard. A people’s history of the united states, Vol 1, New York: The New P, 2003
Picture courtesy of “The library of congress digital archives”, originally from the Chicago daily news
http://webct.dvc.edu/SCRIPT/HIST120_5563_SU09/scripts/student/serve_page.pl?1219012904+default_summer.htm+OFF+default_summer.htm
-

Module #3 - Analyzing slave codes

The slave codes of colonial North America were some of the most oppressive pieces of literature created. The central themes of the South Carolina, Louisiana, District of Colombia's and Alabama's slave codes were that black people were to have very little rights and be treated as second class citizens.

In the South Carolina slave code the 1st article states, "That all negroes, mulatoes, mestizoes or Indians, which at any time heretofore have been sold, or now are held or taken to be, or hereafter shall be bought and sold for slaves, are hereby declared slaves; and they, and their children, are hereby made and declared slaves...." I find it hard to imagine the justifying reasons that must have been used to make such a proclamation and the ramifications of those actions. The slave codes all incorporated the basic principals that slaves were property, could not own property, could not marry, should not posess weapons or firearms and were permanantly slaves.

Some of the codes had more specific points incorporated into the text that did not appear to be slave related, such as the Louisiana code specifies that, "Decrees the expulsion of Jews from the colony." I wonder why the authors felt it necessary to include that in the code?

Some other noteworthy points of these slave codes include the mandatory instruction of religion to slaves and the observance of Sundays and holidays. The Louisiana code is specific enough to delegate that slave owners take care of their slaves after the are injured or sick and that they were clothed properly. I find it at least a little ironic that the same codes that provide slaves also gave slaves some rights to proper care.

"by 1800, ten to fifteen million blacks had been transported as slaves to the Americas... It is roughly estimated that Africa lost fifty million human beings to death and slavery" (Zinn / 26). I find it hard to fathom the idea that I could possess another life like a piece of property and that I could use a worker with no payment whatsoever. The people of the colonies that had slaves must have felt entitled to these servants, but how could they not show mercy. These codes are a reminder of how callous and demeaning human beings can be and what they can become accustomed too through their own misguided interpretations.

References cited -

South Carolina code

http://webct.dvc.edu/SCRIPT/HIST120_5563_SU09/scripts/student/serve_page.pl?1219012956+readings120-summer.htm+OFF+readings120-summer.htm

Loiusianna's code noir

http://webct.dvc.edu/SCRIPT/HIST120_5563_SU09/scripts/student/serve_page.pl?1219012956+readings120-summer.htm+OFF+readings120-summer.htm

District of Colombia slave code

http://rs6.loc.gov/ammem/sthtml/stpres02.html

Alabama slave code

http://www.archives.state.al.us/teacher/slavery/lesson1/doc1.html

-Zinn, Howard. A People's History of the United States. Vol. 1. New York: The New P, 2003.

Module #2 -Zinn's people history statement

In the excerpt provided from "Howard Zinn's A peoples history of the United States", Howard Zinn makes many statements that should be validated and emphasized.

In the excerpt Zinn proclaims that "Understanding the complexities, the book will be skeptical of governments and their attempts, through politics and culture, to ensnare ordinary people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest". I agree we should be skeptical of anyone who tries to control the outcome of history and how it is portrayed, clearly our government and politicians are not worthy of having unmitigated authority over their own actions.

I appreciate Zinn's take on Columbus and his ability to look at the truth and as he says "emphasize new possibilities by disclosiong those hidden episodes of the past". It would be so easy to let the misconceptions of Colombus and his voyages and adventures go on as historical positives. However, it is apparent that colombus was not a hero as much as a ruthless pillager according to the text that followed, the atrocities discussed by Zinn in chapter 1 of his book are details that are left out of every elementary school discussion of the famous voyages. I cannot help but wonder if current day events will not mimic the contradictions similar to the Colombus famous voyages and discoveries.

In one of the last paragraphs of the statement provided Zinn procalims, "I am supposing, or perhaps only hoping, that our future may be found in the past's fugitive moments of compassion rather than its solid centuries of warfare. " This is a wonderful sentiment, however based on current events we are not only seeing less moments of compassion, but continued aggresion and warfare. Hopefully our future does not lie in the forcefull takeover and pillage of peoples land and resources, maybe our politicans should be wary and learn from the mistakes made in the past.

Introduction

Hello - My name is Brett Volway and this is my blog for History 120 for summer 2009. I am a husband, father of 3 little girls (10,6 and 2) and live in Martinez, CA. I have been going to school off and on for years, but still do not have a firm grasp on what I wish to study. I have a small business in Concord that pays the bills and provides for my family and allows me to live a lifestyle I can appreciate. I took California History the semester before last and am looking forward to supplementing that education with this class. When I am not working or playing with my family I enjoy mountain biking, whitewater kayaking and climbing.

Brett