Too Proud to Fight: U.S. Involvement in World War I

On April 6, 1917, the United States formally declared war against Germany and entered The Great War in Europe.

http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/usawardeclaration.htm

Already in the war since the summer of 1914, Britain, France, and Russia welcomed news that American troops and supplies would be directed toward the Allied war effort, under the command of Major General John Pershing. Though the United States was already involved in the war and was already helping the Allied war effort.

What was supposed to be none of our business, quickly became our business when a British Cruise liner, the Lusitania, was sunk in the Atlantic Ocean. Of the 1,962 civilians on board, 1,198 of them died, 124 of whom were Americans.

An atrocity!! America claimed that the Lusitania was carrying innocent cargo and vacationers on a cruise ship... very brave vacationers I might add. The United States home front was stunned and demanded that Wilson go to war. But Wilson stood firm and continuously declared neutrality. What a crock! Wilson's actions were never neutral, and I secretly think he always wanted to go to war for economic reasons, but was looking for an excuse to enter the war. He would eventually get his excuse.

This, like many American conflicts was our own fault. President Woodrow Wilson had promised to stay neutral, but he hardly followed through with this promise. In fact, despite his comments, the United States was never neutral, and the Lusitania did not have 'innocent cargo'.

The United States had been shipping war materials to Germany's enemies for some time. The sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 by Germany was justified.

After warning of "unrestricted submarine warfare" to ANY ships found in the Atlantic Ocean in an around Europe, the Germans had every right to torpedo the Lusitania.

Germany had already sunk a number of merchant vessels. Their ban of ships in this area was a simple war time tactic. They feared the US would supply their enemies with supplies on the sly.

Germany, sandwiched between France, Russia and Britain had almost no shot at winning the war. To remotely have a chance, Germany needed to make sure that Russia was not being sent supplies from the US or Britain for that matter. Taking Russia out of the war would eliminate the entire Eastern front and Germany could then focus on the West. Russia did eventually leave the war due to their troops' morale being low as a result of food and supplies not being replenished and the rapidly decreasing economy of their homeland. Russia's surrender was a big reason the United States joined the war... Wilson could not justify staying out of the war and allowing Germany to win.

The Lusitania's cargo, according to Howard Zinn contained the following:

1,248 cases of 3-inch shells
4,927 boxes of cartridges (1000 rounds per box)
2,000 cases of small-arms ammunition.

...hardly an innocent cargo.

Both Britain and the United States then lied about the cargo on-board, falsifying the manifests.

We were asking for it. Germany asked us not to get involved. Germany issued a warning that any ship in the area would be sunk. America claimed it was remaining neutral. As far as I'm concerned, shipping supplies to other countries is not staying neutral.

Perhaps Wilson was looking for an excuse to join the war, despite claiming that "There is such a thing as nation being too proud to fight." How about a nation, too proud to fight for the wrong reasons?

Wilson believed Germany's demands were intruding on the rights of American citizens to sail on the high seas. I believe that Wilson knowingly put American and British lives in danger by ignoring the unrestricted submarine warfare warnings.

This war was not about the United States. It was about European Alliances. It was about Nationalism, Imperialism and Militarism. The United States did not need to be involved. But there is an obvious contradiction to this neutrality with the delivery of supplies. This contradiction leads many to believe that Wilson was looking for a reason to get involved in the war.... but the US interest in the war was more about the future of the US Economy and less about the immediate defense of its citizens.

The United States would not stand to see Britain defeated by Germany. The United States' economy relied heavily on foreign markets to the tune of $3.5 billion. Britain was seen as a country that needed loans and the American companies like JP Morgan and Company were just what Britain needed.

Additionally, industrialists realized that involvement in the war would mean increased production and sale of their resources. Tycoons of steel, railroads, gun powder, automobiles and banks were sure to benefit from the US involvement in the war.

There is no doubt that a war is a good way to pull an economy out of a depression or a recession, but why can't our administrators be honest about why we go to war? It was not about the innocent lives of Americans but rather our posterity.

More to Explore:

World War I Lesson Plans/Primary Source Documents
Woodrow Wilson Lesson Plans/Primary Source Documents

Read More...

Summary only...

1848: America's Coming Out Party...

In last week's TIME magazine there was an article written by novelist Kurt Andersen which discusses America in the late 1840s, particularly in 1848.

Andersen writes that the United States was "coming of age" in 1848 where miraculous transformation in all facets of human life occurred improving the way in which people lived.

In January of 1848, gold was discovered in Northern California. The Gold Rush was upon us and stories of fortunes and failure would become a part of the "American Way".

The beginning of February brought the end of the Mexican War, which extended the United States from Texas all the way to the Pacific. That's a pretty big chunk.

Meanwhile in London, a German Philosopher would frown upon the petty American citizens and their belief of the "bizarre phenomenon" of striking it rich. Karl Marx and his buddy Friedrich Engels were published The Communist Manifesto, causing riots in Europe. Marx and Engels believed that getting rich from gold was something that "was not provided for in the Manifesto" because the philosophy does not believe in the creation of "large new markets out of nothing". Think again gentlemen!

California's Gold Rush turned San Francisco into the largest city west of Chicago. This due in large part to the prospect of fortune.

There were several improvements of speed in 1848. The first being the telegraph. 1848 marked the first year that country was wired. From Boston to New York City to Washington to Chicago and New Orleans, the country could communicate much faster than it could before. What used to take weeks and then days, would now only take seconds. The world was now much smaller.

The same year, in upstate New York, an unprecedented gathering of women demanded suffrage and women's rights.

With the increased speed of the printing presses, newspapers were popping up all over the country and truly came of age in the late 1840s. The Associated Press was formed in 1846.

Andersen claims that "railroad mania" really took flight in the late 1840s. Four times as much railroad track was laid than in 1847.

It was also the late 1840s when Pioneers began their trek across the wilderness in search of a better life.

The 1840s also saw the first department store, the first 'national brand', and the first presidential campaigns. "Tippecanoe and Tyler too!!" Forget the selling of Richard Nixon as president. The US was suckered into electing William Henry Harrison. The Whigs remade Harrison into a great war hero, though he was nothing more than a boring, uninspired military leader. (see the poster on the left)

With an expanded voting base, both parties, the Whigs and the Democrats were prepared to appeal to these new masses and set out on national campaign efforts. Eighty Percent more people voted in this election then in the previous one. The election of 1836 had 1,503,534 total votes, while 1840 had 2,411,808 total votes. William Harrison had nearly as many votes in 1840, 1,275,390, as the entire candidate pool from 1836.

Andersen claims that 1848 saw the country's first theatrical "mega hit", A Glance at New York, which featured dialogue spoken in the vernacular sense. But let's be honest, this came into vogue in the Renaissance as well and was nothing new.

The main fan base of these shows were the heart and soul of the mean streets of the city, forming the first American youth sub-culture. These "Bowery Boys and Girls" were foulmouthed and rambunctious, and according to Andersen, enjoyed physical violence. A precursor to today's youth hip-hop culture.

The article continues in stating that PT Barnum began his traveling show in the late 1840s and such authors as Walt Whitman and Nathanial Hawthorne began their work on the classics Leaves of Grass and The Scarlet Letter respectively. Though I always associated this work by Whitman with the Civil War.

Henry David Thoreau's On Walden Pond experience began in the late 1840s... on this same note, Andersen fails to mention that environmentalist, naturalist, preservationist and writer John Muir journeyed across the Atlantic from Scotland in 1848.

Muir who's works are still read to this day, later founded the Sierra Club. He befriended Teddy Roosevelt in the early 1900s and convinced him that the parks were being mismanaged by the states and the misuse of resources and urged Roosevelt to do something about it. A 'woodsy' guy himself Roosevelt went on to establish the nation's first national bird reserve, which eventually became the Wildlife Refuge System. Roosevelt also charged congress with creating the United States Forrest Service. (Muir and Roosevelt are pictured to the right)

Roosevelt set aside more land for national parks and nature preserves than all of his predecessors combined, 194 million acres. In all, by 1909, the Roosevelt administration had created an unprecedented 42 million acres of national forests, 53 national wildlife refuges and 18 areas of "special interest", including the Grand Canyon.

Perhaps, modern thought, modern communication, modern transportation and modern American life did begin in the late 1840s. It was time unequalled in its aggressiveness towards speed, change and modernity.

Though the some, like Walden, distanced themselves from it. And many still today try to follow in his footsteps to find a balance. If this is you... I suggest reading the works of Thoreau as well as John Muir, it truly is an enlightening, relaxing experience that takes you away from whatever stresses you have.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Father of Our Constitution

March 16th marked the 256th birthday of James Madison, who born into wealth in Orange County, Virginia.

Many, know very little about James Madison. The name is familiar. They know his association with our fledgling nation, but perhaps are not familiar with all of his accomplishments. Some may not even know that he was our 4th President. If this describes you, then feast your brain on a quick bio of 'The Father of our Constitution'.

Childhood

As a child, Madison was smaller then most of the kids his age. He was also frail and contracted a lot illnesses growing up, which lead him to becoming a hypochondriac. Because his illnesses, real or assumed, required him to miss a lot of school, Madison was a few years older than his classmates.

Being born into the Virginia aristocracy, Madison never had to worry about working for a living but decided to study law, religion and political theory on his own accord. By age 11 it is believed that he had read every book in his Virginia home, Montpelier.

Madison went on to attend The College of New Jersey (Princeton) where he finished 3 years worth of schooling in 2 years. I guess all that reading paid off. His study at TCNJ was cut short for illness and Madison returned home to tutor his many brothers and sisters.

Political Life

Madison never imagined he'd join the ranks of Thomas Jefferson or George Washington in the fight for independence as his confidence within himself was not strong. He didn't think he had anything to contribute to the colonial movements and labeled himself as too "dull and infirmed now to look out for extraordinary things" and he did not "expect a long healthy life".

In December of 1774, Madison was elected to local office as a member of the Orange County Committee. He attended the Virginia convention in 1776 and was later elected to the General Assembly where he served alongside George Mason, Richard Henry Lee and Thomas Jefferson.

It was here where Madison realized he and Jefferson shared many of the same political views. The two Virginians grew close, and became life long friends and allies.

While on the General Assembly Madison helped Thomas Jefferson to pass the Statute of Religious Freedom and the two worked together to oppose the Government's support of religion and helped to build the "wall of separation" between church and state.

Madison also worked with another well respected Virginian, the great George Washington at the Annapolis Convention. Here they worked out the navigational rights of the Potomac River.

He also participated in the framing of the Virginia Constitution in 1776, and served in the Continental Congress

National Spotlight

As the United States began to take shape, and after winning the war for independence, with help in many different arenas from the aforementioned Washington, Jefferson, Lee, Mason and Madison the United States was now realizing that their first attempt at Government was not working.

The infamous Articles of Confederation, which worked well enough to get the U.S. through the war was now being exposed as having a weak executive branch with no power to demand taxes from the states and having no way to settle disputes between the states. Additionally each state had its own rules on trading and commerce and it did not bode well for relations between the states.

Something had to change. Enter, James Madison.

Good ol' James came to the convention with the intent to scrap the entire Articles of Confederation and start all over. To support his this, Madison came prepared with his own replacement, the Virginia Plan.

The Virginia Plan was part of the compromise between large states and small states. Small states wanted equal representation, the same as the large states, while the larges states felt they should have more representation than the smaller states. Because, after all, they had more people.

Thus, our 2 tiered congress was born. Small states have equal representation in the Senate (2 per state) and the larger states have more representation in the House. (representation based on population.) There was actually a whole lot more to it, with arguments over how slaves should be counted. If slaves counted as citizens for the south shouldn't they count for taxes too? Thus the 3/5 compromise.. the compromises of this Convention go on and on... but since this is about James Madison, we'll save this for another time...

For now, consider this Part 1 - of the life and times of James Madison.

For information about James Madison's life in Philadelphia, please visit The Daily Life and Diversity of Philadelphia. This is a site I worked on in conjunction with Independence National Park.

Please go to the USHistorySite.com for James Madison Lesson Plans

James Madison... to be continued...

Read More...

Summary only...

The Obligatory: Lincoln / Kennedy Coincidences

Having a US History blog without the obligatory coincidences between the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy, is like having a little league game without a parent who complains about the ump. You know its coming, you don't want to hear it, but still you find some joy in knowing that it still exists.

I think that most of us have seen this list. It is continuously passed around via email on an endless cycle and will inevitably land in your inbox every year or so, like it did in my inbox this afternoon. My Grandfather sent it to me. And despite how many times I've seen it, and how many times I've looked up the facts to debunk it, I still read each and every word.

Continue reading to the bottom for a link to the debunking of the list.

Mr. Miley, my 10th grade US History teacher from William Tennent High School in Warminster, PA introduced me to this phenomenon. As an open minded high school sophomore I thought it was one of the more interesting things I've ever learned. Mr. Miley was a JFK assassination buff and spent a significant amount of time on the subject. Unfortunately, this and The Jungle by Upton Sinclair are about the only things I remember from that class. I didn't start to appreciate US History until college. And I owe most of this to Dr. Paul Zbiek from King's College in Wilkes-Barre. He lectured by telling a story, and he would plan the classes well by leaving us with cliffhangers. It was great to watch his passion for the Civil War.

Back to the topic at hand...

I've been familiar with these "coincidences" for a while. And I don't think I can really continue this American History blog without getting this entry out of the way so that I can reference it later.

So here it goes... Here are the coincidences

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846. John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860. John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960.

The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both were shot in the head.

Lincoln's secretary, Kennedy, warned him not to go to the theatre.

Kennedy's secretary, Lincoln, warned him not to go to Dallas.

Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners.

Both successors were named Johnson.

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

John Wilkes Booth was born in 1839.

Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939.

Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are comprised of fifteen letters.

Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.

Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

So that's the list.... Some of the similarities are kind of eerie, I don't doubt that. Let me continue by giving you the origins of this list.

A short while after JFK's assassination in 1963, this list surfaced and has been continuously reprinted and circulated since. And for good reason. It makes for interesting fodder. However, several of these entries are misleading or just flat out wrong. The majority of the coincidences are simply that, coincidences and should not be tied to any spiritual or karmic motives. If our president in 2o60 is assassinated, I might reconsider this statement.

And often times, this one is added:

A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland. A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.

The Debunking:

To start, I've personally done some research about the last coincidence and the first thing that jumps out is this. Marilyn Monroe died in August of 1962. Kennedy was shot in November of 1963. Monroe was dead for over a year before the assassination. Do I even have to go on?

No. But I will. Currently, there is no town named Monroe, Maryland. Though there is a Monroe Gardens, Maryland, so this one might be possible.

#2

John Wilkes Booth was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939.

This is wrong. Just take a look at any John Wilkes Booth Bio to find out that he was born on May 10, 1838. See it here and here.

And because I couldn't say it better myself, please find a link to Snopes.com where someone has already taken the time to debunk many more of these claims.

I welcome any other facts and information...

Read More...

Summary only...

Remember the Alamo?

Of course not. It was yesterday, March 6, 1836 that the Mexican forces recaptured the Alamo, a former mission in the Mexican town of San Antonio. The mission was was held since December of 1835 by Texas freedom fighters.

It was in April of 1836 when the Texans stormed the mission again under the command of Sam Houston, reclaiming the Alamo as their own and gaining independence from Mexico.

Texas would remain as its own independent nation for nearly ten years. In 1845, Texas' legislature voted for annexation to the United States.

1848 brought the Mexican War which came to an end with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This treaty brought even more land to the United States.

The treaty brought us parts of modern-day Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming. as well as the all of California, Nevada and Utah. The remaining parts of Arizona and New Mexico would later be purchased from Mexico in the Gadsden Purchase of 1853.

The United States is clearly the aggressor here. Manifest destiny played a huge role in our conquering of Mexican territory.

Read More...

Summary only...

Did Theodore Roosevelt Really Say That?

"Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or leave the country."
- Theodore Roosevelt

These are the true words of Theodore Roosevelt, supposedly taken from a letter written to the President of the American Defense Society on January 3, 1919, three days before he died, ten years after his presidency.

The American Defense Society, who named Roosevelt Honorary President, was ready to launch a campaign to distribute Theodore Roosevelt portraits to schools and organizations in support of their cause, which is what brought Roosevelt to make what would be his last public statement; where he encouraged the United States to "Keep up the Fight for Americanism."

This theme of "Americanism" was a popular topic for Roosevelt, for he believed our nations would fall to ruins because of the "squabbling of nationalities" amongst the "hyphenated Americans."

It was this fear that led him to endorse compulsory learning of English by every naturalized citizen. It was this same fear that prompted Roosevelt to record his infamous statement that "Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or to leave the country". He also added that "English should be the only language taught or used in the public schools."

Another quote from Roosevelt: "It is our boast that we admit the immigrant to full fellowship and equality with the native-born. In return we demand that he shall share our undivided allegiance to the one flag which floats over all of us."

I've seen these statements (or ones very similar) written many times. However they always seem to be associated with many different dates, spanning two years. What I can conclude with near certainty was that Roosevelt said these words years after his presidency. This does not sound like the calculated words of a politician, but rather the tired voice of a strong minded, curmudgeon who loves his country to the point where he doesn't want to see all his hard work crumble in vain. He actually seems a lot like my Granfather.

Regardless of when he said these words, Roosevelt's words ring true for many Americans today. Some things never change.

More Teddy Roosevelt Quotes
Roosevelt on immigration

Read More...

Summary only...

The GI Bill: A Curse or a Blessing?

My Grandfather, an 87 year old World War II Veteran has a heart of gold and mind as sharp as a World War II sniper. He's also got an opinion. He and I often debate sports, history and politics. I thoroughly enjoy his input and I cherish every moment of it. When he found out I was blogging about history, he wanted to add his two cents. He's earned it. He's part of "The Greatest Generation". He's put in his time. He's allowed to be crotchety. What would this world be without curmudgeons? And I mean this is in the best possible way.

Please find below his thoughts on the GI Bill, immigration and American laziness.

"I believe The GI Bill (Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944) was the best and worst thing in American history. Before WWII the USA was a country of family oriented God loving people. Who raised their families, feared God and worked hard; something that brought from the hamlets of Europe. Then came the Great War, and to thank them, the good men in Congress passed the GI BILL.

We were able to buy homes at 4% mortgages, go to college based on time served and of the 11 million, many of us jumped. We became educated and educated our children. Then our children started to ask questions. We never wanted that type of depression to affect our own, so we made a relief program.

This was fine if you were educated and lost your job temporarily. This relief came in the form of The 52 --20 club. You could get $ 20.00 for 52 weeks. Many of our “ethnic” took advantage of this. Get a job work for a couple of months. Get laid off and go on relief. With nothing to do they fostered children who followed their fathers. Not everyone did this but enough to cause a problem.

Then the educated ones found fault with Vietnam but having developed a liberal attitude they followed Kennedy and Johnson who escalated the WAR. Protests resulted following the feudal instincts of Europe and are still present in the near and far east. Ours was not as great. Just enough to break down what our ancestors had built up. However, this has started what happened to all great nations; Greed within.

The lackadaisical belief in GOD, THE BREAK DOWN OF FAMILIES. Greed sent our family overseas. We probably have more billionaires than millionaires, and we want more. I fear for my great grandchildren and I pray that GOD will return strong. This will keep our promised land. Unfortunately our existence is being questioned by people who want to change our basic principles and Congress is letting them do it. Take down those signs that show four languages, when you by many products only print instructions in English. Its fine to let people come here but they must speak English.

If you are going to help them, give them 52-20. ONCE. And they can’t bring their families until they themselves are established as tax paying CITIZENS.

GP"

GP = Grandpop

For more information, please visit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Bill
http://www.gibill.va.gov/GI_Bill_Info/history.htm

Read More...

Summary only...

The 10 Worst Presidents

This week's edition of US News and World Report ranks The 10 Worst Presidents. I like US News and World Report for several reasons. First, because of its conservative slant, it is a great compliment to my Time magazine. I always recommend reading two sides of a story before making any judgement. The second reason is that it has a lot of articles about American history.

If you can get past the ads aimed at our older Americans, America's most conservative thinkers, those that Tom Brokaw calls "Our Greatest Generation", then it is a pretty good magazine. I don't mean to offend "the generation" but I know when I see Ed McMahon promoting a bathtub that opens from the side so that you don't have to step over the edge, there is a possibility that the product is not aimed at me. I think we can agree the magazine has conservative readership.

Now to the business at hand, The 10 Worst Presidents of the United States.

According to USNews, their list is as follows... (worst being at the top)

1. James Buchanan
2. Warren Harding
3. Andrew Johnson
4. Franklin Pierce
5. Millard Fillmore
6. John Tyler
7. U.S. Grant
8. William Harrison
9. Herbert Hoover / Richard Nixon
10. Zachary Taylor

A pretty good list with the usual suspects rearing their ugly heads.

The essence of the article is about whether or not these lists can be viewed as accurate based on the political ideology of the president versus that of the public at that time. Harvard historian, Arthur Schlesinger Sr. believes that what weighed most heavily in determining the worst president was whether they "took the side of the progressivism and reform, as understood in their day." In other words. any president who did not agree with the majority of public opinion during their tenure is most assuredly viewed as a poor president.

George Bush, for example, is already being penciled in as a failure and will undoubtedly join the list when his administration is distinguished.

Many of these presidents are listed in the bottom ten due to inactivity or passiveness in times of American strife or historical challenge.

U.S. Grant (#7) and Warren Harding (#2) turned a blind eye to corruption within their administrations. Herbert Hoover(#9) did nothing to get America out of a depression. James Buchanan, who preceded Lincoln, did not believe there would be a Civil War and his decision not to deal with secession is ranked as the worst presidential mistake of all time.

In ranking the presidents there is a bias towards activism. Those that do, don't make the list. Those that don't, do! Unless the action is misplaced or controversial, like Nixon (tied for #9) and Watergate or Lyndon Johnson, who didn't make the list.

The USNews list is derived from the average of "five major and relatively recent" presidential polls, which spawned a more accurate representation of the least successful presidencies. Because of a tie at #9, there are actually 11 in the list.

To be fair, here is another list from the book Presidential Leadership, which ranks all the presidents. I'll include only the bottom 10.


1. James Buchanan
2. Warren Harding
3. Franklin Pierce
4. Andrew Johnson
5. Millard Fillmore
6. John Tyler
7. Jimmy Carter
8. Zachary Taylor
9. Richard Nixon
10. Herbert Hoover

Jimmy Carter, U.S. Grant and William Harrison are the only presidents who made only one list. That said, I think we can get a pretty good idea that the remaining leaders can be considered, failures.

FYI -- The only three presidents to be considered "Great" according to Presidential Leadership's criteria, are George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and FDR. No surprises.

Read More...

Summary only...

Cherokee People?

On February 21, 1828, the first issue of the Cherokee Phoenix was printed, both in English and in the newly invented Cherokee alphabet.

This is especially newsworthy today based on the fact that NPR reported that a federal court hearing has Native Americans arguing against the descendants of African slaves once kept by Cherokee tribal members. The Cherokee Nation has moved to expel the people known as Cherokee Freedmen.

The Freedmen argue that a 140-year-old treaty protects their citizenship in the Cherokee Nation. Which puts the tribal member in a tight spot trying to argue against a long standing treaty.

The Cherokee was always one of the largest and wealthiest of all native american tribes. Many were landowners and owned up to 100 african slaves. It was these slaves who were granted citizenship when there names were included on a federal government list of all Cherokee citizen's called the "Dawes Roll".

The ancestors of these slaves are now arguing that they should be included in the Cherokee nation and are only being excluded because of the color of their skin.

The Cherokee argue that "It's an Indian thing, we do not want non-Indians in the tribe, our Indian blood is what binds us together".

It was after fighting for the losing side in the Civil War that the Cherokees decided to grant their newly freed slaves citizenship in the tribe. The Cherokee Freedmen believe that they helped sustain Cherokee life as much as an 'original' tribe member and deserve to be part of the Cherokee Nation.

I guess the courts will have to decide.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Spanish-American War

On February 15, 1898, an explosion of unknown origin sank the battleship U.S.S. Maine in the Havana, Cuba harbor, killing 266 of the 354 crew members.

The sinking of the Maine incited United States passions against Spain, eventually leading to a naval blockade of Cuba and a declaration of war.

But was the USS Maine, or was the United States really just looking for an excuse to claim some land?

Let's take a look, shall we.

The USS Maine was sent to Cuba to protect American interests after some riots had broken out in Havana. The ship, one of America's first battleships which cost nearly $2 million dollars, was reportedly blown up by a mine. The first report from the U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry originally didn't blame any single person or country.

Public opnion however began to blame the Spanish military who was occupying Cuba at the time. Diplomatic communications between the US and Spain did not resolve the matter, and thus the United States was at war with Spain by April of 1898. The Spanish-American war had begun. It was the war that made Teddy Roosevelt and his Rough Riders famous. Roosevelt, popular for stomping out the little guy in the interest of expanding American "interests", won one of the war's major battles at San Juan Heights eventually forcing a surrender.

First, lets take a look at the US "interests" in Cuba and determine why we were so concerned about the riots in Havannah.

Long before 1898 America had bought up large tracts of land in Cuba for sugar (azucar en espanol). By 1895 the United States had more than $50 million dollars invested in Cuba. Annual trade with Cuba, mostly in sugar, was worth twice that. Put simply, the United States had a stake $100 million dollars per year in Cuba and sugar.

The United States, wanted to ensure that they could continue to use Cuba to produce sugar and probably weren't that concerned with the well being of the country, but rather the well being of their sugar price.

Despite the fact that President Grover Cleveland signed a proclamation of Neutrality on June 12, 1895, fervor for war grew.

Cuba, still owned by Spain, was placed under martial law in February of 1896 by General Valeriano Weyler of Spain and thus heavily guarded by Spanish troops. Within a month, President Cleveland reversed his neutrality proclamation and stated that he might intervene if Spain did not end the crisis in Cuba.

By this time, March of 1897, President William McKinley had taken office, and he became even more anxious to intervene in the Cuba/Spain conflict, especially since he was criticized by the Spanish Foreign Minister in a letter published in a New York Journal on February 9, of 1898.

After the explosion of the USS Maine on February 15th, the United States moved quickly passing a law on March 9th to allocate $50 million dollars to build up the military.

March 28, it was decided that a mine had blown up the USS Maine. On April 21st, McKinley orders a blockade of Cuba, and four days later the United States Declared War.

Read McKinley's War Message to Congress.

The result of the Spanish-American War was bringing Guam, the Philipines, Cuba and Puerto Rico under US control. As part of the Treaty of Paris of 1898, which ended the Spanish-American War, Spain ceded the Phillipines, Cuba, Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States

It was an age of American Imperialism.

So why did we go to war? Was it because of the USS Maine? Was it to protect our "interest" in sugar? Did McKinley declare war to disprove a foreign naysayer? .

Around the same time, Hawaii was also annexed for sugar. Guam, on the other hand served as a pit-stop or waystation for American ships going to the Phillipines. The Phillipines opened the door for the United States in the Pacific. Imperialism was upon us. And the imperialistic ideals would continue when Spanish-American War hero Theodore Roosevelt would succeed McKinley as our next president.

More on Teddy Roosevelt.

Read More...

Summary only...

Losing Trust in the American Government.. is nothing new.

If you've lost trust in the Government from Watergate and beyond, then you've been misinformed of the ills of our Government from the many years before that. Not unlike 'democratic' Governments of Ancient Greece and Rome, our United States government has not earned the trust of the American people from day one.

Let's begin with the original writing of the Constitution. The original constitution left a lot to be desired as far as human rights were concerned. The main articles of the constitution did a good job explaining the legislative process but didn't quite complete the job with the inclusion of the rights of the people.

The 'Elastic Clause' as it has come to be named, leaves an open door for the Legislative Branch to do whatever they'd like as long as the deem it 'necessary and proper'. Which is a phrase, much like the rest of the Constitution, that is ambiguous and can be interpreted many different ways.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18, states:

"The Congress shall have the Power... ...To make all laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all
other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States,
or in any Department or Office thereof."

In other words, if it is NOT written in the constitution, then congress can decide what should be written there if they consider "necessary and proper" for that given moment. Put frankly, it left the door open for them to fill in the blanks.

The second way our original Constitution was not to be trusted was with the absence of our individual rights. The constitution gave plenty of rights to the government, namely the Congress, the Courts and the Executive Branch, but didn't list ANY right of the citizens. Many states would not ratify the constitution for this reason. The authors of the famous Federalist Papers were in favor of this 'big government' and were persuading the public to support the new Constitution.

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, just might be the first politicians to try and pull the wool over our heads. Their Federalist Papers tried to convince t he public to ratify the Constitution, as is. But many anti-federalists demanded that individual rights be included in the new constitution, and they were.

Thus, the first 10 Amendments, or changes were made to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights serve as a reminder that the Government can't get away with everything. Had nobody fought for our rights in the 1787 and 1788, when the Constitution was being debated, then our world would be entirely different.

Thank you Thomas Paine!

The list of Government mistrust goes on and on. We could talk about Andrew Jackson and his spoils system, the Election of 1824, the corrupt Presidencies of U.S. Grant and James Garfield, or any politician during the Gilded Age. But I think the strongest argument can be said for the precedent set by the Constitution and its original inability to provide for the common good of all men.

PS. Despite my accusations of the authors of the Federalist Papers, I think the views of all the founding fathers were instrumental in creating our great democracy. Incidentally, Alexander Hamilton is one of my favorite 'fathers' for his efforts with the banking system and the economy.

Read More...

Summary only...

Henry Clay... our Greatest Senator.

Henry Clay, like the Buffalo Bills was at the doorstep of greatness several times, and each time the result was undesirable. Henry Clay ran for president on 5 separate occasions. He won his party's nomination several times making to the 'big dance' only to be outdone by another party's candidate.

Though he never officially led our country, Henry Clay did great things representing Kentucky in both the House and Senate. Clay was known as The Great Compromiser, because of success brokering the issue of slavery several times.

First, was the Compromise of 1820, more commonly referred to as the Missouri Compromise. At this time, the balane between Free and Slave states was even at eleven a piece. Missouri wanted to come in as a free state, but the northern statesmen weren't going to have it. In a nutshell, the Missouri Compromise brought in Maine as a free state and Missouri as a slave state, maintaining the balance in the Senate. Additionally, slavery was now forbidden north of the 36-30 latitude line, which is essentially the northern border of Arkansas.

This negotiation staved off the inevitable Civil War for the time being.

Thirty years later, Clay would be called on again, this time coerced out of a short retirement to debate the issue of slavery once more. A similar situation had occurred. Senate wanted to keep the balance of Slave vs. Free state, but wasn't sure what to do with the newly acquired land which came as a result of the Mexican
American War. The Compromise of 1850 was born. This plan allowed slavery in the New Mexico and Utah territories while admitting California to the Union as a free state. It also included a new Fugitive Slave Act and banned the slave trade (but not slavery itself) in the District of Columbia. Many thought the banning of the slave trade in DC would lead others to follow suit. Banning the slave trade, and not slavery itself would allow the current slave owners to continue using slaves, but leaving them to rely on their current slaves' offspring to carry on the work.

The Compromise of 1850, again, helped to delay the Civil War for an additional eleven years.

Obviously, Henry Clay has some influence in the political arena and was highly respected. If her were alive today, might he be a moderate democrat, willing to cross party lines to get things done?

He was forward thinking enough to start the Whig Party, essentially the first 'second party'.

The American System kind of falls under the realm of 'crossing party lines'. The Amrerican System was Henry Clay's economic plan to make the United States self sufficient. In order for this to work, the North would have to cooperate with the South and vice-versa. It was an effort to rely less on British manufacturers and more on the industry located on the eastern seaboard. It called for improvements in roads and canals, to aid in shipping goods to the newly developing western states. It also suggested a national bank, something Alexander Hamilton had been advocating for many years. However, increased tension between the North and South, eventually led to the demise of this plan.

But again, it shows the strategic mind of Henry Clay who wanted nothing more than a peaceful and cooperative united states. Clay passed away in 1852 unaware that despite all his efforts, the slavery issue became too much and the strife between the states came to a head with the inevitable Civil War.

Even so, Henry Clay deserves more credit for his efforts.

PS - A Senate committee, headed by John F. Kennedy in 1957, was assigned the task of assessing and honoring his past members. This committee declared that Henry Clay was the greatest Senator in the history of this body.

And finally, here's an article comparing Clay to John McCain.

Read More...

Summary only...

We Didn't Start the Fire

Billy Joel's jaunt through the 20th century in his song "We Didn't Start the Fire", is an excellent introduction into the modern era. It is interesting to consider one man's thoughts on the important issues of his lifetime.

We'll take a closer look at the lyrics to this song, we'll analyze his thoughts on why these specific events/people are important, and then you'll have the opportunity to create your own 1990-2006 verse. (extra credit if you perform it).

For now, listen to the song, enjoy the images and consider everything that has happened in the last 60 years.

Your posting assignment is to discuss in a few paragraphs why Billy Joel chose some of the events and people he did? (describe at least 2, and I don't want any repeats.)

Read More...

Summary only...

The Cost of Advancement

We've been discussing how Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller built great fortunes through hard work and determination. We've also considered that their fortunes came at the great expense of competitors, customers and workers.

After Reading Howard Zinn's Ch. 11 (p. 253-299) what are your thoughts on the costs of advancement and the tycoons of the late 19th century who helped to improve the nation?

Are they ruthless robber barons who only care about making a profit? Or are they great businessmen who do contribute positively on society?

Use examples of what we've read and what we've discussed to support your claim.

Read More...

Summary only...