As a new student to Puget South Early College, I was very nervous to take college level classes. I was so afraid I might have messed up or misunderstood, especially the writing class which I worried the most. To me, writing is always a way to express my feelings and thoughts, just like write an angry letter when I am mad, and make up a song or poem when I am happy. There is no limitation for me in writing. Maybe there are some mistakes I always make but as long as I can be creative and express it freely, I do not think there will be anything problems. But at beginning of the class of Writing 101, my style of writing did not work well. Since I am an ESL (English as Second Language) student, an immigrate and not an English native speaker, the language is my weakness, but as the class went on I learned what I need to write a good essay by reading my classmates’ essays. The two essays that I have prepared for this portfolio will show my changes of writing style in a good way from my writing experiences in this class.
****
I did not do well on my first essay since I had never write a college essay before and always practiced writing in ESL level in the ESL class. To tell my strength on my first essay which is the “Bacon’s Rebellion”, the only two things I was good at were to describe what was happening during that time and compared it with the modern world. As a new student to the college with a little weak English skills, I did not get what am I suppose to do with the essay, so I did it the way that I used to write for my ESL essays, and it did not work. And the weaknesses I had on this essay were not having enough historical evidences, quotes, clear arguments , good hook , and some grammar mistakes. The most important part I made mistake was not giving a good theme, which did not show a clear argument. So what I did was keeping the most important and useful information and rewrite other parts. I added my voice of argument, give quote, changed a hook and focus more about my topic since I was out of topic at first time. And I believe the revised version of first essay will show a huge difference from the original one.
***
On my second essay, I did a better job because it was a partnered essay. I was glad to work with my partner. I gave him my ideas and words, and he fixed and wrote it down for me, so this essay actually looked smoother then my first essay. It was an essay about a loyalist having an interview with a patriots, and I believe my partner and I brought out good questions for each other to explain each side’s situations. And the only weaknesses we had was a little mistake on the grammar and did not have a good citation, because instead of giving a citation to our source we gave an annotation. So I fixed the grammar and used a website called “ esaybib” for the citations. There was too much things to change around on the second essay, but after fixing it, it looked a little bit better.
***
For my final, I think I did a good job because I tried my best and used what I have learned in this class. I know it might not be prefect, but to me it was the best work I have ever done this quarter. I was a little bit in hurry so I made a lot grammar mistakes, but I printed out a copy for myself to correct my mistakes right after the test. And this time, I might have a good hook and showed a sense of understanding the quote. And it is pretty much the end of the quarter, I learned how to focus and not to be off the topic, and more understanding of how to use historical evidences on the essay to support my argument. Over all, I learned more about college writing and grew from the ESL writing. I am glad I took this class which will help me to prepare for writing essays in the future and got a sense of how might the classes look like if I was in a class of big number students in a university.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Portfolio: Essay 1
Vicky Lay
Essay #1
Bacon’s Rebellion - Class
What catch my attention the most and quickest are those events that changed the history or happened with interesting reasons. Just like what happened in the World War II, Japan attacked the Pearl Harbor which belong to United State of America, just because they thought the U.S. government would help their enemies to fight them, so Japan decided bomb Pearl Harbor, where American Navy located. Later on, America dropped a nuclear bomb in Japan and killed a big number of Japan’s population. After all Japan learned a lesson from U.S., and it changed history and ended the World War II. Isn’t it an interesting event happened in history for Japanese made a funny mistake. And just like what surprised me most in Bacon’s Rebellion which happened in1676, that Nathaniel Bacon was a rich class gentleman from England. He helped and led those poor American colonists to fight the English government and the American Indians. And also the differences of life between each class during the year of 1676 got me interested.
**********************************************************************************
Bacon’s Rebellion erupted all over Virginia’s Indian policy in 1676. The policy was a treaty that the colonial government signed with American Indians that the colonists or the government will not cross or take over the rest of Indian’s territory. And as the end for the result, we know that Europeans still took over the land just because more and more Europeans immigrated to America and they needed more space to live.
**********************************************************************************
It was a huge different life between each society class. It was either very rich and powerful or very poor and did not own anything at all. As more and more Europeans came to America, what happened to those poor people who could not pay for their trips to America? For those poor people who could not their trips to America, they signed a seven- year contract with rich people like merchants to pay for the trip to America. In order to pay back, they had to serve the merchant for seven years, but if they tried to run away during the serving years the merchant had the right to add more years on the contract. And it very similar to the lowest class which were the African slaves. The African slaves had no right and no voice during this time. The main two reasons why Africans were enslaved was because to the English religion, the color black represented evil, and also was an excuse that they needed somebody to do the works that they did not want to do by themselves. And even though the poor English were owned by somebody, they still got their freedom after serving years, and slaves did not. There were only a few examples that slaves could by themselves out of their owners. Most of African slaves worked for their owner all their lives and their children were treated and worked as slaves too. Slaves were very useful and cheap to the rich people at this time, since more Africans were kidnapped and sent to America and sold as slaves. In the text book, “THE AMERICAN PROMISE” written by historians Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, Lawson and Hartmann, Africans were brought to America by ships. Europeans sent and sold around 1,341,000 Africans in sixteenth century. The master did not care anything about his slaves, all he did was to make them work and work and if they got sick or died, he would just go buy more slaves to work for him. The master just wanted to make profits from the products that slaves made. And the products were mostly tobacco since it was the biggest plantation and European were crazy about it.
*********************************************************************************
The high classes during this time were those governors, rich family, and those plantation owners. The reason why rich people were powerful was because they were friends with governments. And government was friends with rich people because they can support the government with money. For this reason, more and more unfairness events started to disrupted in the society in Virginia. I am strongly disagreed the way that the slaves were mistreated. How could people treated a human begin like an animal and did not care for his death.
********************************************************************************
How did the houses look different in each different class ?There’s a travel report written by Sara McClure, a student of the College of William and Mary. And it’s about when servants and lower class people came to visit a higher class they would have to stay in the main hall. This did create a feeling of intimidation and separated the upper class from the lower classes. And the fact that wealthy people were able to put so much money and effort into their house brings to light an important difference in priorities between the classes. Most of small or poor planters would put all their money back into their tobacco crops while people who were wealthier could afford to use money for their homes.
********************************************************************************
Virginia’s Indian policy might have worked if the Chesapeake population did not grow so fast. But since the number of new colonists and poor and freed servants increased, they were land-hungry. They did not have that much money to buy lands and also there were not enough lands for them to have when there is a treaty between Native Americans and Europeans. These were the two main reasons that Bacon led his men to against Virginia government and Native Americans.
********************************************************************************
An article named “ Bacon’s Rebellion” posted in the website of National Center for History in the Schools of University of California, that Nathaniel Bacon was the son of a wealthy English gentleman. Bacon was sent to America to plant a large tobacco field. At first he was welcomed by the Governor of Virginia, but not till Bacon started a rebellion against government and Native Americans. Bacon was really a good leader that stood up for those poor freemen. He knew that it was wrong that government and rich people charged a heavy taxes on lower classes. No wonder those people in lower classes could not get rich and for those poor freemen was almost barely to making a living. When Bacon started the rebellion, more people became his supporters. Nathaniel Bacon became a hero to many of the poor freeman. The Governor at this time was a man named William Berkeley. Bacon had declared war against Berkeley and others that are on government‘s side. And then Berkeley called Bacon as a traitor.
*********************************************************************************
“We have two evils to fight, capitalism and racism. We must destroy both racism and capitalism,”by Huey P. Newton. And “Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think. But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing,” by Thomas Paine. I like the ideas of both quotes. To get a peaceful society with equality of rights, we must fight for it if it needs. The word FREEDOM meant a lot to the most of people in the past and still in the modern world. And I am glad that Nathaniel Bacon stood up and helped poor colonists to spread their voices.
********************************************************************************
During the rebellion, Bacon led the colonists to fight American Indians to get more lands and was because those American Indian had a surprised attack which killed a lot colonists. Also Bacon led his followers against to the Governor Berkley and sacked the grandees’ plantations, and attacked Jamestown. And the loyalists on Berkley’s side retaliated by plundering the homes of Bacon’s followers.
*********************************************************************************
As the end of the rebellion, bacon and his supporters actually won, the governor reduced the taxes by 75 percent between 1660 and 1700 and there were more lands for colonists . And because of the taxes reduced, it minimized the differences between rich planters and poor farmers.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Portfolio: Essay 2
David Cahoon & Vicky Lay
Combined Essay #1
Introduction to Interview
Two decades defined the American Revolution, in the 1760’s and the 1770’s. During this time when colonies were blossoming, many immigrants from England chose to move to the New World. Along with this move, families would be torn apart between two critical choices. If families chose to stay loyal to England and the King, colonists would be known as Loyalists; if they chose to break free of the supreme empire then the colonists would be known as Patriots. This would pit neighbor against neighbor and even within the same family. Many of the early problems for the colonists arose when England abused the colonists by taking away many of their newly gained American rights. England “expressly imposed taxes on them, and in others, under various presences but in fact for the purpose of raising a revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, and establishing a board of commissioners with unconstitutional powers.”[1] While England continued to impose laws and taxes on the colonists, without their approval, many voted for splitting off from the supreme empire, resulting in some being labeled Patriots. On the other side a document was discovered of an interview between a Loyalist and a Patriot. This piece is about a New England merchant named Patrick, who is in favor of patriotism and has agreed to embark his thoughts and reason with a royal governor who continues to stay loyal to England. The royal governor, Bob, was appointed to the colony to directly report back to the King, for purposes of keeping tabs on the acts of the Patriots. The interview between the Loyalist and Patriot is a debate to discover the motives and actions behind the Patriots.
********************************************************************************
Governor Bob: Thank you for taking the time to speak with me and to share your opinions. To start off, as a merchant of New England, could you explain to me why you would want to break away from the protection and security of England?
********************************************************************************
Merchant Patrick: Personally, I find the protection and security of England irrelevant to the problem. We applaud England for the help in the defeat of the French but it was not solely because of their efforts. We as Americans did our part of ridding the land of the French. The main issue is the improper imposition of taxes on the colonies. Britain should not be allowed to tax the American colonies to gain back money and power without our consent. Tell me governor, why do you think we should pay tax to the British?
********************************************************************************
Governor Bob: The protection we provided to the colonists in America caused Britain a substantial amount of money. If it were not for our help the French would have crushed the colonists. Since the New England Colonies are still apart of Britain, Britain can tax you for the expenses of your protection. The colonists had a Tea Party that dumped tea from England into the sea in 1773; does this mean you are opposed paying the taxes? Would you tell me the reasons why you disagree and what can we change or do to make it better?
********************************************************************************
Merchant Patrick: The Tea Party was a representation of our feelings towards the taxes; of course we are opposed to paying unreasonable taxes without representation in Britain for our economic needs. Why should Britain be able to setup the Tea Act where Britain does not have to pay taxes, but we get taxed on the imports of goods? I say “No taxation without representation.”[2]Then in turn, Britain's unreasonable tax on importing and exporting goods is pushing more and more merchants like me to become extremely aggravated. These taxes are dampening our profits as a whole and simply, we are not getting anything out of our taxed wages. Our rights are wrongfully being trampled on, and since our ancestors settled in this land we should be given the same rights as they once had. This whole situation between Patriots and the King is not strictly about the imposing of taxes, but also the loss of liberty and justice. As “the parliament have taken upon them, from the representations of our governor and other persons inimical to and deeply prejudiced against the inhabitants, to try, condemn, and by an act to punish them, unheard; which would have been in violation of natural justice even if they had an acknowledged jurisdiction. This attack, though made immediately upon us, is doubtless designed for very other colony who will not surrender their sacred rights and liberties into the hands of an infamous ministry. Now therefore is the time when all should be united in opposition to this violation of liberties of all. Their grand object is to divide the colonies.”[3] So Bob, should we as colonists sit back and watch Britain try and take advantage of us? Tell me why we shouldn't be rebelling against the King and the parliament when our liberties are being broken and taken right from our families?
********************************************************************************
Governor Bob: If I was one of the Patriots, I believe I would not keep quiet and let it happen, but in the other hand, we as immigrants from England to America, I know somewhere in our minds we still have a voice saying that we are still part of the British Empire. “A reverence for our Creator, principles of humanity, and the dictates of common sense, must convince all those who reflect upon the subject, that government was instituted to promote the welfare of mankind, and ought to be administered for the attainment of the end.”[4] I can tell that all of you still have the respect for Great Britain. I believe the acts of what the British Empire did were driven by a desire to keep the bonds between colonists in America and the people that remain in England strong. I have to admit that the King and loyal governors are trying too hard to over-protect the colonists. The key issue that turned the colonists and British Empire against each other is the fact that the colonists were not able to consent to the taxation against them. Now that I understand the issues, I will report to the King and the Governors in England. Thank you for spending your time to sharing a piece of your mind. I hope we can fix the issue of the lack of understanding of the colonists’ concerns and have a good relationship with each other again.
[1]The Declaration and resolves of the First Continental Congress of October, 1774 and was written by the congress.
[2] “No taxation without representation" was a slogan period 1763-1775 that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the Thirteen colonies.
[3]Quote taken from Circular letter of the Boston Committee of Correspondence; May 13, 1774.
[4]A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Portfolio: Final Exam
“Why [consider history]? Simply because I am interested in the past? No, if one means by that...a history of the past in terms of the present. Yes, if one means... the history of the present.” –Michel Foucault
I believe that if we want to understand more about a country or culture, we will have to study its own history. And the history will show you how it was formed and becoming what it is now in the present. Just like the quote, “Why [consider history]? Simply because I am interested in the past? No, if one means by that...a history of the past in terms of the present. Yes, if one means... the history of the present,” written in “Discipline & Punish” by Michel Foucault, a French historian and philosopher.
To translate this quote, I believe the author was asking that why are we studying history? Is it just because we are interesting at it? No, we are studying history because history is what made the world is like today. What we learn in the past can be helpful for us to get to know more cultures and the reasons why of some events are still or stopped happening in the modern world. There are a lot examples will give us an idea for the meaning of this quote. For the first example, why did the population of African decreased so much and quick during 1450 to 1770? Because white people believed that black represents evil and white represents good and kind, so British used to kidnap or buy Africans as slaves and treated them bad as low class animals. During the slave trades, a lot of Africans died on the way to America, just because the British sailors did not give them food and water, and also without fresh air which made them sick and died. And then as more and more Africans worked as slaves in America, they started to rebel to get their freedom and rights. Now, you can see people are treating each other equally no matter where you are from or what skin color you have, the history shows us what fights and wars people had been through to get the society we have now in America.
For another example, the Boston Tea Party which happened in fall of 1773, when American colonists dumped the tea that imported from England into the Boston Harbor. The reason why the colonists decided to dump the tea into the harbor was because the British were adding too much taxation on the colonists. British lost a lot of money to fight in the wars ad they were trying to get in back by taxing the colonists, which caused colonists rebel and wanted to be independent. As we know that the colonists won and earned their freedom from Great Britain and became what we known as the United States of America. And for the last example I would like to give was happened in Europe, a disease that killed almost half of the European population. The history of this disease was called Black Death. People had no education and knowledge of medication at this time; they drank dirty water and food. For an example, when someone was killed by the Black Death, people would dump the dead body into the water, and then use to water for drink and showers which caused the disease to spread wider in the European nation. And as we developed and learned, we know that we should keep our environment clean to prevent the disease to spread around.
I am strongly agreed with author’s idea, so I would answer yes to the question that author is asking. Everyone including my self should use what we learn the best in the past to make good changes to our community. In the writing class, I have learned that the style I used to use will not work here, and I need to develop that will suit my voice and work in this class. As the class went on, I learned what I missed and need to make change and added more useful skills that will help me. So what I learned here was that when things are not working well on the essay, I can always try something new and pick up what is helpful for me. In my history class, after read through so many primary documents and historical events, I have learned that if everyone would just sit down and have conversations, I believe there were some wars and rebels that were no needed to fight about. And also if everyone had a sense of respect for people who have different colors of skin, there would not be so many tragedies happened in the past during the African slave trades. And would my learning have been different with a different answer to Foucault’s question? I would say NO, because no matter how my answers are different, the only importance that matter is what I believe in. If I truly believe that history is what made the world is today, then history is very important and also a valuable source to help our thinking and making decisions.
I believe that if we want to understand more about a country or culture, we will have to study its own history. And the history will show you how it was formed and becoming what it is now in the present. Just like the quote, “Why [consider history]? Simply because I am interested in the past? No, if one means by that...a history of the past in terms of the present. Yes, if one means... the history of the present,” written in “Discipline & Punish” by Michel Foucault, a French historian and philosopher.
To translate this quote, I believe the author was asking that why are we studying history? Is it just because we are interesting at it? No, we are studying history because history is what made the world is like today. What we learn in the past can be helpful for us to get to know more cultures and the reasons why of some events are still or stopped happening in the modern world. There are a lot examples will give us an idea for the meaning of this quote. For the first example, why did the population of African decreased so much and quick during 1450 to 1770? Because white people believed that black represents evil and white represents good and kind, so British used to kidnap or buy Africans as slaves and treated them bad as low class animals. During the slave trades, a lot of Africans died on the way to America, just because the British sailors did not give them food and water, and also without fresh air which made them sick and died. And then as more and more Africans worked as slaves in America, they started to rebel to get their freedom and rights. Now, you can see people are treating each other equally no matter where you are from or what skin color you have, the history shows us what fights and wars people had been through to get the society we have now in America.
For another example, the Boston Tea Party which happened in fall of 1773, when American colonists dumped the tea that imported from England into the Boston Harbor. The reason why the colonists decided to dump the tea into the harbor was because the British were adding too much taxation on the colonists. British lost a lot of money to fight in the wars ad they were trying to get in back by taxing the colonists, which caused colonists rebel and wanted to be independent. As we know that the colonists won and earned their freedom from Great Britain and became what we known as the United States of America. And for the last example I would like to give was happened in Europe, a disease that killed almost half of the European population. The history of this disease was called Black Death. People had no education and knowledge of medication at this time; they drank dirty water and food. For an example, when someone was killed by the Black Death, people would dump the dead body into the water, and then use to water for drink and showers which caused the disease to spread wider in the European nation. And as we developed and learned, we know that we should keep our environment clean to prevent the disease to spread around.
I am strongly agreed with author’s idea, so I would answer yes to the question that author is asking. Everyone including my self should use what we learn the best in the past to make good changes to our community. In the writing class, I have learned that the style I used to use will not work here, and I need to develop that will suit my voice and work in this class. As the class went on, I learned what I missed and need to make change and added more useful skills that will help me. So what I learned here was that when things are not working well on the essay, I can always try something new and pick up what is helpful for me. In my history class, after read through so many primary documents and historical events, I have learned that if everyone would just sit down and have conversations, I believe there were some wars and rebels that were no needed to fight about. And also if everyone had a sense of respect for people who have different colors of skin, there would not be so many tragedies happened in the past during the African slave trades. And would my learning have been different with a different answer to Foucault’s question? I would say NO, because no matter how my answers are different, the only importance that matter is what I believe in. If I truly believe that history is what made the world is today, then history is very important and also a valuable source to help our thinking and making decisions.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Reflection Letter (Draft)
As at beginning of the class (Writing 101), my style of writing did not work well. Since I am an ESL (English as Second Language) student, an immigrate and not an English native speaker, the language is my weakness, but as the class go on I learned what should I have to write an good essay by reading my classmates’ essays. The two essays that I have prepared for this portfolio will show my changes of writing style in a good way from my writing experiences in this class.
I did not do well on my first essay since I had never write a college essay before and always practiced in ESL level in the ESL class. To tell my strength on my first essay which is the “Bacon’s Rebellion”, the only two things I was good at were to describe what was happening during that time and compared it with the modern world. As a new student to the college with a little weak English skills, I did not get what am I suppose to do with the essay, so I did it the way that I used to write for my ESL essays, and it did not work. The weaknesses of my first essay were not having enough historical evidences, quotes, clear arguments, good hook and some grammar mistakes. The most important part I made mistake was not giving a good theme, which did not show a clear argument.
TO BE CONTIUNE…
I did not do well on my first essay since I had never write a college essay before and always practiced in ESL level in the ESL class. To tell my strength on my first essay which is the “Bacon’s Rebellion”, the only two things I was good at were to describe what was happening during that time and compared it with the modern world. As a new student to the college with a little weak English skills, I did not get what am I suppose to do with the essay, so I did it the way that I used to write for my ESL essays, and it did not work. The weaknesses of my first essay were not having enough historical evidences, quotes, clear arguments, good hook and some grammar mistakes. The most important part I made mistake was not giving a good theme, which did not show a clear argument.
TO BE CONTIUNE…
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Reflection for Essay # 3
1) Group Interaction:
My group actually worked out well. My group members knew that I have problems with reading or writing in English, so they were willing to help and answered all my questions I had. We treated each other very nicely. I am so glad to be in this group.
2) Use of Contract:
I don't think we use the contract a lot in this group. Everyone did what they support to do and helped each other. Sometimes some of our group might be obsent cause of sickness or something, but they still finish their work on time. So I do think that we can still do the works without a contract since everyone is taking the responsibility in my group.
3) Use of WIKI:
It was kind of useful for me. I can always go back to check the sources I found and checked what my group memebers found too. It was more likely sharing those good sources with each other to understand more on a event and was easier for me to know what websites were useful to use on my essay.
4) Individual Progress:
I believe it was great to work with my group because they gave good ideas on the essay, which taught me a lesson of how to write a good hook. In my first essay, I didn't have a good hook because I didn't really have any experiences so I didn't get how to write a good one at that time.
And now, I think I got a sense of it since my group showed me a super good hook in this essay. I believe that I can write a good hook on next essay.
My group actually worked out well. My group members knew that I have problems with reading or writing in English, so they were willing to help and answered all my questions I had. We treated each other very nicely. I am so glad to be in this group.
2) Use of Contract:
I don't think we use the contract a lot in this group. Everyone did what they support to do and helped each other. Sometimes some of our group might be obsent cause of sickness or something, but they still finish their work on time. So I do think that we can still do the works without a contract since everyone is taking the responsibility in my group.
3) Use of WIKI:
It was kind of useful for me. I can always go back to check the sources I found and checked what my group memebers found too. It was more likely sharing those good sources with each other to understand more on a event and was easier for me to know what websites were useful to use on my essay.
4) Individual Progress:
I believe it was great to work with my group because they gave good ideas on the essay, which taught me a lesson of how to write a good hook. In my first essay, I didn't have a good hook because I didn't really have any experiences so I didn't get how to write a good one at that time.
And now, I think I got a sense of it since my group showed me a super good hook in this essay. I believe that I can write a good hook on next essay.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Final Draft for Essay #3
North Carolina: The Anti-Federalist State
One day a guy who had a deck of cards decided to make a card tower. He began rushing while building the card tower, then realized that if he wasn’t careful; his whole project would come crashing down and he’d end up with a big mess to clean [and then he would have to start all over!]. Knowing this, he slowed down and took his time, and the card tower turned out fine. Taking things slow and steady was the mentality of the North Carolinians. They felt it was risky to rush in the ratification of the Constitution before it was PERFECT [meaning its terms worked for EVERYONE, not just SOME states]. The deck of cards was like the Constitution because they both served as bases that needed to be put together carefully. Any hastiness would not fulfill all necessary supporting features and would build a weak base, therefore risking the whole entire structure. They needed careful planning, thus making a strong base to be a foundation for their new nation. The hasty ratification of the Constitution threatened the longevity of the United States, and thereof North Carolina (and her people). It would have affects on three different levels: national government rights, state rights, and individual rights.
The anti-federalists feared that in ratifying the Constitution, the centralized government would eventually lose their sense of Democracy and turn into a monarchy. This would contradict the initial reason why they succeeded from the British during the Revolution. According to the Constitution, Congress had the power to lay and collect taxes, regulate commerce with other countries, provide punishments and coin money. The anti-federalists were apprehensive of the government and were scared that they could cut off trade with any country at any time and mess up the economy (without any voice of the Americans in that decision). The government rights would then be on the rise while state and citizen rights would slowly be deprived.
The Constitution without a bill of rights would put the states at risk of submission under the new national government. Individualism was a key attribute to have within the states. They didn’t like the idea of having one centralized form of government. They wanted to make sure they would be heard and would have some sort of rights for themselves such as individual states’ rights and laws. Furthermore, they also wanted to make sure their personal and property rights would be protected and guaranteed. Mutually they wanted a bill of rights to protect them, but at the time there wasn’t one. The Americans feared that without a bill of rights to protect them and their rights, they would be at the mercy of the national government and possibly more powerful states. States feared losing their voice in taxation and decisions regarding trade; therefore they shunned themselves away form accepting the constitution.
There was a great chance of limitation to the rights of citizens if the Constitution was ratified. This revolved around distrust between classes. “The Constitution was seen as a plot by the upper class to steal power back from common folk…” [The American Pageant (1)] stated Stanford history professor David M. Kennedy. The majority of people saw the Constitution this way because it gave so much power to the government; which of course, was comprised of people from wealthier classes. Because North Carolina’s population was made up of primarily farmers and people of a more humble class, they were more inclined to fight back. One key concern that these people had was the loss of their rights. Taxation was a subject that was uneasily discussed—according to the Constitution, government would have the right to tax all the states whatever amount they wanted (depending on need and self purposes). To them, this would eventually lead to government tyranny. Many feared that this amount of power would allow the government to tax them heavier (whenever they wanted to): first, to pay off any personal debts, and second, to pay off the war debt. Evidently, if the government were run by wealthier people, they could agree on higher taxation (because they could pay it) but that would mean endless suffering for the farmers and other lower classes. Loss of land would be the conclusion to scenarios such as this (they would have to sell or it would be taken away by force). “… this new document had no guarantees of personal and property rights—for example, a jury trial in federal courts was not guaranteed…” [North Carolina: Through Four Centuries (2)] explained the renowned William S. Powell; leading authority in North Carolina history. The farmers of N.C. saw this as prime time for the Federalists to take away power and rights from others in lower classes (therefore limitation of rights would be a possible rising issue).
Despite obvious cons in the ratification that applied to the North Carolinians, there were certainly pros. The Federalists declared that a strong centralized government was necessary for ascendance to power for the growing nation. It is true that a strong centralized government would generate fear, especially to lower class citizens like many of the North Carolinians. However, having no form government can be as dangerous as a tyrannical one; and possibly causing economic crippling to the farming population of North Carolina. A state such as North Carolina can’t survive in a loose anarchy. It had dependence on internal governmental security as well as dependence on other states (trade). Without a strong centralized government, such security cannot not be assured, which would instantly jeopardize North Carolina’s ability to sell their cash crops, and produce.
This was not a compelling enough argument for the Anti-Federalists in North Carolina, and to them, individual freedoms took presidency over a new government. Perhaps it was too early for the Anti-Federalists, who had just put forth all effort to disown the British government. Of course not all paranoia on the matter could be blamed on fear of a repeated monarchy. What can be said for the North Carolinians is a centralized government could hurt them easier than it could help them, which would deem it an unnecessary risk. The Federalism versus Anti-federalism debate concerned each class of people in a different light. For the majority of North Carolinians, anti-federalism was the most beneficial choice.
[Nash] What am I? Neither a federalist nor an anti-federalist. In this age I think the question is irrelevant. I’m sure that America would be almost exactly the same as it is now had the anti-federalist cause won over that of the federalists, thus I see no reason to favor one or the other. Instead, I ask myself what I would have been if I lived back when I feel it was relevant. The obstacle facing this mindset is a lifetime of inculcation that makes me automatically think “of course federalism was the right way to go.” Surely I can’t base my decision on what I’ve been told, so I have to reconsider anti-federalism. From what I gather about anti-federalism, their reasoning for not wanting to ratify didn’t have relations with not wanting to be a new country; but rather a cautionary step against making a weak infrastructure for their new nation. Because of this reason, I probably would choose Anti-Federalism, had I lived back then. Although, If my decision is based on what I know now, I would lean more to the Federalist side, because I think the Constitution is swell and serves well as our country’s infrastructure.
[Vicky] For my position, I am not belonging to Federalism or Anti-Federalism. I can understand the government was trying to make the constitution perfect for the country but it just didn't work out for everyone. In the Constitution of United States, there were so many sections in the articles that gave a lot of rights to the government, and this was what Anti-Federalists were afraid of. For example, the Article 1 Section8 in Constitution of United States, " The Congress shall have power: To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United State. To declare war, grant letters of marquee and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water, to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." [The U.S. Constitution (3)] Also Anti-Federalists were afraid that once the government gains a lot of rights and power, they might try to take control and make decisions without asking the citizens. In the Article 1 Section 5 of the constitution, “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-third, expel a member.¨ [The U.S. Constitution (3)] At this time, the people that won the election were those powerful and rich people. I don't have an answer to say which side is right or wrong and I won't try to convince people to believe in one side or the other. But what I believe in is that if the government was not going to make decision by itself or the citizens trusted the government, then I guess the constitution would just work out fine.
[Kyle] Federalist or Anti-federalist does not mean much to me. I find strong points to both sides, but cannot subjectively say I am for one side or the other. I am clearly able to see the anti-federalist’s points; they mutually did not want to have a recap of the revolution they had just finished. They believed that the centralized government would have too much power over the other states and that the smaller states would not be heard. I wholly agree with this statement and if I was living back then it would be prominent to me that my voice be heard and if I was living in a small state that might not have happened. On the other hand I can see where the federalists are coming from. After going through the whole revolution they wanted to make sure it was worth while by ratifying the constitution. They were ready to form their own government, a democracy, and start what is now America. I see eye to eye with this because I would want to finalize the revolution and start to unite America, the thirteen colonies, as soon as possible. From my understanding I am unable to side with either the federalists or anti-federalists. The two sides have valid reasons for what they were trying to do. Furthermore, not living back in that time makes it difficult to fully understand just exactly what the people back then were going through. That leaves me at a neutral state, not sure and not leaning towards one side or the other.
[Tiffany] After a bit of surface researching, I put almost no effort in deciding that “I would be a federalist of course, the Constitution was a step in building our nation, why not?” At the time, I regarded the Anti-Federalists as a group that was just stubborn and didn’t want to change. After digging deeper into North Carolina’s history and looking at the Anti-Federalist causes more thoroughly, my vision of my position was altered. Realizing that the reasons of the Anti-Federalists were just as legitimate as the Federalists’, my position is in a foggy area. The Federalists wanted to start tackling the messy project of building a new nation. In a way, a centralized government would act like the binding behind the states to create a sense of unity between states. This would make things more efficient and organized. The Anti-Federalists were worried that the centralized government might obsess over their power and soon turn into a monarchy—what they had been fighting to separate from in the first place. Looking back, I honestly can’t point my finger and choose what side to take… Both sides were reasonable, and there would be no point in arguing who was entirely right and who was entirely wrong.
Quote Sources:
1. Kennedy, David M. The American Pageant. Comp. Lizabeth Cohen. Ed. Thomas A. Bailey. AP ed. Vol. 13. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006. (accessed: November 19, 2006)
2. Powell, William S. North Carolina: Through Four Centuries. Chapel Hill, London: The University of North Carolina P, 1989. 225-227 (accessed: November 15, 2006)
3. The U.S. Constitution: URL: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/usconst.htm (accessed November 2007)
One day a guy who had a deck of cards decided to make a card tower. He began rushing while building the card tower, then realized that if he wasn’t careful; his whole project would come crashing down and he’d end up with a big mess to clean [and then he would have to start all over!]. Knowing this, he slowed down and took his time, and the card tower turned out fine. Taking things slow and steady was the mentality of the North Carolinians. They felt it was risky to rush in the ratification of the Constitution before it was PERFECT [meaning its terms worked for EVERYONE, not just SOME states]. The deck of cards was like the Constitution because they both served as bases that needed to be put together carefully. Any hastiness would not fulfill all necessary supporting features and would build a weak base, therefore risking the whole entire structure. They needed careful planning, thus making a strong base to be a foundation for their new nation. The hasty ratification of the Constitution threatened the longevity of the United States, and thereof North Carolina (and her people). It would have affects on three different levels: national government rights, state rights, and individual rights.
The anti-federalists feared that in ratifying the Constitution, the centralized government would eventually lose their sense of Democracy and turn into a monarchy. This would contradict the initial reason why they succeeded from the British during the Revolution. According to the Constitution, Congress had the power to lay and collect taxes, regulate commerce with other countries, provide punishments and coin money. The anti-federalists were apprehensive of the government and were scared that they could cut off trade with any country at any time and mess up the economy (without any voice of the Americans in that decision). The government rights would then be on the rise while state and citizen rights would slowly be deprived.
The Constitution without a bill of rights would put the states at risk of submission under the new national government. Individualism was a key attribute to have within the states. They didn’t like the idea of having one centralized form of government. They wanted to make sure they would be heard and would have some sort of rights for themselves such as individual states’ rights and laws. Furthermore, they also wanted to make sure their personal and property rights would be protected and guaranteed. Mutually they wanted a bill of rights to protect them, but at the time there wasn’t one. The Americans feared that without a bill of rights to protect them and their rights, they would be at the mercy of the national government and possibly more powerful states. States feared losing their voice in taxation and decisions regarding trade; therefore they shunned themselves away form accepting the constitution.
There was a great chance of limitation to the rights of citizens if the Constitution was ratified. This revolved around distrust between classes. “The Constitution was seen as a plot by the upper class to steal power back from common folk…” [The American Pageant (1)] stated Stanford history professor David M. Kennedy. The majority of people saw the Constitution this way because it gave so much power to the government; which of course, was comprised of people from wealthier classes. Because North Carolina’s population was made up of primarily farmers and people of a more humble class, they were more inclined to fight back. One key concern that these people had was the loss of their rights. Taxation was a subject that was uneasily discussed—according to the Constitution, government would have the right to tax all the states whatever amount they wanted (depending on need and self purposes). To them, this would eventually lead to government tyranny. Many feared that this amount of power would allow the government to tax them heavier (whenever they wanted to): first, to pay off any personal debts, and second, to pay off the war debt. Evidently, if the government were run by wealthier people, they could agree on higher taxation (because they could pay it) but that would mean endless suffering for the farmers and other lower classes. Loss of land would be the conclusion to scenarios such as this (they would have to sell or it would be taken away by force). “… this new document had no guarantees of personal and property rights—for example, a jury trial in federal courts was not guaranteed…” [North Carolina: Through Four Centuries (2)] explained the renowned William S. Powell; leading authority in North Carolina history. The farmers of N.C. saw this as prime time for the Federalists to take away power and rights from others in lower classes (therefore limitation of rights would be a possible rising issue).
Despite obvious cons in the ratification that applied to the North Carolinians, there were certainly pros. The Federalists declared that a strong centralized government was necessary for ascendance to power for the growing nation. It is true that a strong centralized government would generate fear, especially to lower class citizens like many of the North Carolinians. However, having no form government can be as dangerous as a tyrannical one; and possibly causing economic crippling to the farming population of North Carolina. A state such as North Carolina can’t survive in a loose anarchy. It had dependence on internal governmental security as well as dependence on other states (trade). Without a strong centralized government, such security cannot not be assured, which would instantly jeopardize North Carolina’s ability to sell their cash crops, and produce.
This was not a compelling enough argument for the Anti-Federalists in North Carolina, and to them, individual freedoms took presidency over a new government. Perhaps it was too early for the Anti-Federalists, who had just put forth all effort to disown the British government. Of course not all paranoia on the matter could be blamed on fear of a repeated monarchy. What can be said for the North Carolinians is a centralized government could hurt them easier than it could help them, which would deem it an unnecessary risk. The Federalism versus Anti-federalism debate concerned each class of people in a different light. For the majority of North Carolinians, anti-federalism was the most beneficial choice.
[Nash] What am I? Neither a federalist nor an anti-federalist. In this age I think the question is irrelevant. I’m sure that America would be almost exactly the same as it is now had the anti-federalist cause won over that of the federalists, thus I see no reason to favor one or the other. Instead, I ask myself what I would have been if I lived back when I feel it was relevant. The obstacle facing this mindset is a lifetime of inculcation that makes me automatically think “of course federalism was the right way to go.” Surely I can’t base my decision on what I’ve been told, so I have to reconsider anti-federalism. From what I gather about anti-federalism, their reasoning for not wanting to ratify didn’t have relations with not wanting to be a new country; but rather a cautionary step against making a weak infrastructure for their new nation. Because of this reason, I probably would choose Anti-Federalism, had I lived back then. Although, If my decision is based on what I know now, I would lean more to the Federalist side, because I think the Constitution is swell and serves well as our country’s infrastructure.
[Vicky] For my position, I am not belonging to Federalism or Anti-Federalism. I can understand the government was trying to make the constitution perfect for the country but it just didn't work out for everyone. In the Constitution of United States, there were so many sections in the articles that gave a lot of rights to the government, and this was what Anti-Federalists were afraid of. For example, the Article 1 Section8 in Constitution of United States, " The Congress shall have power: To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United State. To declare war, grant letters of marquee and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water, to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." [The U.S. Constitution (3)] Also Anti-Federalists were afraid that once the government gains a lot of rights and power, they might try to take control and make decisions without asking the citizens. In the Article 1 Section 5 of the constitution, “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-third, expel a member.¨ [The U.S. Constitution (3)] At this time, the people that won the election were those powerful and rich people. I don't have an answer to say which side is right or wrong and I won't try to convince people to believe in one side or the other. But what I believe in is that if the government was not going to make decision by itself or the citizens trusted the government, then I guess the constitution would just work out fine.
[Kyle] Federalist or Anti-federalist does not mean much to me. I find strong points to both sides, but cannot subjectively say I am for one side or the other. I am clearly able to see the anti-federalist’s points; they mutually did not want to have a recap of the revolution they had just finished. They believed that the centralized government would have too much power over the other states and that the smaller states would not be heard. I wholly agree with this statement and if I was living back then it would be prominent to me that my voice be heard and if I was living in a small state that might not have happened. On the other hand I can see where the federalists are coming from. After going through the whole revolution they wanted to make sure it was worth while by ratifying the constitution. They were ready to form their own government, a democracy, and start what is now America. I see eye to eye with this because I would want to finalize the revolution and start to unite America, the thirteen colonies, as soon as possible. From my understanding I am unable to side with either the federalists or anti-federalists. The two sides have valid reasons for what they were trying to do. Furthermore, not living back in that time makes it difficult to fully understand just exactly what the people back then were going through. That leaves me at a neutral state, not sure and not leaning towards one side or the other.
[Tiffany] After a bit of surface researching, I put almost no effort in deciding that “I would be a federalist of course, the Constitution was a step in building our nation, why not?” At the time, I regarded the Anti-Federalists as a group that was just stubborn and didn’t want to change. After digging deeper into North Carolina’s history and looking at the Anti-Federalist causes more thoroughly, my vision of my position was altered. Realizing that the reasons of the Anti-Federalists were just as legitimate as the Federalists’, my position is in a foggy area. The Federalists wanted to start tackling the messy project of building a new nation. In a way, a centralized government would act like the binding behind the states to create a sense of unity between states. This would make things more efficient and organized. The Anti-Federalists were worried that the centralized government might obsess over their power and soon turn into a monarchy—what they had been fighting to separate from in the first place. Looking back, I honestly can’t point my finger and choose what side to take… Both sides were reasonable, and there would be no point in arguing who was entirely right and who was entirely wrong.
Quote Sources:
1. Kennedy, David M. The American Pageant. Comp. Lizabeth Cohen. Ed. Thomas A. Bailey. AP ed. Vol. 13. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006. (accessed: November 19, 2006)
2. Powell, William S. North Carolina: Through Four Centuries. Chapel Hill, London: The University of North Carolina P, 1989. 225-227 (accessed: November 15, 2006)
3. The U.S. Constitution: URL: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/usconst.htm (accessed November 2007)
Draft for Essay # 3
North Carolina:
The Anti-Federalist state
So there was this guy, who had a deck of cards, and he was making a card tower. He began rushing while building the card tower, then realized that if he wasn’t careful the whole thing would come crashing down and he’d end up with a big mess to clean [and then he would have to start all over!]. Knowing this, he slowed down and took his time, and so the card tower turned out fine. Taking things slow and steady was the mentality of the North Carolinians. They felt it was risky to rush in the ratification of the Constitution before it was PERFECT [meaning its terms worked for EVERYONE, not just SOME states]. The deck of cards was like the Constitution because they both served as bases that needed to be put together carefully. Any hastiness would not fulfill all necessary supporting features and would build a weak base, therefore risking the whole entire structure. They needed careful planning, thus making a strong base to be a foundation for their new nation. The hasty ratification of the Constitution threatened the longevity of the United States, and thereof North Carolina (and her people). It would have affects on three different levels: national government rights, state rights, and individual rights.
The anti-federalists feared that in ratifying the Constitution, the centralized government would eventually lose their sense of Democracy and turn into a monarchy. This would contradict the initial reason why they succeeded from the British during the Revolution. According to the Constitution, Congress had the power to lay and collect taxes, regulate commerce with other countries, provide punishments and coin money. The anti-federalists were apprehensive of the government and were scared that they could cut off trade with any country at any time and mess up the economy (without any voice of the Americans in that decision). The voice of the lower classmen (which was the majority of the anti-federalist group as well as N.C.) would be lost because of the fact that all the men in Congress would be men from higher classes.
The Constitution without a bill of rights would put the states at risk of submission under the new national government. Individualism was a key attribute to have within the states. They didn’t like the idea of having one centralized form of government. They wanted to make sure they would be heard and would have some sort of rights for themselves such as individual states’ rights and laws. Furthermore, they also wanted to make sure their personal and property rights would be protected and guaranteed. Mutually they wanted a bill of rights to protect them, but at the time there wasn’t one. The Americans feared that without a bill of rights to protect them and their rights, they would be at the mercy of the national government and possibly more powerful states. Colonists afraid of losing their voice in taxation and decisions regarding trade shunned them away form accepting the constitution.
There was a great chance that there were going to be limitations to the rights of citizens if the Constitution was ratified. “The Constitution was seen as a plot by the upper class to steal power back from common folk…” [The American Pageant] The majority of people saw the Constitution this way because it gave so much power to the government; which of course, would be composed of people from the wealthier classes. Because North Carolina’s population was made up of primarily farmers and people of a more humble class, they were more inclined to fight back. One of the key concerns that these people had was the loss of their rights. Taxation was a subject that was uneasily discussed—according to the Constitution, government would have the right to tax all the states whatever amount they wanted (depending on need and other purposes). To them, this was similar to the British King taxing his own people without them giving their consent first. Many feared that this amount of power could allow the government to take away land or tax them heavier: to first, pay off any personal debts, and second, to pay off the war debt. Obviously if the government were run by wealthier people, they could agree on higher taxation (because they could pay it) but that would mean endless suffering for the farmers and other lower classes. This would then tie into the reason why the lower class is suspecting that the Constitution is a trap by the higher class. The farmers of N.C. saw this as prime time for the Federalists to take away power and rights from others in lower classes (therefore limitation of rights would be a possible rising issue).
Despite the obvious cons ratifying would imply for the north Carolinians, there were certainly pros. The federalists said a strong centralized government was necessary for ascendance to power for their growing nation. It is true that a strong centralized government would merit fear, especially to lower class citizens like many of the north Carolinians. However, having no certain government at all can be as dangerous as a tyrannical one; and possibly economically crippling to the massively farming population of North Carolina. A state such as North Carolina could not survive well in a loose anarchy. It depended on internal governmental security just as much as it depended on that of other states (to whom they traded with). Without a strong centralized government such security could not be assured, which would instantly jeopardize North Carolinas ability to sell their cash crops, and produce.
[Nash] What am I? Neither a federalist nor an anti-federalist. In this age I think the question is irrelevant. I’m sure that America would be almost exactly the same as it is now had the anti-federalist cause won over that of the federalists, thus I see no reason to favor one or the other. Instead, I ask myself what I would have been if I lived back when I feel it was relevant. The obstacle facing this mindset is a lifetime of inculcation that make me automatically think “of course federalism was the right way to go.” Surely I can’t make my decision based only on what I’ve been told, so I have to reconsider anti-federalism. From what I gather about anti-federalism, is that their reasoning’s for not wanting to ratify didn’t have to do with not wanting to be their own country; but rather it was a cautionary step against making a weak infrastructure for their new nation. Because of this reason, I probably would have been anti-federalist, had I lived back then. Although, If my decision is supposed to be based on what I know now, I would say I lean more on the federalist side, because I think the constitution is swell and serves well as our countries infrastructure.
[Vicky] For my position, I am not belonging to the Federalists¡¦ side nor the Anti-Federalists¡¦ side. I can understand the government was trying to make the constitution perfect for the country but it just didn't work out for everyone. In the Constitution of United States, there were so many sections in the articles that gave a lot of rights to the government, and this was what Anti-Federalists were afraid of. For example, the Article 1 Section8 in Constitution of United States, " The Congress shall have power: To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United State. To declare war, grant letters of marquee and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water, to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." Also Anti-Federalism were afraid that once the government gains a lot of rights and power, they might try to take control and make decisions without asking the citizens. In the Article 1 Section 5 of the constitution, ¡§ Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-third, expel a member.¨ At this time, who won the election were those powerful and rich people. I don't have the answer to say which side is right or wrong and I won't try to convince people to believe in which side. But what I believe in is that if the government was not going to make decision by itself or the citizens trusted the government, then I guess the constitution would just work out fine.
([Kyle] Federalist or Anti-federalist does not mean much to me. I find strong points to both sides, but cannot subjectively say I am for one side or the other. I am clearly able to see the anti-federalist’s points; they mutually did not want to have a recap of the revolution they had just finished. They believed that the centralized government would have too much power over the other states and that the smaller states would not be heard. I totally agree with this statement and if I was living back then it would be prominent to me that my voice be heard and if I was living in a small state that might not of happened. On the other hand I can see where the federalists are coming from. After going through the whole revolution they wanted to make sure it was worth while by ratifying the constitution. They were ready to form their own government, a democracy, and start what is now America. I see eye to eye with this because I would want to finalize the revolution and start to unite America, the thirteen colonies, as soon as possible. From my understanding I am unable to side with either the federalists or anti-federalists. The two sides have valid reasons for what they were trying to do. Furthermore, not living back in that time makes it difficult to fully understand just exactly what the people back then were going through. That leaves me at a neutral state, not sure and not leaning towards one side or the other.
[Tiffany] After a bit of surface researching, I put almost no effort in deciding that “I would be a federalist of course, I mean the Constitution was a step in building our nation, why not?” At the time, I regarded the Anti-Federalists as a group that was just stubborn and didn’t want to change. After digging deeper into North Carolina’s history and looking at the Anti-Federalist causes more thoroughly, my vision of my position was altered. Realizing that the reasons of the Anti-Federalists were just as legitimate as the Federalists’, my position is in a foggy area. The Federalists wanted to start tackling the messy project of building a new nation. In a way, a centralized government would act like the binding behind the states to create a sense of unity between states. This would make things more efficient and organized. The Anti-Federalists were worried that the centralized government might obsess over their power and soon turn into a monarchy—what they had been fighting to separate from in the first place. Looking back, I honestly can’t point my finger and choose what side to take… Both sides were reasonable, and there would be no point in arguing who was entirely right and who was entirely wrong.
The Anti-Federalist state
So there was this guy, who had a deck of cards, and he was making a card tower. He began rushing while building the card tower, then realized that if he wasn’t careful the whole thing would come crashing down and he’d end up with a big mess to clean [and then he would have to start all over!]. Knowing this, he slowed down and took his time, and so the card tower turned out fine. Taking things slow and steady was the mentality of the North Carolinians. They felt it was risky to rush in the ratification of the Constitution before it was PERFECT [meaning its terms worked for EVERYONE, not just SOME states]. The deck of cards was like the Constitution because they both served as bases that needed to be put together carefully. Any hastiness would not fulfill all necessary supporting features and would build a weak base, therefore risking the whole entire structure. They needed careful planning, thus making a strong base to be a foundation for their new nation. The hasty ratification of the Constitution threatened the longevity of the United States, and thereof North Carolina (and her people). It would have affects on three different levels: national government rights, state rights, and individual rights.
The anti-federalists feared that in ratifying the Constitution, the centralized government would eventually lose their sense of Democracy and turn into a monarchy. This would contradict the initial reason why they succeeded from the British during the Revolution. According to the Constitution, Congress had the power to lay and collect taxes, regulate commerce with other countries, provide punishments and coin money. The anti-federalists were apprehensive of the government and were scared that they could cut off trade with any country at any time and mess up the economy (without any voice of the Americans in that decision). The voice of the lower classmen (which was the majority of the anti-federalist group as well as N.C.) would be lost because of the fact that all the men in Congress would be men from higher classes.
The Constitution without a bill of rights would put the states at risk of submission under the new national government. Individualism was a key attribute to have within the states. They didn’t like the idea of having one centralized form of government. They wanted to make sure they would be heard and would have some sort of rights for themselves such as individual states’ rights and laws. Furthermore, they also wanted to make sure their personal and property rights would be protected and guaranteed. Mutually they wanted a bill of rights to protect them, but at the time there wasn’t one. The Americans feared that without a bill of rights to protect them and their rights, they would be at the mercy of the national government and possibly more powerful states. Colonists afraid of losing their voice in taxation and decisions regarding trade shunned them away form accepting the constitution.
There was a great chance that there were going to be limitations to the rights of citizens if the Constitution was ratified. “The Constitution was seen as a plot by the upper class to steal power back from common folk…” [The American Pageant] The majority of people saw the Constitution this way because it gave so much power to the government; which of course, would be composed of people from the wealthier classes. Because North Carolina’s population was made up of primarily farmers and people of a more humble class, they were more inclined to fight back. One of the key concerns that these people had was the loss of their rights. Taxation was a subject that was uneasily discussed—according to the Constitution, government would have the right to tax all the states whatever amount they wanted (depending on need and other purposes). To them, this was similar to the British King taxing his own people without them giving their consent first. Many feared that this amount of power could allow the government to take away land or tax them heavier: to first, pay off any personal debts, and second, to pay off the war debt. Obviously if the government were run by wealthier people, they could agree on higher taxation (because they could pay it) but that would mean endless suffering for the farmers and other lower classes. This would then tie into the reason why the lower class is suspecting that the Constitution is a trap by the higher class. The farmers of N.C. saw this as prime time for the Federalists to take away power and rights from others in lower classes (therefore limitation of rights would be a possible rising issue).
Despite the obvious cons ratifying would imply for the north Carolinians, there were certainly pros. The federalists said a strong centralized government was necessary for ascendance to power for their growing nation. It is true that a strong centralized government would merit fear, especially to lower class citizens like many of the north Carolinians. However, having no certain government at all can be as dangerous as a tyrannical one; and possibly economically crippling to the massively farming population of North Carolina. A state such as North Carolina could not survive well in a loose anarchy. It depended on internal governmental security just as much as it depended on that of other states (to whom they traded with). Without a strong centralized government such security could not be assured, which would instantly jeopardize North Carolinas ability to sell their cash crops, and produce.
[Nash] What am I? Neither a federalist nor an anti-federalist. In this age I think the question is irrelevant. I’m sure that America would be almost exactly the same as it is now had the anti-federalist cause won over that of the federalists, thus I see no reason to favor one or the other. Instead, I ask myself what I would have been if I lived back when I feel it was relevant. The obstacle facing this mindset is a lifetime of inculcation that make me automatically think “of course federalism was the right way to go.” Surely I can’t make my decision based only on what I’ve been told, so I have to reconsider anti-federalism. From what I gather about anti-federalism, is that their reasoning’s for not wanting to ratify didn’t have to do with not wanting to be their own country; but rather it was a cautionary step against making a weak infrastructure for their new nation. Because of this reason, I probably would have been anti-federalist, had I lived back then. Although, If my decision is supposed to be based on what I know now, I would say I lean more on the federalist side, because I think the constitution is swell and serves well as our countries infrastructure.
[Vicky] For my position, I am not belonging to the Federalists¡¦ side nor the Anti-Federalists¡¦ side. I can understand the government was trying to make the constitution perfect for the country but it just didn't work out for everyone. In the Constitution of United States, there were so many sections in the articles that gave a lot of rights to the government, and this was what Anti-Federalists were afraid of. For example, the Article 1 Section8 in Constitution of United States, " The Congress shall have power: To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United State. To declare war, grant letters of marquee and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water, to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." Also Anti-Federalism were afraid that once the government gains a lot of rights and power, they might try to take control and make decisions without asking the citizens. In the Article 1 Section 5 of the constitution, ¡§ Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-third, expel a member.¨ At this time, who won the election were those powerful and rich people. I don't have the answer to say which side is right or wrong and I won't try to convince people to believe in which side. But what I believe in is that if the government was not going to make decision by itself or the citizens trusted the government, then I guess the constitution would just work out fine.
([Kyle] Federalist or Anti-federalist does not mean much to me. I find strong points to both sides, but cannot subjectively say I am for one side or the other. I am clearly able to see the anti-federalist’s points; they mutually did not want to have a recap of the revolution they had just finished. They believed that the centralized government would have too much power over the other states and that the smaller states would not be heard. I totally agree with this statement and if I was living back then it would be prominent to me that my voice be heard and if I was living in a small state that might not of happened. On the other hand I can see where the federalists are coming from. After going through the whole revolution they wanted to make sure it was worth while by ratifying the constitution. They were ready to form their own government, a democracy, and start what is now America. I see eye to eye with this because I would want to finalize the revolution and start to unite America, the thirteen colonies, as soon as possible. From my understanding I am unable to side with either the federalists or anti-federalists. The two sides have valid reasons for what they were trying to do. Furthermore, not living back in that time makes it difficult to fully understand just exactly what the people back then were going through. That leaves me at a neutral state, not sure and not leaning towards one side or the other.
[Tiffany] After a bit of surface researching, I put almost no effort in deciding that “I would be a federalist of course, I mean the Constitution was a step in building our nation, why not?” At the time, I regarded the Anti-Federalists as a group that was just stubborn and didn’t want to change. After digging deeper into North Carolina’s history and looking at the Anti-Federalist causes more thoroughly, my vision of my position was altered. Realizing that the reasons of the Anti-Federalists were just as legitimate as the Federalists’, my position is in a foggy area. The Federalists wanted to start tackling the messy project of building a new nation. In a way, a centralized government would act like the binding behind the states to create a sense of unity between states. This would make things more efficient and organized. The Anti-Federalists were worried that the centralized government might obsess over their power and soon turn into a monarchy—what they had been fighting to separate from in the first place. Looking back, I honestly can’t point my finger and choose what side to take… Both sides were reasonable, and there would be no point in arguing who was entirely right and who was entirely wrong.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
AOD # 8 - Journal
Creative Conflict - confronting others in ways that produce growth
It took place in my dance class the week before Thanksgiving. My friend J(trying not to mention the name) was very upset. She said that she had been trying out for 3 years for the dance team, but they never pick her and this year they started a team that eveyone can join without try out. This team is going to learn two dances, and one of the dance that girls get to lift up by the boys and another dance does not. My friend is so mad and sad including other girls who are not picked to do the dance with lifting.
J kept saying that, " it must be my wieght, and see those girls who get picked are skinny and pretty." And other girl who ( little and skinny) were not picked were starting to say IT IS NOT FAIR. So I told them that, " Why? Come on. Don't be so emotional. See, I have a smile on my face, and I am glad that I am not doing that dance. Give me a smile." I was trying them convince them that doing those moves in that dance are a little dangerous. You could hurt your arms, legs or your back if you don't do it right. And of course like me, I know it would be hard for guys to lift me up, so I am glad that I am not in it and don't have to worry about it too. So I was trying to make them feel better and learn how to ecpect the result because this is a all year long class, you can bring a sad face to class every time. A few days later, I aked my friend how she feels about it now, and she told that she is ok with it now. And I was glad to hear that.
It took place in my dance class the week before Thanksgiving. My friend J(trying not to mention the name) was very upset. She said that she had been trying out for 3 years for the dance team, but they never pick her and this year they started a team that eveyone can join without try out. This team is going to learn two dances, and one of the dance that girls get to lift up by the boys and another dance does not. My friend is so mad and sad including other girls who are not picked to do the dance with lifting.
J kept saying that, " it must be my wieght, and see those girls who get picked are skinny and pretty." And other girl who ( little and skinny) were not picked were starting to say IT IS NOT FAIR. So I told them that, " Why? Come on. Don't be so emotional. See, I have a smile on my face, and I am glad that I am not doing that dance. Give me a smile." I was trying them convince them that doing those moves in that dance are a little dangerous. You could hurt your arms, legs or your back if you don't do it right. And of course like me, I know it would be hard for guys to lift me up, so I am glad that I am not in it and don't have to worry about it too. So I was trying to make them feel better and learn how to ecpect the result because this is a all year long class, you can bring a sad face to class every time. A few days later, I aked my friend how she feels about it now, and she told that she is ok with it now. And I was glad to hear that.
Friday, November 16, 2007
AOD # 7
Negotiation - problem solving that meets some key interests of all involved
Yesterday (11/15/07) in the class of Arts of Democracy, we had a activity that four people in a group and pretended to be a Muslim family. The daugter of the family is trying to convince her parents aobut adopting the American culture, but her parents want her to keep the tranditional way no matter what. As we go alone with the conversation, more and more problems and arugement came up, so we kinda have a little hard time to slove each problems that we had to deal with. But at end of the negotiation, we came up with solutions that worked for everyone.
I believe the point of this activity is let us to understand how can u solve the problem when it comes up to you, so it was more like a practice for us to get prepare in the future. I didn't speak a lot in my group, but as I listened to my group members' conversation I learned more and understood the situation of each side. It was a good lesson for me and my life too.
Yesterday (11/15/07) in the class of Arts of Democracy, we had a activity that four people in a group and pretended to be a Muslim family. The daugter of the family is trying to convince her parents aobut adopting the American culture, but her parents want her to keep the tranditional way no matter what. As we go alone with the conversation, more and more problems and arugement came up, so we kinda have a little hard time to slove each problems that we had to deal with. But at end of the negotiation, we came up with solutions that worked for everyone.
I believe the point of this activity is let us to understand how can u solve the problem when it comes up to you, so it was more like a practice for us to get prepare in the future. I didn't speak a lot in my group, but as I listened to my group members' conversation I learned more and understood the situation of each side. It was a good lesson for me and my life too.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Sourses for Essay # 3
Willie Jones, leading Anti-Federalist in North Carolina
http://www.northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/48/entry
the opposition to the Constitution was strong, and in two states — North Carolina and Rhode Island
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalism
Popular Sovereignty and Constitutional Amendment (Constitution)
http://ni4d.us/library/amarpaper.pdf
THE CONFIDENCE OF THE PEOPLE ( a lot examples & quotes)
Size, Representation, and the Constitutional Role of Political Parties
http://www2.law.columbia.edu/instructionalservices/political_parties/kramer.pdf
FEDERALISM, ANTI-FEDERALISM AND THE ROLE OF THE NINTH AMENDMENT IN
CONSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSES ( about the rights)
http://www.ohiolink.edu/etd/send-pdf.cgi?acc_num=miami1115304485
http://www.northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/48/entry
the opposition to the Constitution was strong, and in two states — North Carolina and Rhode Island
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalism
Popular Sovereignty and Constitutional Amendment (Constitution)
http://ni4d.us/library/amarpaper.pdf
THE CONFIDENCE OF THE PEOPLE ( a lot examples & quotes)
Size, Representation, and the Constitutional Role of Political Parties
http://www2.law.columbia.edu/instructionalservices/political_parties/kramer.pdf
FEDERALISM, ANTI-FEDERALISM AND THE ROLE OF THE NINTH AMENDMENT IN
CONSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSES ( about the rights)
http://www.ohiolink.edu/etd/send-pdf.cgi?acc_num=miami1115304485
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Reflecttion on Second Essay
1) Progress
In this essay I think i didn't make it informational like what I did on first essay. And I asked specific questions and used quote to answer the pariot's question. So I do think I will get a better grade on this essay than the first one.
2) How did your process mesh with your partners?
My partner(David) gave me some good ideas of how to ask good question and corrected my gammar/spelling mistakes. And he was willing to help, so it actually made the whole process flow smoothly. We mostly agreed on each other's ideas and and tried them on the essay and selected the ones that worked out well.
3) How did you handle creative conflict? If you didn't, what made your collaboration work?
There was no creative conflict in my group. We had similar ideas and thoughts of what we want to out in this essay. And we always ask each other's opinions before we put it on, also the questions we asked brought a good connection between both side to explain the problems we have of what we believe in.
In this essay I think i didn't make it informational like what I did on first essay. And I asked specific questions and used quote to answer the pariot's question. So I do think I will get a better grade on this essay than the first one.
2) How did your process mesh with your partners?
My partner(David) gave me some good ideas of how to ask good question and corrected my gammar/spelling mistakes. And he was willing to help, so it actually made the whole process flow smoothly. We mostly agreed on each other's ideas and and tried them on the essay and selected the ones that worked out well.
3) How did you handle creative conflict? If you didn't, what made your collaboration work?
There was no creative conflict in my group. We had similar ideas and thoughts of what we want to out in this essay. And we always ask each other's opinions before we put it on, also the questions we asked brought a good connection between both side to explain the problems we have of what we believe in.
Monday, November 12, 2007
AN INTERVIEW WITH A PATRIOT (ESSAY #2)
David Cahoon & Vicky Lay
Combined Essay #1
Combined Essay #1
Introduction to Interview
Two decades defined the American Revolution, 1760’s and the 1770’s. During this time when colonies were blossoming, many immigrants from England chose to move to the New World. Along with this move, families would be torn apart between two critical choices. If families chose to stay loyal to England and the King, colonists would be known as Loyalists; if they chose to break free of the supreme empire then the colonists would be known as Patriots. This would pit neighbor against neighbor and even within the same family. Many of the early problems for the colonists arose when England abused the colonists by taking away many of their newly gained American rights. England “expressly imposed taxes on them, and in others, under various presences but in fact for the purpose of raising a revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, and establishing a board of commissioners with unconstitutional powers.”[1] While England continued to impose laws and taxes on the colonists, without their approval, many voted for splitting off from the supreme empire, resulting in some being labeled Patriots. On the other side a document was discovered of an interview between a Loyalist and a Patriot. This piece is about a New England merchant named Patrick, who is in favor of patriotism and has agreed to embark his thoughts and reason with a royal governor who continues to stay loyal to England. The royal governor, Bob, was appointed to the colony to directly report back to the King, for purposes of keeping tabs on the acts of the Patriots. The interview between the Loyalist and Patriot is a debate to discover the motives and actions behind the Patriots.
Governor Bob: Thank you for taking the time to speak with me and to share your opinions. To start off, as a merchant of New England, could you explain to me why you would want to break away from the protection and security of England?
Merchant Patrick: Personally, I find the protection and security of England irrelevant to the problem. We applaud England for the help in the defeat of the French but it was not solely because of their efforts. We as Americans did our part of ridding the land of the French. The main issue is the improper imposition of taxes on the colonies. Britain should not be allowed to tax the American colonies to gain back money and power without our consent. Tell me governor, why do you think we should pay tax to the British?
Governor Bob: The protection we provided to the colonists in America caused Britain a substantial amount of money. If it were not for our help the French would have crushed the colonists. Since the New England Colonies are still apart of Britain, Britain can tax you for the expenses of your protection. The colonists had a Tea Party that dumped tea from England into the sea in 1773; does this mean you are opposed paying the taxes? Would you tell me the reasons why you disagree and what can we change or do to make it better?
Merchant Patrick: The Tea Party was a representation of our feelings towards the taxes; of course we are opposed to paying unreasonable taxes without representation in Britain for our economic needs. Why should Britain be able to setup the Tea Act where Britain does not have to pay taxes, but we get taxed on the imports of goods? I say “No taxation without representation.”[2]Then in turn, Britain's unreasonable tax on importing and exporting goods is pushing more and more merchants like me to become extremely aggravated. These taxes are dampening our profits as a whole and simply, we are not getting anything out of our taxed wages. Our rights are wrongfully being trampled on, and since our ancestors settled in this land we should be given the same rights as they once had. This whole situation between Patriots and the King is not strictly about the imposing of taxes, but also the loss of liberty and justice. As “the parliament have taken upon them, from the representations of our governor and other persons inimical to and deeply prejudiced against the inhabitants, to try, condemn, and by an act to punish them, unheard; which would have been in violation of natural justice even if they had an acknowledged jurisdiction. This attack, though made immediately upon us, is doubtless designed for very other colony who will not surrender their sacred rights and liberties into the hands of an infamous ministry. Now therefore is the time when all should be united in opposition to this violation of liberties of all. Their grand object is to divide the colonies.”[3] So Bob, should we as colonists sit back and watch Britain try and take advantage of us? Tell me why we shouldn't be rebelling against the King and the parliament when our liberties are being broken and taken right from our families?
Governor Bob: If I was one of the Patriots, I believe I would not keep quiet and let it happen, but in the other hand, we as immigrants from England to America, I know somewhere in our minds we still have a voice saying that we are still part of the British Empire. “A reverence for our Creator, principles of humanity, and the dictates of common sense, must convince all those who reflect upon the subject, that government was instituted to promote the welfare of mankind, and ought to be administered for the attainment of the end.”[4] I can tell that all of you still have the respect for Great Britain. I believe the acts of what the British Empire did were driven by a desire to keep the bonds between colonists in America and the people that remain in England strong. I have to admit that the King and loyal governors are trying too hard to over-protect the colonists. The key issue that turned the colonists and British Empire against each other is the fact that the colonists were not able to consent to the taxation against them. Now that I understand the issues, I will report to the King and the Governors in England. Thank you for spending your time to sharing a piece of your mind. I hope we can fix the issue of the lack of understanding of the colonists’ concerns and have a good relationship with each other again.
[1]Referring back to the Declaration and resolves of the First Continental Congress of October, 1774 the congress wrote this article to try and state the freedoms of the colonists because these freedoms were wrongfully being abused by the British.
[2]“No taxation without representation" was a slogan period 1763-1775 that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the Thirteen colonies.
[3]Quote taken from Circular letter of the Boston Committee of Correspondence; May 13, 1774. The article was written as a distress letter to seek help from neighboring colonies. The article states how Britain is trying to divide the colonies to make them weaker, taking away the natural rights and liberties of the Colonists.
[4] The quote is written in A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms. This article is about how colonists respect the British Empire but are not happy with the unfairness of the laws that British have made for them.
[2]“No taxation without representation" was a slogan period 1763-1775 that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the Thirteen colonies.
[3]Quote taken from Circular letter of the Boston Committee of Correspondence; May 13, 1774. The article was written as a distress letter to seek help from neighboring colonies. The article states how Britain is trying to divide the colonies to make them weaker, taking away the natural rights and liberties of the Colonists.
[4] The quote is written in A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms. This article is about how colonists respect the British Empire but are not happy with the unfairness of the laws that British have made for them.
Friday, November 9, 2007
AOD #6
Negotiation-problem solving that meets some key interests of all involved
I think everyone should learn how to negotiate with others when problem comes. A good negotiation can find a good way to slove the problem that both sides agree with. In the video I watched for the class Art of Democracy, we can see when two parties are aruging for something and the result will be different depends on the way you negotiate with each other. When you listen to each other's opinions and be consdierable, everything will turn out to be fine at most of the time.
For example, I had a little arugement with my parents after I came back from the college fair. They told me that I should take coputer as major since computer is the most popular tool in the modern world. And I told them that i am not intersting at computer, I want to learn something esle. And when they ask me what else can you do in the future with comouter, i couldn't answer the question because I wasn't prepared. So next time when they ask me this question again, I will be sure that I am prepared and ready to tell and convince them what I am really interested at.
I think everyone should learn how to negotiate with others when problem comes. A good negotiation can find a good way to slove the problem that both sides agree with. In the video I watched for the class Art of Democracy, we can see when two parties are aruging for something and the result will be different depends on the way you negotiate with each other. When you listen to each other's opinions and be consdierable, everything will turn out to be fine at most of the time.
For example, I had a little arugement with my parents after I came back from the college fair. They told me that I should take coputer as major since computer is the most popular tool in the modern world. And I told them that i am not intersting at computer, I want to learn something esle. And when they ask me what else can you do in the future with comouter, i couldn't answer the question because I wasn't prepared. So next time when they ask me this question again, I will be sure that I am prepared and ready to tell and convince them what I am really interested at.
Friday, November 2, 2007
AOD #5
Creative Conflict-confronting others in ways that produce growth
This week in AOD class, we disscuss the meanings of Creative Conflict. Creative conflict means listen to other, negotiate with anger and more... . We saw some photo of a community called Tree House, was built for most of people who had adpoted more than 3 or 4 children and have better environment for them to live. From the photo I can tell that the children live in that community are comforted and have good relationship with each other. Sometimes there are volunteers to play or read stories with children, most of them are seniors.
It was really nice to know there is a nice place call Tree House in ths world. If there are more of this kind of community, a lot of relatiobship problems between the family and adopted children will be easily solved. And it was so great to know the meanings of Creative Conflict, it is useful to use when you get problems with other, especail with your family. It will be a good idea to apply them in your family, but my relationship with my family is fine, so i guess I will try to tell more people about it when they have problems with their relationship with others.
This week in AOD class, we disscuss the meanings of Creative Conflict. Creative conflict means listen to other, negotiate with anger and more... . We saw some photo of a community called Tree House, was built for most of people who had adpoted more than 3 or 4 children and have better environment for them to live. From the photo I can tell that the children live in that community are comforted and have good relationship with each other. Sometimes there are volunteers to play or read stories with children, most of them are seniors.
It was really nice to know there is a nice place call Tree House in ths world. If there are more of this kind of community, a lot of relatiobship problems between the family and adopted children will be easily solved. And it was so great to know the meanings of Creative Conflict, it is useful to use when you get problems with other, especail with your family. It will be a good idea to apply them in your family, but my relationship with my family is fine, so i guess I will try to tell more people about it when they have problems with their relationship with others.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Source for Second Essay
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=a9h&AN=24626866&site=ehost-live&scope=site
(First source for second essay)-David Cahoon
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=a9h&AN=19628612&site=ehost-live&scope=site
(Second source for second essay)-David Cahoon
(First source for second essay)-David Cahoon
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=a9h&AN=19628612&site=ehost-live&scope=site
(Second source for second essay)-David Cahoon
Annotation on Resourses for Essay # 2
*Format: Interview
*Finding resourses and have them annotate in our Wiki
Annotation
Vicky:
Loyal to a Fault
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=2&did=1300269381&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1193945744&clientId=1894 This article was published in "New York Times Magazine"in 2007 by Jasanoff Maya, an Assistant Professor of History. This article tells that loyalists are the American Revoltion's guility secret: rarely spoken of, hauntingly present. At least one in five Americans is believed to have remained loyal to Britain during the war. This article had useful information about how loyalists were like during the war and how they ended up after the war.
'Catch Him and Smash Him!'
http://blackboard.highline.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_5_1
This site is about the loyalist's fight. A force of the U.S. militia, dragoons and regulars met Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton and his veteran regulars and Loyalists in battle in the northwestern South Carolina at Cowpens and achieved one of the most remarkable victories for the U.S. during the Revolution in January 1781. And I believe it is useful beacuse it gives some details and events during the American Revolution.
A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Armshttp://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/arms.htmThis primary document is about how colonists feel about the King of Great Britain. The colonist still respect the British Empire as their Creator, but they are unhappy that British took away the true laws from them. Also it talked about that British said that they are trying to protect the colonist, but the truth was trying to take control the land.The colonists are asking for freedom.
The American Promise p.195~201These pages give the background of the tea from England to America, and the acts colonists did to show British Empire that they are unhappy with the taxes and other true laws during 1770~1774.
*Finding resourses and have them annotate in our Wiki
Annotation
Vicky:
Loyal to a Fault
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=2&did=1300269381&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1193945744&clientId=1894 This article was published in "New York Times Magazine"in 2007 by Jasanoff Maya, an Assistant Professor of History. This article tells that loyalists are the American Revoltion's guility secret: rarely spoken of, hauntingly present. At least one in five Americans is believed to have remained loyal to Britain during the war. This article had useful information about how loyalists were like during the war and how they ended up after the war.
'Catch Him and Smash Him!'
http://blackboard.highline.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_5_1
This site is about the loyalist's fight. A force of the U.S. militia, dragoons and regulars met Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton and his veteran regulars and Loyalists in battle in the northwestern South Carolina at Cowpens and achieved one of the most remarkable victories for the U.S. during the Revolution in January 1781. And I believe it is useful beacuse it gives some details and events during the American Revolution.
A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Armshttp://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/arms.htmThis primary document is about how colonists feel about the King of Great Britain. The colonist still respect the British Empire as their Creator, but they are unhappy that British took away the true laws from them. Also it talked about that British said that they are trying to protect the colonist, but the truth was trying to take control the land.The colonists are asking for freedom.
The American Promise p.195~201These pages give the background of the tea from England to America, and the acts colonists did to show British Empire that they are unhappy with the taxes and other true laws during 1770~1774.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Discussion on Essay # 2
*We decided to do essay format( Letter).
* David- New England Merchant
Vicky- Royal Governor
* David- New England Merchant
Vicky- Royal Governor
Friday, October 26, 2007
AOD # 4
Celebration and appreciation - expressing joy and appreciation for what we learn as well as what we achieve.
Today is 10/26/07, Ramila and her sister ,and my brother and I volunteered in Key Club for concession stand in a football game. It was F. W. High School vs. T.J. High School. I don't really know the score, all I know is that Federal Way High School won the game, because I was so busy with making hot dogs and hot cocoa. And when I took out my cellphone it was 9:30 pm already, i cam there at 6:25pm. I didn't know it had already been 3 hours. And then we started to clean up to close the store. After all it was total four hours if volunteering, also the longest one to me too.
The customers kept coming for 3 hours, and I learned that it is not easy to ran a business by yourself. One of seniors who was in charge said " It's hard to find somebody to help because it's volunteering work." And i answered him, " Well, we are here. We are willing and happy to help you." So i did learn how to make good looking hot dogs and earned 4 hours of community service for PSEC requirement. So I learned as well as what I achived.
Today is 10/26/07, Ramila and her sister ,and my brother and I volunteered in Key Club for concession stand in a football game. It was F. W. High School vs. T.J. High School. I don't really know the score, all I know is that Federal Way High School won the game, because I was so busy with making hot dogs and hot cocoa. And when I took out my cellphone it was 9:30 pm already, i cam there at 6:25pm. I didn't know it had already been 3 hours. And then we started to clean up to close the store. After all it was total four hours if volunteering, also the longest one to me too.
The customers kept coming for 3 hours, and I learned that it is not easy to ran a business by yourself. One of seniors who was in charge said " It's hard to find somebody to help because it's volunteering work." And i answered him, " Well, we are here. We are willing and happy to help you." So i did learn how to make good looking hot dogs and earned 4 hours of community service for PSEC requirement. So I learned as well as what I achived.
MIDTERM PRACTICE
I believe the writer is trying to say in this passage is that the God created a new world for the colonists from Europe in America and they tried to be a better model to show others how a wonderful place they have created and kept. Those colonists tried to form a good government and society in the New England but to kept knowning that they were still English.
The main reason why those colonists left England and wanted to create the New England was to have freedom of religion. Back in the old centuries, English government forced all people to to church and follow the same religion as the king did. The king or government often to ask colonists to do some sacrifices the God or give money to the church. At this time, most of people did not have any good educations, all they knew and learned was about their religions, so religion meant a lot to them during this time.
Since more and more Europeans moved to another place, those English people tried to run away from the society they lived in. Most of them moved to America to get freedom of religion of what they believed in. As more and more new colonists moved to America, they started and tried to form a colony like England but with different rules and society. So the writer said, “[W]hen he shall make us a praise and glory that men shall say of succeeding [colonies], ‘the Lord make it like that of New England.’ For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us[.]”. Because what they knew better was religion and God, so they thought the God created a new world for them to live and take a good control of it. They tried to make it as good as possible and be ones that willing to change to show others and follow them.
In my position, I am really impressive of what those colonists tried to create and do for their new socirty. If I was one tem them who lived in England and had to follow whatever the king or church said, I would moved to a better place to live. Just like the reason why my mom chose to to moved to America four years ago. She said that in Taiwan, there is less chance to find a good job, even the people who had high education. So my family moved to America like those colonists to find more chances and miracles in a new place or society. It always hard to form or get use to a new place, but as long as I am willing to give a try and word hard, I know i will be succeeful in the future as what those colonist did a good job on creating a New England for a better life with freedom.
The main reason why those colonists left England and wanted to create the New England was to have freedom of religion. Back in the old centuries, English government forced all people to to church and follow the same religion as the king did. The king or government often to ask colonists to do some sacrifices the God or give money to the church. At this time, most of people did not have any good educations, all they knew and learned was about their religions, so religion meant a lot to them during this time.
Since more and more Europeans moved to another place, those English people tried to run away from the society they lived in. Most of them moved to America to get freedom of religion of what they believed in. As more and more new colonists moved to America, they started and tried to form a colony like England but with different rules and society. So the writer said, “[W]hen he shall make us a praise and glory that men shall say of succeeding [colonies], ‘the Lord make it like that of New England.’ For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us[.]”. Because what they knew better was religion and God, so they thought the God created a new world for them to live and take a good control of it. They tried to make it as good as possible and be ones that willing to change to show others and follow them.
In my position, I am really impressive of what those colonists tried to create and do for their new socirty. If I was one tem them who lived in England and had to follow whatever the king or church said, I would moved to a better place to live. Just like the reason why my mom chose to to moved to America four years ago. She said that in Taiwan, there is less chance to find a good job, even the people who had high education. So my family moved to America like those colonists to find more chances and miracles in a new place or society. It always hard to form or get use to a new place, but as long as I am willing to give a try and word hard, I know i will be succeeful in the future as what those colonist did a good job on creating a New England for a better life with freedom.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Essay #1 Reflection
1. How do you think you did?
I think I did not do very well on this essay. I did not focus on my topic. It was my first essay that I worked hard to try to understand how to write a good one and spent a long time on it but I still did not get the point of how to write it.
2. What have you learned about your
A) Writing Process?
The outline did helped when I am out of the track or stuck on the essay sometime. It helped me to organize my paper. For example, it reminded me what direction am I going from second paragraph and what am I arguing in each paragraph.
B) Writing Philosophy?
I learned that I should have start my essay by giving my agreement/disagreement or arugment for the topic sentence to show what am I going to aruge or focus in my essay. I should not put a question that didn't represent my point of argument fot the first sentence. I should have wrote that "the lower classes had less power and rights than the higher classes which caused many equality problems and rebellion in this history," instead of putting "have anyone think about how society classes and slavery were like in the past and how does it look like in the modern society?" for the topic sentence.
3. What have you learned about college writing vs. high school writing?
For the college writing, we don't want an informational paper, we want your thoughts and arugements.
For the high school writing, what I wrote before was givng main ideas or facts of the event in the reading, we didn't really put our arguements in the essay. It was more like an informational essay of what I read.
4. What changes will you make for next time?
I will change the way of the order in my writing and find more good sources to use. And show my point of agreement/ disagreement or direction of where the paper will go in the introduction. Also keep in truck of what I should be focusing on.
I think I did not do very well on this essay. I did not focus on my topic. It was my first essay that I worked hard to try to understand how to write a good one and spent a long time on it but I still did not get the point of how to write it.
2. What have you learned about your
A) Writing Process?
The outline did helped when I am out of the track or stuck on the essay sometime. It helped me to organize my paper. For example, it reminded me what direction am I going from second paragraph and what am I arguing in each paragraph.
B) Writing Philosophy?
I learned that I should have start my essay by giving my agreement/disagreement or arugment for the topic sentence to show what am I going to aruge or focus in my essay. I should not put a question that didn't represent my point of argument fot the first sentence. I should have wrote that "the lower classes had less power and rights than the higher classes which caused many equality problems and rebellion in this history," instead of putting "have anyone think about how society classes and slavery were like in the past and how does it look like in the modern society?" for the topic sentence.
3. What have you learned about college writing vs. high school writing?
For the college writing, we don't want an informational paper, we want your thoughts and arugements.
For the high school writing, what I wrote before was givng main ideas or facts of the event in the reading, we didn't really put our arguements in the essay. It was more like an informational essay of what I read.
4. What changes will you make for next time?
I will change the way of the order in my writing and find more good sources to use. And show my point of agreement/ disagreement or direction of where the paper will go in the introduction. Also keep in truck of what I should be focusing on.
Friday, October 19, 2007
AOD # 3
It was a busy week for me because the first hisotry essay was due this Friday. I had retyped my essay for many times, just because I didn't really get what do I need to put down in this essay. I have been in America for 4 years, and all my English classes were ESL classes, so I needed a lot of help to write this essay. And thanks to my teachers, they were willing to help and gave me a lot opinions of what i should put down in my essay. So from this essay, I learned what level I am in and what I need to work on my writting skills.
In Arts of Democracy Class, I learned how to negotiation with each other by listening to my group. I don't use to talk a lot, so I don't really know how to have a conversation about something with others. As what I have learned, i really want to thank to the people in my group because I didn't really get what do I have to do for this class, but they are very nice and willing to help me. So this week, I really learned a lot from my teacher and my group mates, and know that they are always be there for me when i need help.
In Arts of Democracy Class, I learned how to negotiation with each other by listening to my group. I don't use to talk a lot, so I don't really know how to have a conversation about something with others. As what I have learned, i really want to thank to the people in my group because I didn't really get what do I have to do for this class, but they are very nice and willing to help me. So this week, I really learned a lot from my teacher and my group mates, and know that they are always be there for me when i need help.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Final Essay #1
Bacon’s Rellbellion - System of Society Class Have anyone think about how society classes and slavery were like in the past and how does it look like in the modern society? Well, I did think about it when I was studying about slavery during Bacon’s Rebellion which happened in 1676. In the past, how people turned into slaves were by losing in the war, born in a poor or slave family or people who were brought from Africa. And the violence between Virginia colonists and Native Americans was one of the reason that made up Bacon‘s Rebellion so strongly. At sixteenth century in America, the population was made up by White Europeans , Native Americans and Africans, and religion was most powerful thing that gave people knowledge instead of getting professional educations in technology. Because of the religion, most of people in the past thought black represented evil, and became the reason why Africans were brought to America and treated as slaves. In the modern society, slavery is not that popular as it was in the past. Most of examples still happening in this world are children that were sold as laborers in Africa, and women that were kidnapped from China, Thailand or Vietnam sold as sexual slaves and sent to Taiwan secretly. As more and more Europeans moved into America in sixteenth century, they wanted more lands from Native Americans and more people to work for them to make profits. At this time, the government in Virginia had already signed a treaty with Native Americans that Europeans will not cross or take over more lands from them. Plant tobacco fields was the main economy to those high class rich people, which made a big difference between classes and slavery became prevailed, and caused a lot arguments and rebellions in the past. There were many unfair things like, people who had more money meant more power, which meant less money less power and rights but more work to do. Also with many other reasons that made Bacon’s Rebellion as a very strong rebellion that impacted and changed the life of society classes and relationship with Native Americans in America.
In 1676, Bacon’s Rebellion stared as a dispute over Virginia’s Indian Policy. Right after Columbus explored America for Spain, more and more Europeans started to came to America, and for those poor Europeans they had to sign a contract with some wealthy people to brought them to America. The contract was they have to work for the owner who brought them to America for seven years, and they will be free after seven years. Some of them were able to be free after seven years, but some of them had children or tried to ran away during their service year, the owner would add more years on the contract as a punishment. But it was the only way that poor Europeans can move to America without money. A letter that was posted on Rocky Mountain News on Saturday, October 8. 2004 from the AMERICAN INDIAN MOVEMENT of Colorado and Our Allies, the letter was about we should not have a holiday which is a celebration for Columbus explored America after what he done with those Native Americans. As we study in the history, Columbus and his men tortured Native Americans and took over their lands. So there were many fights between Europeans and Native American for many years. Since the Virginia government signed a treaty with Native Americans about the lands, many Virginia colonists were unhappy about it, especially the poor servants and freemen. They did not have that much money to buy lands and also there were not enough lands for them to have when there is a treaty between Native Americans and Europeans. These were the two main reasons that Bacon led his men to against Virginia government and Native Americans.
During this time, more Africans were kidnapped and sent to America and sold as slaves. In the text book, “THE AMERICAN PROMISE” written by historians Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, Lawson and Hartmann, Africans were brought to America by ships. Europeans sent and sold around 1,341,000 Africans in sixteenth century. And it was only because Africans has black skin which meant evil to the European‘s religion, but it was also an excuse to have cheap slaves to work for them. They placed Africans under the deck side by side , even laid on top of others with a long foot chain. Africans did not have fresh air, light or bathrooms. Almost half of them died on the way to America. There was a research about pH of the Atlantic Ocean went high which was because European threw the died Africans into the ocean. It caused illness and changes of sea creatures.
An article posted in the website of National Center for History in the Schools of University of California, that Nathaniel Bacon was the son of a wealthy English gentleman. Bacon was sent to America to plant a large tobacco field. At first he was welcomed by the Governor of Virginia, but not till Bacon started a rebellion against government and Native Americans. Bacon was really a good leader that stood up for those poor freemen. He knew that it was wrong that government and rich people charged a heavy taxes on lower classes. No wonder those people in lower classes could not get rich and for those poor freemen was almost barely to making a living. A travel report written by Sara McClure, a student of the College of William and Mary, when servants and lower class people came to visit a higher class they would have to stay in the main hall. This did create a feeling of intimidation and separated the upper class from the lower classes. And the fact that wealthy people were able to put so much money and effort into their house brings to light an important difference in priorities between the classes. Most of small or poor planters would put all their money back into their tobacco crop while people who were wealthier could afford to use money for their homes.
While rich people were getting richer, those slaves had to work from day to night. Because of the price of an African slave was very cheap, so the did not care about their health or anything, the owner would just buy a new slaves if one of his slave got sick or died. Also rich people was like have more people plant tobacco meant more profit for him to make. It was like living in the hell for the slaves. When Bacon started the rebellion, more and more people became his supporters. Nathaniel Bacon became a hero to many of the poor freeman. The Governor at this time was a man named William Berkeley. Bacon had declared war against Berkeley and other on his side. Berkeley called Bacon as a traitor. There was a castle called Bacon’s Castle. It was built in 1655 by Major Arthur Allen and it actually named as Bacon’s Castle in the nineteenth century, because Bacon was going to use this castle as a stronghold during rebellion, but he may not been in this castle before if he did not get a chance to us it. After Bacon declared a war with Berkeley, Bacon and his crew fought the Indians, sacked the grandees’ plantations, and attacked Jamestown. But Berkeley and his men took revenge by plundering homes and destroying the farms of Bacon’s supporters. Bacon and his supporters continued to fight until one day in October that Bacon was unexpectedly died from a disease in 1676. In “ The American Promise”, it wrote after Bacon’s Rebellion, a governor of Virginia said that it was necessary “ to steer between… either an Indian or a civil war.” It was a hard decision for them to make. But they could have make it easier if they could have give better supports or gain more rights for the lower classes.
The king realized the mess that were made in Jamestown during Bacon’s Rebellion effected the tobacco exports and customs duties, he had some of his royal officials to replace Berkeley. They decided to sell tobacco to more other countries and cut down the taxes by 75 percent between 1660 and 1700. And it was welcomed by all freemen. The number of servants and slaves were reduced. In 1700, only around one-third of free colonists still worked on the lands that were owned by others.
To relate this to my personal experience, it looks more similar to the situation I have in my country Taiwan right now. Taiwan is a small country, we are trying to be an independent country and join the United Nation. Most of Taiwaneses’ ancestors were from China, but it had been 96 years, we had developed new cultures, foods, and style of living. We use a different type of Chinese Writing from China, even they way we speak Chinese is different too. Now we are trying to be independent, and prove we are not part of Chinese’s colony. But China seems to be so negative about it, just like it was hard for rich people to be equal with lower classes. And also because China is not happy about it, it causes many country disagree us to join the United Nation. For the qualifications, we do have enough technologies, especially the medical science. We are working hard to get approve from other countries And I hope it will become succeed as Bacon’s Rebellion that changed and impact the whole society class system. Bacon really did a good job by having a rebellion to help the poor freeman get their rights and making a better living. His rebellion impacted the whole society and changed the slavery system which by reducing a big number of it. And Bacon made king realized that he must make a decision to solve the problem between colonists and Native Americans. It was a important moment in the history in sixteenth century.
In 1676, Bacon’s Rebellion stared as a dispute over Virginia’s Indian Policy. Right after Columbus explored America for Spain, more and more Europeans started to came to America, and for those poor Europeans they had to sign a contract with some wealthy people to brought them to America. The contract was they have to work for the owner who brought them to America for seven years, and they will be free after seven years. Some of them were able to be free after seven years, but some of them had children or tried to ran away during their service year, the owner would add more years on the contract as a punishment. But it was the only way that poor Europeans can move to America without money. A letter that was posted on Rocky Mountain News on Saturday, October 8. 2004 from the AMERICAN INDIAN MOVEMENT of Colorado and Our Allies, the letter was about we should not have a holiday which is a celebration for Columbus explored America after what he done with those Native Americans. As we study in the history, Columbus and his men tortured Native Americans and took over their lands. So there were many fights between Europeans and Native American for many years. Since the Virginia government signed a treaty with Native Americans about the lands, many Virginia colonists were unhappy about it, especially the poor servants and freemen. They did not have that much money to buy lands and also there were not enough lands for them to have when there is a treaty between Native Americans and Europeans. These were the two main reasons that Bacon led his men to against Virginia government and Native Americans.
During this time, more Africans were kidnapped and sent to America and sold as slaves. In the text book, “THE AMERICAN PROMISE” written by historians Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, Lawson and Hartmann, Africans were brought to America by ships. Europeans sent and sold around 1,341,000 Africans in sixteenth century. And it was only because Africans has black skin which meant evil to the European‘s religion, but it was also an excuse to have cheap slaves to work for them. They placed Africans under the deck side by side , even laid on top of others with a long foot chain. Africans did not have fresh air, light or bathrooms. Almost half of them died on the way to America. There was a research about pH of the Atlantic Ocean went high which was because European threw the died Africans into the ocean. It caused illness and changes of sea creatures.
An article posted in the website of National Center for History in the Schools of University of California, that Nathaniel Bacon was the son of a wealthy English gentleman. Bacon was sent to America to plant a large tobacco field. At first he was welcomed by the Governor of Virginia, but not till Bacon started a rebellion against government and Native Americans. Bacon was really a good leader that stood up for those poor freemen. He knew that it was wrong that government and rich people charged a heavy taxes on lower classes. No wonder those people in lower classes could not get rich and for those poor freemen was almost barely to making a living. A travel report written by Sara McClure, a student of the College of William and Mary, when servants and lower class people came to visit a higher class they would have to stay in the main hall. This did create a feeling of intimidation and separated the upper class from the lower classes. And the fact that wealthy people were able to put so much money and effort into their house brings to light an important difference in priorities between the classes. Most of small or poor planters would put all their money back into their tobacco crop while people who were wealthier could afford to use money for their homes.
While rich people were getting richer, those slaves had to work from day to night. Because of the price of an African slave was very cheap, so the did not care about their health or anything, the owner would just buy a new slaves if one of his slave got sick or died. Also rich people was like have more people plant tobacco meant more profit for him to make. It was like living in the hell for the slaves. When Bacon started the rebellion, more and more people became his supporters. Nathaniel Bacon became a hero to many of the poor freeman. The Governor at this time was a man named William Berkeley. Bacon had declared war against Berkeley and other on his side. Berkeley called Bacon as a traitor. There was a castle called Bacon’s Castle. It was built in 1655 by Major Arthur Allen and it actually named as Bacon’s Castle in the nineteenth century, because Bacon was going to use this castle as a stronghold during rebellion, but he may not been in this castle before if he did not get a chance to us it. After Bacon declared a war with Berkeley, Bacon and his crew fought the Indians, sacked the grandees’ plantations, and attacked Jamestown. But Berkeley and his men took revenge by plundering homes and destroying the farms of Bacon’s supporters. Bacon and his supporters continued to fight until one day in October that Bacon was unexpectedly died from a disease in 1676. In “ The American Promise”, it wrote after Bacon’s Rebellion, a governor of Virginia said that it was necessary “ to steer between… either an Indian or a civil war.” It was a hard decision for them to make. But they could have make it easier if they could have give better supports or gain more rights for the lower classes.
The king realized the mess that were made in Jamestown during Bacon’s Rebellion effected the tobacco exports and customs duties, he had some of his royal officials to replace Berkeley. They decided to sell tobacco to more other countries and cut down the taxes by 75 percent between 1660 and 1700. And it was welcomed by all freemen. The number of servants and slaves were reduced. In 1700, only around one-third of free colonists still worked on the lands that were owned by others.
To relate this to my personal experience, it looks more similar to the situation I have in my country Taiwan right now. Taiwan is a small country, we are trying to be an independent country and join the United Nation. Most of Taiwaneses’ ancestors were from China, but it had been 96 years, we had developed new cultures, foods, and style of living. We use a different type of Chinese Writing from China, even they way we speak Chinese is different too. Now we are trying to be independent, and prove we are not part of Chinese’s colony. But China seems to be so negative about it, just like it was hard for rich people to be equal with lower classes. And also because China is not happy about it, it causes many country disagree us to join the United Nation. For the qualifications, we do have enough technologies, especially the medical science. We are working hard to get approve from other countries And I hope it will become succeed as Bacon’s Rebellion that changed and impact the whole society class system. Bacon really did a good job by having a rebellion to help the poor freeman get their rights and making a better living. His rebellion impacted the whole society and changed the slavery system which by reducing a big number of it. And Bacon made king realized that he must make a decision to solve the problem between colonists and Native Americans. It was a important moment in the history in sixteenth century.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Draft # 2 Introduction
Bacon’s Rellbellion - The Differences Between Classes Have anyone ever think about how the people’s lives were like when there were society classes? Well, I did think about that when I was studying about slavery. Slavery had been going on and on for many centuries, and it is still happening in Europe and Asia. And most of them are children who got kidnapped and sold to some factories to work or some girls were sold as sexual slaves. How did the slavery and other low classes’ lives like in the history? Why did people need slaves in the past? Lives of low classes and slaves would look like work, work and work everyday. The main reasons why the wealthy class need slaves was they needed people to plant a lot of tobacco and do things they did not want to do by themselves. How did people turn in to slaves in the past? And were those slaves able to get freedom ad make living after all? Right after Columbus explored America for Spain, more and more Europeans moved into America. When some poor Europeans wanted to come to America, they had to sign a contract with rich people to bring them here ,and then they would work for rich people in order to pay back. And yes, some of slaves were able to be free after they work seven years and it was the end of the contract. There were also had examples of some slaves that had to work longer than seven years just because they had children or tried to run away during the contract years. So most of the owners would add on year in their contracts. Was it a good deal to be a slave in order to pay back to the owner? Well, who knows. We can learn more about it from history documents about Bacon’s Rebellion which involved society classes’ problems and how did it started.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Draft # 1
Bacon’s Rellbellion – Life of Different Classes
It was a big difference between life of rich and poor in the history. Rich people were friends with government, and poors were slaves which worked for the wealthy level. The class level was depended on race or skin color sometimes. People who had lighter skin like white were in a higher society level, and for those who had darker skin like black. Many of arguments or protests in a country often involved society level or racism in the past, and it could still happen today in our society somewhere in this world too.
In 1676, Bacon’s Rebellion started as a dispute over Virginia’s Indian Policy. During this time, more and more Europeans moved into New World since Columbus explored America. As more Europeans came, they needed more lands to build houses and plant foods. The governments had signed a contract with Indians in Virginia which says the Europeans will not cross or take over rest of Native American’s territory. At this point, people who studied about Columbus should have known that a lot of cruel tortures he did to the natives. And I do agree that the government signed a treaty with Native Americans to protect natives’ rights and keep out from their territory, but the protection did work for long.
The time before the policy begun, the Algonquian chief had led Indian to have a surprise attack which killed about 500 Virginia colonists in two days in 1644. So for next few years, there were fightings between Indians and colonists. When government signed a treaty, those colonists felt unfair and mad about “Why can these uneducated Indians to have that much when they do not know how to use the land?” And also for those poor servants who did not have money to buy lands for their own, they wanted to get it from Indians. Of course the houses and environments they lived in looked different depended on your class. There was slavery going on in the society during this time. For the labor, planter and servant, they did not have that much money to spend for their houses. Most of planters would put all their money back into their tobacco crop while people who were wealthier could pay more money for their homes. At main time, a man named Nathaniel Bacon, he started a rebellion with some colonists. They were both against the government and Indians. They were fighting for lands and freedom for the slaves. If I was Bacon I would do the same thing too, because the rich people and colonial rulers had a very close relationship and charged a big number of taxes on the products. So even if I worked hard at that time, I will never able to saving anything by paying high taxes. Just for this reason, more and more colonists came to support Bacon’s Rebellion. Nathaniel Bacon became a hero to many of the poor freemen. He was not a poor man. He was the son of a wealthy English gentleman. Bacon was sent to Virginia with enough money to establish a large tobacco plantation. At first he was welcome by the governor but not till he came up with a rebellion. To me, Bacon was a brave man with strength and good opinions of his own to led a group of mistreated people to get their rights.
The governor at this time was a man named William Berkeley. Bacon had declared war against Berkeley and others on his side. Berkeley called Bacon as a traitor. There was a castle called Bacon’s Castle. It was built in 1665 by Major Arthur Allen and it actually named as Bacon’s Castle in the 19th century, because Bacon was going to use this house as a stronghold during rebellion, but he may not been in this house if he did not have any chance to use it. Once you go in, you can really tell that it is a rich family’s house. During this time period, more money meant more power and higher society level, and less wealthy meant you have less power and more works to do. After Bacon declared a war against Berkeley, his crew and him fought the Indians and sacked the grandees’ plantations, and attacked Jamestown. But Berkeley and his people took the revenge by plundering homes and destroyed the farms of Bacon’s supporters. In this case, I do think it was a smart way for Berkeley and his people destroyed Bacon’s supporters’ houses and farm to stop them from attacking them, but of course Bacon’s supporters were not that easy to be stopped. Bacon and his supporters continued fighting until one day in October that Bacon was unexpectedly died from a disease.
It was a big difference between life of rich and poor in the history. Rich people were friends with government, and poors were slaves which worked for the wealthy level. The class level was depended on race or skin color sometimes. People who had lighter skin like white were in a higher society level, and for those who had darker skin like black. Many of arguments or protests in a country often involved society level or racism in the past, and it could still happen today in our society somewhere in this world too.
In 1676, Bacon’s Rebellion started as a dispute over Virginia’s Indian Policy. During this time, more and more Europeans moved into New World since Columbus explored America. As more Europeans came, they needed more lands to build houses and plant foods. The governments had signed a contract with Indians in Virginia which says the Europeans will not cross or take over rest of Native American’s territory. At this point, people who studied about Columbus should have known that a lot of cruel tortures he did to the natives. And I do agree that the government signed a treaty with Native Americans to protect natives’ rights and keep out from their territory, but the protection did work for long.
The time before the policy begun, the Algonquian chief had led Indian to have a surprise attack which killed about 500 Virginia colonists in two days in 1644. So for next few years, there were fightings between Indians and colonists. When government signed a treaty, those colonists felt unfair and mad about “Why can these uneducated Indians to have that much when they do not know how to use the land?” And also for those poor servants who did not have money to buy lands for their own, they wanted to get it from Indians. Of course the houses and environments they lived in looked different depended on your class. There was slavery going on in the society during this time. For the labor, planter and servant, they did not have that much money to spend for their houses. Most of planters would put all their money back into their tobacco crop while people who were wealthier could pay more money for their homes. At main time, a man named Nathaniel Bacon, he started a rebellion with some colonists. They were both against the government and Indians. They were fighting for lands and freedom for the slaves. If I was Bacon I would do the same thing too, because the rich people and colonial rulers had a very close relationship and charged a big number of taxes on the products. So even if I worked hard at that time, I will never able to saving anything by paying high taxes. Just for this reason, more and more colonists came to support Bacon’s Rebellion. Nathaniel Bacon became a hero to many of the poor freemen. He was not a poor man. He was the son of a wealthy English gentleman. Bacon was sent to Virginia with enough money to establish a large tobacco plantation. At first he was welcome by the governor but not till he came up with a rebellion. To me, Bacon was a brave man with strength and good opinions of his own to led a group of mistreated people to get their rights.
The governor at this time was a man named William Berkeley. Bacon had declared war against Berkeley and others on his side. Berkeley called Bacon as a traitor. There was a castle called Bacon’s Castle. It was built in 1665 by Major Arthur Allen and it actually named as Bacon’s Castle in the 19th century, because Bacon was going to use this house as a stronghold during rebellion, but he may not been in this house if he did not have any chance to use it. Once you go in, you can really tell that it is a rich family’s house. During this time period, more money meant more power and higher society level, and less wealthy meant you have less power and more works to do. After Bacon declared a war against Berkeley, his crew and him fought the Indians and sacked the grandees’ plantations, and attacked Jamestown. But Berkeley and his people took the revenge by plundering homes and destroyed the farms of Bacon’s supporters. In this case, I do think it was a smart way for Berkeley and his people destroyed Bacon’s supporters’ houses and farm to stop them from attacking them, but of course Bacon’s supporters were not that easy to be stopped. Bacon and his supporters continued fighting until one day in October that Bacon was unexpectedly died from a disease.
Friday, October 12, 2007
AOD #2
I am just back from volunteering in a theater. I was helping with selling some snacks and drinks. And i got to stay to watch the show for free. It was a really fun night. First I learned how to run a small snack bar and communication with others. I really like this kind of opportunities which I know them from the Key Club from my high school.
Also this Wednesday during the community meeting, i made an announcement at front of everybody. It was the first time I spoke up and had everybody's attention. So from both of them I learned and practiced how to communicate adn talk in public and helped others at same time.
Also this Wednesday during the community meeting, i made an announcement at front of everybody. It was the first time I spoke up and had everybody's attention. So from both of them I learned and practiced how to communicate adn talk in public and helped others at same time.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Notes for Bacon's Rebellion (貝肯叛亂)
1. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1p274.html
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon's_Rebellion
3. http://www.conservapedia.com/Bacon's_Rebellion
place: Jamestown, Virginia
time: 1676
involved: Bacon, Coloinalist ( government) and Indians
Sshort Infromation from internet : Bacon's Rebellion was a revolt in 1676 by frontiersmen, indentured servants, and slaves, in colonial Virginia. It was led by Nathaniel Bacon, who organized a militia to deal with Indians who were raiding inland farms. In 1676, Bacon was elected to the House of Burgesses where he continued to promote his Indian raids, much to the dismay of colonial governor William Berkeley. In his Declaration of the People, Bacon denounced the colonial government for doing little to protect the frontier farmlands and unjust taxation, among other things. Eventually, Bacon's militia turned on the colonial capitol of Jamestown seizing and destroying property of the aristocracy for three months. The rebellion ended shortly after Bacon's death, due to body lice.
Bacon's Rebellion was the first major rebellion in the American colonies in which free white men were involved.
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon's_Rebellion
3. http://www.conservapedia.com/Bacon's_Rebellion
place: Jamestown, Virginia
time: 1676
involved: Bacon, Coloinalist ( government) and Indians
Sshort Infromation from internet : Bacon's Rebellion was a revolt in 1676 by frontiersmen, indentured servants, and slaves, in colonial Virginia. It was led by Nathaniel Bacon, who organized a militia to deal with Indians who were raiding inland farms. In 1676, Bacon was elected to the House of Burgesses where he continued to promote his Indian raids, much to the dismay of colonial governor William Berkeley. In his Declaration of the People, Bacon denounced the colonial government for doing little to protect the frontier farmlands and unjust taxation, among other things. Eventually, Bacon's militia turned on the colonial capitol of Jamestown seizing and destroying property of the aristocracy for three months. The rebellion ended shortly after Bacon's death, due to body lice.
Bacon's Rebellion was the first major rebellion in the American colonies in which free white men were involved.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Arts of Democracy #1
Celebration and appreciation- expressing joy and appreciation for what we learn as well as what we achieve
From this new school year, I started to be a TA in a Chinese school computer class. This is my fifth year to go Chiense school every Saturday morning in main campus of Highline. I am there to help with the translation beacuse the teacher doesn't speak Mandarin well. Also if some students have question I would go to him/ her to answer, and if I couldn't answer or slove, I will ask the teacher to go to that student to help after he is done with talking or speech.
There are some adluts in this comptuer class too. They like to ask me for helpo before they ask the teacher because I am easy to get along with people who are older than me and speak in my language. That's what they told me. So I will be a TA this year and in the next few years if they still offer this class. From this I can increase my computer knowledge and joy to help people. I alway happy or enjoy the time that I can help some who are needed.
From this new school year, I started to be a TA in a Chinese school computer class. This is my fifth year to go Chiense school every Saturday morning in main campus of Highline. I am there to help with the translation beacuse the teacher doesn't speak Mandarin well. Also if some students have question I would go to him/ her to answer, and if I couldn't answer or slove, I will ask the teacher to go to that student to help after he is done with talking or speech.
There are some adluts in this comptuer class too. They like to ask me for helpo before they ask the teacher because I am easy to get along with people who are older than me and speak in my language. That's what they told me. So I will be a TA this year and in the next few years if they still offer this class. From this I can increase my computer knowledge and joy to help people. I alway happy or enjoy the time that I can help some who are needed.
Topic Sentence
Smoking is a way of chronic suicide. As we can see, Europeans bought tabacco from native people and they turned out to like it. So they started to grow tabacco in the New World and then they shipped and sold it in Europe. That's how tabacco started to spread all around the world. And one thing I would like to say is that tabacco is like a kind of drug that is bad for your health. From the facts I read in " http://www.thetruth.com/ ", this web has many examples of what happened to the people who smokes. For examples, the cigarettes can cause wrinkless, cause of vision loss, and it also causes cancers. There are 69 animal/ human carcinogens are in tobacco smoke. Every 6.5 seconds, someone in the world dies from a smoking-related disease, and about 339 people in U.S. die of lung cancer every day. And education is important for the children, they learn what they are not supose to do or what is bad for them. The higher smoking rates are associated with lower education levels. Also there are some facts shows about 918 people die each year on U.S. from smoking-related fires, 719,000 have heart attack drom smoking, and over 8.5 million Americans live with tabacco-relatived illnesses. There were close to 50% of people said that they wanted to quit, but only 4.7% were succeed in quitting. And it is a big responsibility for the parents to tell their children no to smoke. So on, we can reduce the percentage of smoking people in the future. Also the smoke from the the cigarettes is a pollution to our environment too, so we should really convince to people who smoke to stop smoking anymore.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Alternate Reality Games
After understanding this article, I think ARGs is like a proudct that people will have different reslutes after they try it. Just like a Question, that we can come up with many different answers. Also it is like a arugment too, people have differnet point of view and oppions. It sounds interesting to me, but I know it won't be too interesting if I don't even know what are we playing when I get to do something relate to it. So the questions i have are DO I HAVE TO PLAY IT? WOULD IT BE FUN? IS IT HARD TO PLAY? and WHEN WILL THIS ARTICLE HAVE A EASIER VERSION?!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)