Monroe, Kim Jong-un, Franco, and Rogen

  While a large majority of people disagree with their government, North Korea is considered a separate sphere of influence from the United States. This fact became irrelevant with the recent hacks on US soil by who is suspected to be North Korea.
 On November 24, 2014, Sony Pictures was hacked in what is being called, "one of the most debilitating hacks ever targeted at US corporate servers." The result was the theft of several unreleased films and employee information. While they are not entirely sure, North Korea is currently the leading suspect. This is due to the already existing anger towards the U.S. about the Sony film, The Interview. In the movie, popular actors James Franco and Seth Rogen are recruited to assassinate North Korea's controversial leader. "If it was North Korea, these attacks against Sony would indicate that foreign powers are going beyond the traditional information-stealing attacks to enforcing their own law against American companies via what we would consider cyber terrorism," former NSA researcher, Dave Aitel told Business Insider. These hacks are being called the first destructive computer network attack against the United States on US soil by the military. North Korea has been developing their hacking abilities on an internet completely cut off from the rest of the world, giving them leverage. The only question left now is how should the United States respond?
 The Monroe Doctrine was an annual address to Congress from President James Monroe, in which he stated his position on European and American affairs. Even though the internet wasn’t invented until over one hundred years after this address, it can still be applied to the hacks of Sony Pictures. The Doctrine states that, “It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense.” Because of this, the United State should be prepared to defend ourselves against North Korea. The underlying meaning of the Monroe Doctrine is essentially ‘you stay out of our business, and we’ll stay out of yours.’ North Korea failed to mind their own business; therefore it’s likely that the US will not be keeping up their end of the bargain either.
  The Monroe Doctrine was said hundreds of years ago, in a time without the internet and without the ability to hack. Even so, it still applies today in a time where no one can imagine living without smart phones and Wi-Fi.


Rosen, Armin. "The Sony Hack Is A Watershed If North Korea Was Involved." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 04 Dec. 2014. Web. 04 Dec. 2014.

Racism and Identity: Gran Colombia and Ferguson, Missouri

   No one knew the massive effect Simon Bolivar would have on South America when he was a young officer in Caracas in 1810. After the formal announcement of Venezuelan independence, Spain quickly regained control of the province a year later. Bolivar escaped to Cartagena, Colombia, a city currently in rebel hands. Here, he wrote the Manifesto de Cartagena, a political pamphlet with efforts to inspire a desire for "South American-ness," rather than Spanish control. This effort proved to be successful as he was able to gather an army and win six consecutive battles against Spanish forces in Venezuela. In August 1814, the Spanish retook Caracas, and Bolivar fled to exile in Jamaica and Haiti. By the latter end of 1817, he was back in Venezuela rebuilding an army. With his force of 2,500 men, they attacked their unsuspecting enemy, and came out successful. On December 17, 1817, the Republica de Colombia, which covered modern day Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela, was proclaimed. After the liberations of Venezuela in 1821 and Ecuador in 1822, the Republica de Colombia became a free republic. This allowed Simon Bolivar's dream to become a reality. From the start, he had desired a completely South American culture, without the control and influence of Spain. When he created a new republic, he achieved his goal of forming a non-Spanish identity. While they obviously have Spanish routes, the people of South America were likely born and raised in South America. Their ethnicities may be Spanish, but they're South American because that's where they're from.
  At the moment, any news about Ferguson is unescapable. Riots are happening all over the country, it's all over social media, and it's in every headline. Michael Brown was just an average 18 year old kid in Ferguson, Missouri of African-American descent. On August 9. 2014, Brown engaged in an altercation with Darren Wilson, a member of the Ferguson police force. This altercation would lead to Brown's death, as he was shot six times by this police officer. Michael Brown was unarmed when he was killed. This case has been extremely controversial over the past 5 months. Recently, the highly anticipated decision was made, and Darren Wilson will not face trial for the shooting. Many people are outraged because this police officer, who is white, killed a boy, who was African-American, and he got off with no charges against him. It's widely interpreted as a crime of anti-blackness, which, according to an article titled Ferguson Must Force Us To Face Anti-Blackness by Michael P. Jeffries, entails the following; "Our schools, neighborhoods, and criminal-punishment system actively privilege whites at the expense of people of color, even when the rules governing these systems are racially “neutral.” " Race is something that is Omni-present in our society. Unfortunately enough, it's been around forever, and even with the abolition of slavery, it still exists. Anti-black crimes are ones that too often go unpunished, and even credited, as Jeffries points out, "Black humanity is desecrated in plain view, as Mike Brown’s dead body laid uncovered on the street for four and a half hours before being unceremoniously hoisted into an SUV. Brown is described as “it” and “a demon” in his killer’s testimony, and killing black people is all too frequently rewarded, as George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in defense of their actions, and Wilson remains employed." It's about time to stop acknowledging people based on the color of their skin or where they come from. At the end of the day, we're all Americans here. We live in a country that has prided itself on cultural diversity for centuries. Anti-blackness is a major concern in our country, and is not something that can be ignored. If one good thing came out of Michael Brown's death, it would be that we're now forced to face anti-blackness. Racism has always been something that has plagued the world, but I hope to see a time without it in my life.

Jeffries, Michael P. "Ferguson Must Force Us to Face Anti-Blackness." BostonGlobe.com. Boston.com, 28 Nov. 2014. Web. 01 Dec. 2014.

The Entirety of a Country

 The Congress of Vienna was made up of representatives from the countries most heavily affected by Napoleon Bonaparte's actions. They were trying to create the "best of all possible worlds." Could this Congress possibly reverse the changes made by Napoleon? If their power was threatened by these changes, what should they do? In class, we discussed what they could've done. We decided what would be the best option, and then we discovered what they actually did. We put ourselves into the shoes of the Austrian prince, Prince Metternich, to select an option that would allow them to keep diplomacy.
  Metternich and the other diplomats of the Congress of Vienna used multiple concepts to eliminate threats on their power. One of them, the Principle of Intervention, was an ideology that gave the great powers the right to send troops into a country to stop revolution. The hereditary monarchs would be restored to power, keeping the crown within a family so that someone like Napoleon couldn't come in and take it. England was the only country present at the Congress of Vienna that refused to take part. When restored, the monarchs were to act more compassionately towards their peoples in order to extinguish any ideas of revolution. They were to encourage freedom of speech and religious toleration. This lead to further support of the arts, sciences, and education.
  The representatives at the Congress of Vienna were very powerful people in their own countries, and therefore didn't have the best interest of the people in mind at all times. It's very likely that they all had distorted ideas of the best possible choices for the country as a whole. While reinstating the monarchs brought about a sense of comfort and normality, it also heightened the chances of rebellion. The same basic idea of monarchy had been used for thousands of years, and it had been proven to cause problems. While they all knew this, none of the diplomats wanted to give up any of their power, which was bound to happen with a change of government. There were definitely alternative options, such as a democracy, that would've been better for the entirety of the country, and not just the powerhouses. These representatives should've been thinking of the people of their country, and not just themselves when selected to personify it.

http://www.nobility-association.com/thecongressofvienna.htm

The Everlasting Impact of the Little Corporal

There's no denying the fact that Napoleon Bonaparte was an extremely powerful man. He didn't just influence his home country of France, or even all of Europe; he influenced the entire world politically, socially, and economically. The impact he had hundreds of years ago, still resonates today.
 Politically, Bonaparte established massive changes especially in France. In 1709, when the Directory learned of Napoleon's intention to overthrow them, all five members resigned. He also established a "meritocracy" where people were rewarded for their skills, rather than their social class. Although European politics have gone through massive edits and revisions over the years, these changes were imperative to the time.
 In the social aspect, Napoleon made changes that completely flipped the norms of society. Under his power, French armies all across Europe abolished titles of serfdom, ended Church privileges, removed trade barriers, and stimulated industry. In addition, during his reign more citizens had rights to property and education than they had previously. Some of year changes have played a part in his gaining support. He made things better for the average person and didn't bother concerning himself with the governments.
 Economically, countries prospered under Bonaparte's rule. He controlled prices, encouraged new industry, and built roads and canals in all the countries he controlled. However, during the French Revolution, he did take precious artwork and vast amounts of money from Italy. He also established the Bank of France, balanced the budget, and undertook massive public works programs.
  Feelings aside; it's impossible to ignore the fact that 'the little corporal' had a massive impact on the world, socially, politically, and economically.  Love him or hate him, Napoleon Bonaparte changed

the world.

Which Is Best; Capitalism or Socialism?

   It's hard to believe that a sugary candy like Starbursts can simplify complicated topics like Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism. They can, and they make understanding these topics extremely easy. If students are all handed a certain amount, say three Starbursts each, this game is fair and everyone is happy. The playing field isn't level when a select few students start off with more than everyone else; ten Starbursts. This is very similar to Capitalism because while everyone has something, people have unequal amounts. The game is now open for students to bet with each other for Starbursts, yet it is up to each individual to decide if they want to play. Some win, and some lose, but it's up to the player how much they are willing to risk. After the end of the game, some players may have more than they started with, while others may have none. Now, to demonstrate Socialism, the teacher collects all candy and redistributes an equal amount. The players with the higher amounts of Starbursts would likely be upset, while those with less or none would be happy. It's very difficult to please everyone. The idea of everyone having the same amount creates a 'classless society,' and puts everyone at an equal level. If the game had the correct effect, the students wouldn't want to play the game again and would share the candy. This would complete the goal of Communism, where everyone would be equal. There wouldn't be a "government" necessary because the students wouldn't need supervision. In my opinion, this would be a frustrating game because you go through the hassle of winning and losing Starbursts, just to have them taken away at the end. It makes all your hard work seem pointless, because everyone gets the same amount afterwards. We discusses this activity as well as the basic ideas of capitalism and socialism in a Socratic seminar in class. Many points were made, criticizing and complementing both systems.
  The fathers of both socialism and capitalism had different ideas on how to help the poor in a society. Karl Marx, the mind behind Socialism, was inspired by the current economy where a small amount of people were making money while the larger percentage wasn't. He didn't like the unequal distribution of wealth in his current society. He believed that work gave life meaning, and that by nature we are social beings. His focus was on struggle, on making life better for the lower class. With his system, there would be no upper or lower class, all would be equal. It was the idea that the government should take control of all things and distribute wealth. A man named Adam Smith came up with a contrasting idea around the same time. His idea would be called Capitalism, or "the invisible hand." This would leave self interest to the public, and no government would be needed. Free markets would basically control the economy, and would improve on their on through competition. The idea is that when things are needed, someone will make them, and in turn, customers will buy them. Smith's goal to reach a classless society was not reached very often, because most of the time governments interfered due to the long amount of time it would take to reach the equilibrium. Capitalism takes a Laissez-Faire approach in which it is natural and the people are both and consumers and the producers. Both ideas have flaws, but as do all systems. It's impossible to create a society where everyone is pleased all the time.
  In my opinion, both ideas are flawed and not everyone would be pleased all the time. Each system has good features, and if we could somehow mix them into one, we may achieve some kind of equality. With Socialism, there is nothing to aspire to be, which Julianne brought up during our Socratic seminar. If everything is completely equal, you can never be better at something than someone else. You can work harder than anyone else, yet you'll still have the same amount of money as them. You'll never earn anything through your own success, so why bother? Again, Julianne made a great point when she said, "If there's no room for improvement, what motivation is there for hard work?" As Troy pointed out, no one rises too high and no one falls too low. It may sound great on paper, but in reality, we all want to be successful. In turn, with Capitalism if you're born into higher class, you just keep going higher and higher while the poor just keep getting poorer and poorer, as Ryan said. Ms. Bailey pointed out that no matter how hard people work, someone's always at a disadvantage. With a Capitalist society, there is always going to be a lower class of people. In 2013, the poverty rate was 14.5% in the United States. That's over 45 million people. People don't always deserve their situation, but are often born into it. In situations like Paris Hilton, she did nothing to deserve the endless supply of money that she has. In situations where someone is extremely poor, they may work extremely hard to get out, yet still remain part of the lower class. Troy had a great idea in that there's a minimum that people should have, and then they can compete in society. I agree with that because both capitalism and socialism have a massive list of flaws, yet I believe the idea of capitalism can be edited to a point where it will create a better society. The world will never successfully achieve a utopian society, but with capitalism, there's always a chance.

Luddites: Taking Sides

 The Luddites were skilled artisans who attacked machines and factories during early Industrialization. They were followers of the mythical figure, "Ned Ludd." The Luddites sabotaged these factories because of the reduced skill in work and economic hardship. These people were talented craftsmen, but with the Industrial Revolution, machines could do the work at a faster and cheaper rate. What follows is a mock primary source letter from a skilled weaver during early industrialization.

Dear Abigail, 

 How are you, cousin? I hope that you are doing better than me. As you know, I am a weaver, and a pretty good one at that. But, unfortunately, since all of these factories began popping up, I have very few customers left. These factory workers and machines can make things far faster and cheaper than I can. Many other artisans very similar to me have been taking these matters into their own hands. They have been going into factories at night and sabotaging their machines. I'm being pressured to join them. Industrialization is destroying me financially, and I may have to find new work soon. But for now, I can't join them. As much as I'd like to help, I can't risk losing the few customers I have left. 

  I hope all is going well for you in Massachusetts. I wish you well on any and all of your future endeavors. 

  Your cousin, 

   James. 

Money is Motivation: Women in the Lowell Mills

What motivated women to go to work in the Lowell Mills?

 

 Before the Lowell Mill Experiment, women were not expected to have jobs or do anything other than care for the house and children. When the idea of this experiment came around, mill agents were sent from the factories to recruit young women to work. Times were changing, women could work.

    When these mill agents were sent to towns in the countryside, they would paint a "rosy picture" of the factories in Lowell, trying to appeal to both the father and daughter. Most girls were attracted to the idea of having a little bit of spending money, which they wouldn't have at home. Many fathers were attracted to the idea of money being sent home to help out, with the mortgage for example. These factory girls wanted to have more than their mothers did.
  A girl would also have a better opportunity to find a spouse in a city like Lowell than they would at home. But, if a girl stayed too long, she would be considered undesirable for marriage. Because of this, many girls planned on staying only a few years, enough time to save up for a dowry, before leaving to get married.

  Although these were the main ideas that motivated women to go to Lowell, wage cuts were made often, eventually leading to walk outs and boycotting. It's interesting that the very thing that attracted them there in the first place was the thing to make them leave.

 

Sources: "The Lowell Offering," The American Textile History Museum

               "Lucy Hall Video"

               "Lowell - The Factory in the Garden"

              "View of Lowell, Massachusetts," The American Textile History Museum 



The Industrial Revolution: Curation Is Key

 You’d never imagine how much impact a spinning needle could have. This past week, we’ve been working on posters about different aspects of the Industrial Revolution. The topic assigned to my group was the impact of spinning on the Industrial Revolution. The title of our project is “Spinning Into the Future: A Woven Destiny.” We wanted to describe how this time for spinning lead to other massive future accomplishments.

 We were given 6 sources from which we gathered information on our topic. Five out of the six were images, while the last was an article. The first source was an image by George Walker called “Woman Spinning” from 1814, in which he wanted to show what goes on for the average cottager and how the cottages were set up. He wanted the viewer to learn that there were many different roles to play, and not just spinning. The second image was an engraving of a Spinning Jenny, and was made by T.E. Nicholson in 1835. It provides an accurate depiction of the Spinning Jenny and its concept. Another source was called “Power Looms at a Textile Mill” and was made by an unknown creator at an unknown date. What we do know is that the creator wanted to show an audience what a highly functioning mill would look like. Our next source was a chart from ABC Clio called “Growth of the Cities.” It shows the population of London increasing during the Industrial Revolution. Our second to last source was an article titled “Effect of Losing Cottage Industry For Families,” and basically goes on to describe how cottagers could successfully make a profit from home before the industrial Revolution, but were forced to depend on the father for an income or face the harsh factory conditions eventually. Lastly, we observed an image if John Almond’s Handloom from 1771. It shows how a single person handloom could be used and operated at this time. I hope that from our exhibit, visitors can learn that spinning was a vital part of the Industrial Revolution, and that things changed massively from the way that they were before.

 

 After creating our own exhibit, we were given the privilege to browse through the ones created as well. They varied on different topics, ranging from the steam engine to child labor, but all relating back to the Industrial Revolution. The first exhibit I viewed was called “Cotton or Freedom? You Decide,” and was about the cotton industry’s impact on slavery. Slavery allowed a greater amount of cotton to be made, which led to a larger income, which lead to more factories being built, which lead back around to a greater need for slaves. This means that as cotton production increased, slavery increased too. Another exhibit that I viewed was called “The Dark Side of the Industrial Revolution,” and discussed the environmental consequences. Much land that was used for living and wildlife was lost, in order to build more factories. The city of London grew so polluted that people couldn’t see the sun. Buildings became massively overpopulated and most people couldn’t earn enough money to sustain themselves. Although the Industrial Revolution opened doors to many great possibilities, it created many problems along the way. One problem it created was the need for child labor, which was the topic of the next exhibit, titled “All Work, No Play.”  Young children were forced to work in unhealthy and unsafe conditions in factories. Many young girls had to work long hours in order to provide for their family. Lastly, I visited an exhibit called “Hot Stuff: How the Steam Engine Fired Up the Industrial Revolution,” which showed how the steam engine jump started the revolution. It improved travel and trade, but many people were skeptical at first because of its advanced level.

 That’s how many things went during the Industrial Revolution, people were skeptical of new things, but they eventually became vital parts of society. Many of the things discovered during this time are still used today, such as the toilet or antibiotics. The Industrial Revolution created both good and bad things, which still have a lasting impact today.