The essential question in class was, what should people in power do when their power is threatened? In class we went into groups to predict Metternich's decisions, discussed what really happened and then took notes on the Congress of Vienna.
The powerful people that were at the Congress of Vienna had to come up with a plan to stop future revolutions from arising. One of the ideas they had was to create a Holy Alliance. This idea was led by Czar Alexander of Russia. The idea of the Holy Alliance was that monarchs in every country had the divine right to rule and that any revolution was treason against god. To stop the future revolutions, the great powers of Europe were allowed to send troops into the revolting countries to end the revolutions. The only countries that were allowed to do this was Prussia, Russia, France and Austria because they were bound together by God. England did not want to take part in this intervention.
I think the great powers of Europe did a satisfactory job at the Congress of Vienna. Instead of getting rid of smaller countries, they could have kept the same borders and also kept the Holy Alliance. However I think the Great Powers did an alright job.
Congress of Vienna Map: http://www.the-map-as-history.com/demos/tome01/index.php
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Ideologies
The essential question that we received in class was, what were the major political ideologies of the 19th century and how did they influence social and political action? The three ideologies that we learned about were nationalism, conservative and liberal. Each group was assigned one of the ideologies and an article about the topic. After we were done reading and taking notes on the ideology we made a short skits about our topic and shared it to the class using the TVs. Each group had to present their ideology so the class could take notes on all three.
Imagine combing two countries just because they spoke the same language and had the same customs, this idea was called nationalism. Our group's presentation did a great job of explaining what believing in nationalism meant and what countries believed in it. A German writer named Johann Gottlieb wrote a article in 1808 urging the people of Germany to, "fulfill their historical in bringing about the ultimate progress of humanity". This article led to nationalist in both Germany and Italy wanting to unite the two countries and to get rid of foreign rulers like Napoleon.
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/1493cdd6d43cb79b
The second ideology we learned about was conservatism. To be a conservative you have to believe that traditions are the best way to keep order and that change and revolutions are bad. A great example of a conservative is someone who argues against the French revolution. The person would argue that the revolution and the push for change only brought chaos and death to people. A conservative also supported the Monarchy and the Church. Most of the supporters of conservatism came from Europe. The last ideology that we learned about in class was liberalism. If you believed in liberalism, you believe that everyone has liberty, god given rights, innovation. Two of the main supporters of liberalism were the British philosophers John Locke and Adam Smith. John Locke's idea of liberalism was everyone had god given rights and had to right to promote their own liberty. Adam Smith's idea of liberalism was called the "invisible hand", the idea of the invisible hand was to create laws that guided people. Both of these ideas were promoted in Britain but I doubt they were used.
Imagine combing two countries just because they spoke the same language and had the same customs, this idea was called nationalism. Our group's presentation did a great job of explaining what believing in nationalism meant and what countries believed in it. A German writer named Johann Gottlieb wrote a article in 1808 urging the people of Germany to, "fulfill their historical in bringing about the ultimate progress of humanity". This article led to nationalist in both Germany and Italy wanting to unite the two countries and to get rid of foreign rulers like Napoleon.
The second ideology we learned about was conservatism. To be a conservative you have to believe that traditions are the best way to keep order and that change and revolutions are bad. A great example of a conservative is someone who argues against the French revolution. The person would argue that the revolution and the push for change only brought chaos and death to people. A conservative also supported the Monarchy and the Church. Most of the supporters of conservatism came from Europe. The last ideology that we learned about in class was liberalism. If you believed in liberalism, you believe that everyone has liberty, god given rights, innovation. Two of the main supporters of liberalism were the British philosophers John Locke and Adam Smith. John Locke's idea of liberalism was everyone had god given rights and had to right to promote their own liberty. Adam Smith's idea of liberalism was called the "invisible hand", the idea of the invisible hand was to create laws that guided people. Both of these ideas were promoted in Britain but I doubt they were used.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
What was Napoleons Impact on Europe?
One of Napoleons greatest impact on Europe was the change to the social systems. The social systems were changed so you got a job because you were good at it rather than inheriting it. This type of system was called meritocracy, this system was a great way to improve the social system because you had quality workers, instead of workers that just inherited their job. According to The Lost Voices of Napoleon, "let us be equally frank in acknowledging his great qualities, -- his untiring industry, his devotion to the public service." Napoleon was a big advocate of public service, so he improved the education system of his empire. Napoleon gave every citizen a right to get educated or go to school. The changes that Napoleon made greatly improved the social systems of Europe.
Napoleon also changed the political system. Napoleon first overthrew the director of France which gave the people more rights and better laws. The negative impact of Napoleon and the political changes was he became an emperor. People had many different opinions on how Napoleon ran his empire. For example, Madame de Stael felt like she was conquered and subjugated to his rule and had her rights taken away when Napoleon was in control. But on the other hand people liked Napoleon, Marshal Michel Ney liked Napoleon because he felt like Napoleon had the right to rule and because he was respected and impressive military leader. The changes that Napoleon made had both negative and positives outcomes on Europe.
During the reign of Napoleon the economy of France flourished. France captured many cities throughout Europe and took their valuables. An example of this would be when France took over Italy. Napoleon took all of the renaissance paintings and kept them. The paintings would later be returned to Italy. The French Empire had control over the trades routes and this allowed the economy to succeed. It also allowed them to share and spread economic ideas. The politically changes benefited France in great ways.
During the reign of Napoleon the economy of France flourished. France captured many cities throughout Europe and took their valuables. An example of this would be when France took over Italy. Napoleon took all of the renaissance paintings and kept them. The paintings would later be returned to Italy. The French Empire had control over the trades routes and this allowed the economy to succeed. It also allowed them to share and spread economic ideas. The politically changes benefited France in great ways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Capitalism, Socialism and Communism
The activity we did in class was fun and a little frustrating. First, we all got three pieces of candy to "gamble" with, if we lost all of our candy we had to sit down. This activity was aimed to show us how Capitalism worked, some people lost and other people won. The second activity we did was to show Socialism, everyone was handed an equal amount of candy and nobody had more than anyone else.This way we had a "classless" society. The last society we practiced was Communism. People were allowed to keep their candy, this would also create a classless society. The downfall to this theory is people they could trade or gamble their to get more or less. This would also create an uneven society. I thought this activity was fun because we got to choose what we wanted to do with our candy.
Marx's had many theory's to help the poor, one of which was capitalism. Capitalism's goal was freedom of competition. Everyone could choose how much or how little they wanted to play. The problem with this theory was that some people won and others lost. This would create uneven social classes because some would have no candy and others would have a lot. The second theory was practiced was socialism. Socialism is the idea of someone collecting every ones candy and distributing it equally. The goal of socialism was to have a class less society where everyone was equal and no one had more candy than anyone else. The final theory Marx's made to help the poor was communism. This idea of society needed no government or no one to supervise money distribution. The problem with communism was the fact that people would steal, gamble or even kill to get more candy. If this happened then there would still be the problem of more poor than rich. A better idea to society would be Smiths's idea of the invisible hand. The invisible hand is a theory that had people govern themselves, the market would naturally flourish and people could make their own prices and business. The invisible hand would benefit the poor the most because other people were forced to lower prices so everyone can buy it, including the poor. Without the poor buying and trading most businesses wont succeed.
In my opinion the best theory is the invisible hand. I like this theory because businesses wont succeed without the help of the poor. Businesses had to lower prices and raise the quality so everyone could afford what they were selling. I think invisible hand is the best theory and I wouldn't want a different one.
Marx's had many theory's to help the poor, one of which was capitalism. Capitalism's goal was freedom of competition. Everyone could choose how much or how little they wanted to play. The problem with this theory was that some people won and others lost. This would create uneven social classes because some would have no candy and others would have a lot. The second theory was practiced was socialism. Socialism is the idea of someone collecting every ones candy and distributing it equally. The goal of socialism was to have a class less society where everyone was equal and no one had more candy than anyone else. The final theory Marx's made to help the poor was communism. This idea of society needed no government or no one to supervise money distribution. The problem with communism was the fact that people would steal, gamble or even kill to get more candy. If this happened then there would still be the problem of more poor than rich. A better idea to society would be Smiths's idea of the invisible hand. The invisible hand is a theory that had people govern themselves, the market would naturally flourish and people could make their own prices and business. The invisible hand would benefit the poor the most because other people were forced to lower prices so everyone can buy it, including the poor. Without the poor buying and trading most businesses wont succeed.
In my opinion the best theory is the invisible hand. I like this theory because businesses wont succeed without the help of the poor. Businesses had to lower prices and raise the quality so everyone could afford what they were selling. I think invisible hand is the best theory and I wouldn't want a different one.
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Working conditions in America and Great Britain.
We all know that the working conditions in the mills in both America and Great Britain were not great, but let’s find out what was so bad about them. First off, there was a large amount of factory accidents caused by machinery. Kids were having bones broken, skin ripped off or even fingers cut off. At one point there was 47 kids’ injuries from the machine. This was nearly half of the kids that worked there, which was 106. Another problem was the how brutal the punishment was if you didn’t work well enough. For example, one kid was not able to keep up machine, so he was beaten by the over looker. Secondly, the workers had an absurd amount of hours to work, this caused them to sustain physical injuries. Kids could move their bones in any direction they wanted because the bone was so soft. Finally, kids did not have great nutrition because they were not fed well or at all. They were not allowed to have breakfast and no sitting time for dinner. The only food they were feed were oatcake with cans of milk, as you can guess it was not a lot to eat and it wasn't proper nutrition. I do not think one country was better than other because they both didn't have good working conditions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)