I agree with Mackowski’s comment.
Secondly, the article linked to as a source at the end of the paragraph has been deleted or moved. Clicking the link takes you to a 404 page
COVID-19 definitely gave Biden the White House. The misinformation from Biden that gave him an advantage during the election blaming Trump, for the pandemic was atrocious. Dirty politics and frustrating tactics indeed.
I don’t see anything in here about all the record jobs that Trump created.
Also, nowhere in this chapter is anything about the Clinton military drawdown, which incredibly weakened our military, making us suspect to attack during the 911 and subsequent Jihadist awakenings.
While you are correct, definitions change, look at almost any word now verses its definition in 1963 and it will be different.
The statement that George Wallace was a conservative is false. He was a liberal. Please fact check your statements before publishing. Any internet or encyclopedia search for George Wallace yields the result “Democratic Party” (liberal). Please change this error, thank you.
President Batak Obama was very new to his whole experience in the White House and ruling the nation. He did did try to combat the grey recession but was a failure to it because he did not have many supporters by hui side. The economy itself was already bf falling and it still is today because of all the finance that needs to be grated to help all these wars happening now. The stimulus was placed in a time when it was relevant to the economy as how it would be today. Inflation have taken a toll on humanity today because work has become harder to sustain and people are increasingly looking for jobs and a change in the economy. The assistance for the government had deteriorated to about half of what they used to provide for the people who were on government assistance. The freedom of speech allowed one to express their frustrations and needs for a better future living in America but it’s not making any progress within society or to the person in higher power. Expression one self now is saying so much but saying nothing at all really. As the years go by and a new president steps into office nothing have really changed. Obama reign had lasted its time but what can the people say much to how he contributed to the economy and the people.
The sentence: “And so when communists with ties to Cuba overthrew the government of the Caribbean nation of Grenada in October 1983, Reagan dispatched the U.S. Marines to the island.” is incorrect. US Marines were a tiny portion of the invasion force. It was the 1st and 2nd battalions, 75th Rangers and 82nd Airborne who were the main effort, 90% of the ground troops. Army Soldiers not Marines were who Reagan dispatched to take over the island of Grenada.
Will the Trump and COVID 19 information be edited. It seems like an opinion column.
There must be additional sections added pertaining to the recent political and military conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, China and Taiwan, and Israel and Palestine since the United States is heavily funding and expending its budget for these wars.
These colonists justified slave ownership because of the war?
Website content © American Yawp / Feedback 2023. All rights reserved.
Source: https://www.americanyawp.com/feedback_2018-2021/all-comments/
Comments on the Pages
01. The New World (192 comments)
The source is mislabeled as “brooked beak of heaven” and should be fixed.
This suggestion will likely just seem excessively nit-picky. In regards to the “[n]o America city, in fact, would match Cahokia’s peak population levels…” statement. Although it is somewhat implicitly stated in previous statement”north of modern-day Mexico,” the use of America in the aforementioned sentence only to refer to present day USA and Canada could cause a little confusion. As the writers of this resource I’ve had the pleasure of discovering recently probably already know, the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan had a size on par with that of Constantinople. Such a fact is likely included in many cite-able sources. The one where I had found it would be The Cambridge Economic History of Latin America: Volume 1, The Colonial Era and the Short Nineteenth Century by Coatsworth, Bulmer-Thomas, and Cortes-Conde.
Thank you for the great work you’ve done with this website. I was never very interested in North American history until I had found this resource!
Poverty Point would be an excellent addition to this paragraph, or as part of a paragraph on trade in early America. http://www.povertypoint.us/
Sentence two states “Europeans rediscovered or adopted Greek, Roman and Muslim knowledge.” That makes no sense. You can not rediscover anything. Europeans blatantly STOLE knowledge, & ideas & accredited it as their own. This is very misleading & should be changed considering that you have a very large audience viewing this textbook.
Role of women
The Enslavement of Native Americans.
End of Civilization
Lenape Women
Three Sisters
Matrilineal Ancestry
The first two sentences are poorly constructed and repetitive (e.g., word “unleashed” is used repetitively in the first two sentences). Possible rewrite:
“Europeans’ ‘discovery’ of America unleashed waves of destructive exploitation underwritten by murder, greed, and slavery.”
The first two sentences are poorly constructed and repetitive (e.g., word “unleashed” is used repetitively in the first two sentences). Possible rewrite:
“Europeans’ ‘discovery’ of America unleashed waves of destructive exploitation underwritten by murder, greed, and slavery.”
-Agriculture:
**decline in health
**produced more foods
**pusured other skills
**people were able to do other things rather then just make food
Sistema de Castas, not Casas
This sixteenth century drawing depicts the Spanish and their Tlaxcalan allies fighting against the Purépecha, not the Aztec. The text on this image includes “guzmã,” which stands for “Nuño de Guzmán,” the Spanish conquistador who crushed the Purépecha, who were the people of “michuacá,” which is today’s Michoacán, in western Mexico.
The site at Buttermilk Creek, Texas, dated at roughly 15,500 years ago, predates both Monte Verde and the Florida site mentioned and might be cited as an example of a much earlier date for human activity.
One of the main reasons for the shift from the ecomienda system to the repartimiento was the papal encyclical delivered by Pope Paul III in 1537 and adopted by the Spanish monarchy, the Sublimus Dei. Which stated that the Native Americans “are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property…nor should they be in any way enslaved…” This
This paragraph is rather disingenuous. Not one source in entire paragraph to support these claims. So many qualifiers in every statement without one specific instance of any tribe/people/group, anywhere in America who practiced sexual liberation and care-free divorces. Five thousand plus years of Native American history where mass human sacrifice and territorial fighting and raids were commonplace surely also saw many machismo tribes and polygamy was probably common among warring tribes where women were taken as brides by the victors.
Europeans CAN rediscover that knowledge if it was known previously but was lost. That’s the whole point of the word “rediscover”. Europeans can also learn and adapt from others (Greeks, Romans, Muslims). Human beings adopt superior ideas and knowledge, that is a universal trait for all cultures and societies. It is unfair to attribute bad intent upon one massive group for no other reason then irrational dislike for them.
The book should make a distinction between Columbus and the conquistadors and colonists that came after him. Columbus never killed any natives and had constantly warned the men under his command to not enact violence on them. Bartolomé de Las Casas book was written in 1542 (published in 1552), decades after Columbus died in 1506. de Las Casas admired Columbus, who his father sailed with to the New World on Columbus’s second voyage (1493). It is unfair to place Columbus in a disparaging and inaccurate light and connect him to the cruelty others had wrought on the natives. A helpful source on Christopher Columbus comes from Carol Delaney, Professor of Anthropology who wrote a book on Columbus called: Columbus and the Quest for Jerusalem (2011).
Native Americans were Catholics, who spoke Norse. Therir ancestors were NOT in America until the Mississippian Culture, wich is dated from AD 800.
Hello,
I only noticed the S in people(s), (l.8) that should maybe be removed
I have just begun reading this, and it is very well done, thank you.
There is absolutely no evidence that any Aztecs believed Cortés to be Quetzalcoatl. He bragged in his letters to Charles V of Spain that the native Aztecs were gullible and told such tall tales, but the majority of Mesoamericanist scholars reject his side of the story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quetzalcoatl#Belief_in_Cortés_as_Quetzalcoatl
[bridged more than ten thousand years of geographic separation]
This implies that there was communication and altercations before ten thousand years when in reality Europeans have not made contact with Native Americans in history until this point. So “more than ten thousand years” should in reality be a lot more
Interesting that the title of the chapter is The New World when in the very first sentences the authors note that is a misconception and misnomer. Why not follow the lead of historians such as Daniel Richter and refer to the “ancient” Americas or use a similar concept?
Native Americans lived and developed governing systems within their own beliefs and knowledge of the Americas before the Europeans “discovered” their new world. Before their arrival and greedy mindset brought disease, separation and segregation and slavery to the Americas. Similar tactics were in place however were more humane toward both humans and animals.
Native American stories of how the earth was created by their indigenous belief systems. The broad scope of the stories aren’t much different than religious mindset. Both have similar outcomes with different story line. Archaeologist and anthropologist focus on a scientific study of artifacts, bones, genetic signatures tell their own story to give a similar timeline with scientific evidence.
Through evidence collected after the global ice age between 12 and 20,000 years ago was when human hunter gatherers traveled in small groups as means of survival in the new land of Asia and America.
The was a division of native group that understood the vast benefits of their surroundings. Those in the NW had salmon filled rivers. Plains and prairie, deserts, and forest the cultures were as different as their environment.
Mesoamericans relied on maize/corn for survival and this began the agriculture. North America continues to hold the importance of those that began the development and sustainability of North America.
If they were so good at surviving, then how come they didn’t live into their 100’s?
That’s a keen observation; I guess they author’s intention is to appeal to the perspective of the European settlers, but being a valued historical textbook, they probably should have opted for a more objective title. I agree…I wonder why they chose that approach.
The first Dutch and Swedish settlers who encountered the Lenapes in the seventeenth century recognized Lenape prosperity and quickly sought their friendship. Their lives came to depend on it.
Spain settled into their new empire.
Agreement of antecedent and pronoun would be
“Spain settled into its new empire.” OR
The Spanish settled into their new empire.”
Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca joined the Narváez expedition to Florida a decade later but was shipwrecked and forced to embark on a remarkable multiyear odyssey across the Gulf of Mexico and Texas into Mexico.
A better wording would be “along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico”
Goats were native to Eurasia. How is this possible pre-contact?
Agriculture was able to set the foundation of society. This allowed people to diversify themselves and put their abilities to their best use possible. This not only set the foundation for this time period but, for more to come. Today we see the youth trying to follow their parents’ footsteps and, this began behavior was set years ago, according to the text since people pursued their own activities that intrigued them. Allowing farmers to produce food also let society use their minds differently and independently.
It is unreal how the Puebloans’ knew how to celebrate life and start a religious ceremony that would be carried down from generation to generation. with the resources given to them at the time, they knew how to convert those resources into an environment that is sustainable. It felt like for anyone during this time period they would be living in caves or huts not in complexes. The Puebloan people knew how to come together and they understood that together, they could accomplish goals for having a better community.
Native Americans had a right to their land and in keeping it. The Europeans had no place in trying to colonize it for their own. However, during this time of expansion they were eager to control more land throughout the world. Why was world domination so important during these times when there could have been peace?
25 percent is too low for an estimate of the death rate for the Black Death. Modern estimates generally range from 30 to 50 percent.
The thesis that “maybe” some Aztecs believed Cortés to be the god Quetzalcoatl is a little more complex than presented here. A central issue is that the translation of the Nahuatl term “teotl” as “god” as opposed to “spiritual being” (refer to Camilla Townsend’s work). The notion that the Aztecs regarded Cortés or the Spaniards as “gods” is not in first-hand accounts but later narratives. It is perhaps more apt to note that the Aztec and other Mesoamericans had a religious system that believed the world consisted of cycles of destruction and rebirth. The sudden, violent arrival of Spanish conquerors took place in this context. As for the Spaniards’ “persuasion” of the Aztecs, two main factors there were strategic displays of violence (Cholula Massacre) and an alliance with Tlaxcala, a major rival of the Aztec Triple Alliance. In a sense, the Spanish invasion became a “Mesoamerican Civil War,” in which Spanish forces took sides with the Aztecs’ many rivals.
Camilla Townsend, Burying the White Gods: New Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico, The American Historical Review, Volume 108, Issue 3, June 2003, Pages 659–687, https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/108.3.659
considering that the entire Delaware River Valley as the homeland of the Lenape, it might be better/ more accurate to say that the Susquehannock were located to the west and south rather than just south. Also you might mention the the Minqua (Susquehannocks) were an Iroquoian people.
Thank you for considering my suggestion
The “three sisters” are mentioned, but there is no specific mention of what the “three sisters” are
“…inaugurated centuries of violence…” The chapter has already stated that the native inhabitants had “warred with their neighbors.” In this sense, violence had already been inaugurated. Perhaps “continued” is a better word choice than “inaugurated.”
The releasing of “the greatest biological terror the world had ever seen”–while I agree that this was both “biological” and a “terror,” it seems that putting those two terms in such close proximity to each other drums up a sense of premeditation on the part of Europeans.
Hi, I am a student ((the main reason I am reading your work)) I just thought you should know that placing citations in the middle of your work is pretty distracting. I think it would be best if you used superscript. Other then that your writing style is wonderful, it’s as if you are talking straight to me.
Respectfully,
Ashley Bauer
The “but” in Line 5 of paragraph 70 (“modern association between food and geography are but products of the Columbian…) should be changed to “by”.
It should read “geography are by products of the Columbian Exchange”
What the Aztecs did that most may not know is bring ‘chocolate’ , then many types of medicines from herbs and especially the passion flower which treated seizures, menopause ,burns, and even hysteria.
Their skills in sports were also invented – popcorn.
They were the leading in agriculture and taught draining and other ways to crop and drain swamps.
Pyramids and templates and their hieroglyphic writing.
Sports was big with them.
The phrase “using hand tools rather than European-style plows” is rather poorly worded, as it suggests that the natives in the Eastern Woodlands were using European style plows. This is implied by the “but” at the beginning of the sentence as “but” is used as a contrast to something mentioned beforehand.
Steven,
They are referring to the core crops they depended on; corn, beans and squash per paragraph 11.
I completely agree! The name somewhat threw me off but I understand what they were trying to do, This was how the world became a “New World”. i think..
The convention among Latin American historians these days is that the Aztecs did not see Cortes as Quetzalcoatl. The only evidence we have of the conquest from the time of the conquest is Cortes’ letters to the King and in those he does not make mention of this. This theory was put to rest with Camilla Townsend’s article “Burying the White Gods”. It is a Eurocentric interpretation.
Chapter 1: illustration of Cahokia Mounds
The link to the Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site is not workinghttp://www.cahokiamounds.org/
It is not only on this page that it is not working; trying to locate the site via google yields the same, non-working link.
The link seems to be working now.
So here it is the first reading…I have to say I am intrigued with the reading…..not as bad as I thought it would be…..the title…I would call it the Beginning…..the new world……
Yup, this should be re-captioned as the “crooked beak of heaven” mask.
The Spanish phrase “Sistema de Castas” is used two paragraphs above, but, in this paragraph (64), it says “Sistema de Casas.” There is a letter “T” in one (castas/casas) and not the other. I assume this is a mistake.
Cool
An oral account of a peoples history that is passed down through generations can sometimes be misconstrued through the ages.
They had efficient means to hunt and farm that I wasn’t familiar with
I didn’t know they planted tobacco back then I thought it was a newer crop.
When did the sailors perfect the astrolabe?
17 ships only held 1000 men? that seems like a small number ratio.
They didn’t have modern medicine. Although they flourished in other components such as being able to have a food supply that may not run out. They may have encountered certain virus’ that led them to getting sick. Since this was way back they didn’t have the medicine we now have today to protect them from these virus’.
I think it is because although nourishment and resources were in plentifold. there were also a lot of environmental and health challenges that weren’t fully easy to overcome while they were out there in the early days.
@DylanBarnes I totally agree with your comment. Especially considering Native American culture which based its history on stories that were passed on by generations rather than written documents.
NEW WORLD FOR EUROPEANS BUT NOT FOR AMERICANS WHO HAVE LIVED THERE
DIFFERENT LAGUAGES SPOKEN HERE
DIFFERENT CULTURES
NATIVE AMERICANS MIGRATED KEPT PEACE WITH THY NEIGHBOR, HAD ALLIENCES. HAD TRADE NETWORKS
COLOMBIAN EXCHANGE CHANGED EVERYTHING FOR THEM, LIKE SEPARATION, VIOLENCE, TERROR
The fact that this even says “the global exchange of people” is so incredibly sad and heartbreaking.
What does “yawp” mean? I’ve never heard/seen this word before.
This is so interesting. I never quite knew exactly what Indigenous people lived here in California in prior times and now I know that is was the Salinan tribe. It’s also so cool to hear how the first man and women came to be–based off their beliefs/religion. The bald eagle that formed the first man out of clay and the first women coming from a feather is pretty much their version of our Adam and Eve. I’ve never heard other stories like this from different cultures and I love that I already learned something new!
Wow, insane!
Must’ve been a long trip…
I wonder if these languages are still with us today or if many of them have gone lost over the centuries.
I’m sure they were very resourceful.
I knew men would do the hunting and fishing but what I didn’t know is that it was the Women who built their agriculture. Good for them.
When we gain something we must lose something as well. This how the world run today.
European nations began to emerge several centuries ago as economic powers. They. had a modern perspective. If you cam appeal to the European you can have some sort of power
Yawp \yôp\ n: 1: a raucous noise 2: rough vigorous language”I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.” Walt Whitman, 1855.
I wonder if there were any other types of fish that were to be able to be caught besides just the salmon ?
I am thinking even back then in the olden days that a farmer would produce just as much as the hunter and gatherer if not more because they have the tools necessary at any given moment, then again I may be wrong.
As I am reading this paragraph I am wondering was the word Macaw means in old English. If I had to guess I would say it is a small dug out chair within a home ?
I find it very unique how the ancient natives link their life and death experiences with the sun, moon and stars .
I can imagine the acers of land that these tribes had conquered would crumble over time especially if there was no one there to upkeep the land.
For me this seems like the natives were not just from India, but from all over the country.
great Intro
Sistema de Castas
This is beyond creative: “Eastern Woodland peoples wove plant fibers, embroidered skins with porcupine quills, and modeled the earth to make sites of complex ceremonial meaning.” I notice the Native’s were highly intelligent when it came to communication and survival. You could actually put them any where on earth during the Ice Age and the Natives would figure out away to live. This is a 1000’s of years ago. No electric technology just stick, stones, and living organisms. Pretty amazing!
in the fifteenth century
Its interesting to see how they spoke hundreds of different languages, because this isn’t taught in school at all.
Is there a specific reason they call is the “Three Sisters?”
I wonder if agriculture was worth the cons for the Natives. They cons of having weak bones and being “sick” for other skills. I also wonder how badly their weak bones affected their skills.
[North America’s indigenous peoples shared some broad traits. Spiritual practices, understandings of property, and kinship networks differed markedly from European arrangements. ]
I feel that it was a great thing for them to share traits, it causes less divide and less suffering, it makes me wonder if its better for us to share traits or for us to have diverse beliefs and traits. I know that differences help us grow but at the same time, there are more problems with more differences.
[This incorporation did not mean equality, however.]
I think this statement is important, because a lot of people like to argue about the fact that they were outnumbered but don’t like to talk about the fact that there wasn’t any equality. This quote is just a memorable one for me.
I think that this picture should be incorporated into the text because it helps readers to envision he once thriving aztec village.
I think it should be mentioned that las Casas solution to the mistreatment of indigenous peoples was the importation and enslavement of Africans.
Also – flipping between Spanish and European is confusing for some of my students. Let’s be honest – most Americans have little knowledge of geography and may not realize that Spain is part of Europe.
This was the beginning of history where the natives did not receive equality.
I think Americas was a new world for the Natives also ,but it was no longer knew to the Natives when Columbus came.
It’s interresting hearing about how Europeans drastically changed the world for Native Americans. It makes me wonder what life would look like if instead of us bashing the Native Americans for there cultures and ripping that away from them, what would of happened if we welcomed their culture with ours? How would the world look today?
When reading about Native American culture I always find it interesting how respectful of the land they are. Most people are greedy and will run land dry as long as they get good use out of it. By the way the passage describes, the Native community only “provided nutritional needs necessary to sustain cities and civilizations” without making the land unusable. I respect that thought process and effort.
A mind blowing thought is thinking about how all of this was made with their hands or tools that they made by hand. How was this possible?
The Lenapes organized their communities around their crop harvesting seasons, this was crucial in there successfulness as a community. Without this it seems as if they wouldn’t have been as successful with their upbringing.
It is clear in this passage that to Europeans new culture equals money and power. This is why the renaissance was sparked and created that demand for new commodities.
What would of happened if Columbus hadn’t convinced Queen Isabella and Kind Ferdinand to give him 3 small ships? Would we of discovered Bahamas as quickly as we did? How long would that of taken?
This was selfish of the Europeans. Why did we see that we were causing harm to the people that lived on the land and not do anything to stop the destruction? Obviously we were selfish and didn’t care. Why is peace always the last resort? The Native Americans should of had to accommodate for the colonials.
should NOT** of had to accommodate for the colonials.
I wonder what the look on the soldiers faces where like when they had seen the cities for the first time? Everything being described in this passage sounds like a dream, I can only imagine how incredible it was.
95% of the Native American population perished because of diseases brought on by Europeans and we are just now talking about it. This is disgusting and I am embarrassed by my ancestors.
I wonder how did the native Americans develop many cultures and languages.
I think the Aztec institution of human sacrifice should be mentioned here. Apart from being one of the most distinctive and memorable aspects of Aztec civilization, it surely helps explain the unrest in the Aztec empire.
The text is correct. The “but” here is a slightly uncommon usage that means “merely”. Our association of potatoes with Ireland is [but/only/merely] a modern product of the Columbian Exchange; it is not as ancient as one might think.
We are identified as Americans in the present so if Europeans were called Americans, then does that make us Europeans? How did we “the present-day Americans form or choose the language that we speak today known as “English”? I’m wondering, was the “New World” big enough so that people would not end up dating within their kinship, and did they believe in cousins, in-laws, leading down to generations of kinship as we do in the present world
American history is quite different from Biblical history. in the history of American history, these people are named as “Salinan” and are claiming to be of present-day in California claims the first man was made of clay and the first woman out of a feather, which I would find that difficult to believe. However, I think it is a separation of life from the world and the bible. Now, that is confusing as well because I’m thinking, how can you separate the world from the beginning of time, which the Bible “I feel” has the right to. Ideally, I would think people migrated from different parts of the world, settle in areas, and claimed it making a new world outside of anything that could already exist. i think when this information speaks of passing down origins, written and oral that they share how their lives were when came to creation and migration history, that is something that has been passed down from generation to generation for many many many years. I think back on the stories and tales from my grandparents, aunts, uncles, parents, and elderly people
In short, I think it is amazing how studying the remains of bones and genetics can tell a story. I have a better understanding of how artifacts can tell a story because it is simply a study of what was formed or made by an individual in their present time and has become a part of history when it appears after years and years.
The description of the native civilization prior to the arrival of Europeans is very romanticized. It reads as if everything was blissfully amazing and that the arrival of European migrants has brought apocalyptic destruction. Are there supporting and tangible facts or artifacts that speak clearly about that period? Are there facts that do not involve ‘logical deductions’ and can speak for themselves? Can they be integrated into the text with references?
An interesting read – but fairly “woke” in its approach.
No context to the history of slavery – just something Europeans apparently invented. Certainly not at all like that practiced by natives. No mention of Greece, Rome, Egypt, Africa, India, China and the Muslim world where slavery was practiced for tens of thousands of years…don’t take this as a comment to make slavery ok – just one that intends to point out it is mankinds heritage – not white European men’s yoke to wear alone – that is never going to heal if not spoken of truthfully and in context of our growing understanding of history (and no – not the “1619 nonsense”)
Treated the death of natives neutrally as per disease – no one intended it but it certainly happened – that is a step above how it is often portrayed.
People seem upset by the phrase “new world” in these comments…men (and women of course) have been on the planet 3-4 million years = modern man half a million. One group of modern men get to the American continents 10,000 to 20,000 years before another group and this makes them “indigenous” or “native”? Seems to me that both groups spent the better part of 500,000 years not here except one spent only 480,000 years not here. In truth – I believe the authors used the phrase New World just right – in circa 20,000 bc it was a new world for the first Americans as they put it, then in 1492 ad it was a new world for the second group. I also respected the author’s for including creation stories and beliefs of those calling themselves indigenous.
History is always told by the slant of the authors – intentional or no. This one seemed better than most.
Hi hi guys hello how are you guys are you doing this weekend lol I have to go get back in my room and I have a few things to do but I’m on the road so I’ll see you soon lol lol I’m so bored I don’t want you guys lol I just want you guys lol I have to go to watch a movie lol lol I’m watching Netflix and watching movies watching Netflix and Hulu lol .
who cares. stop posting your life on social media.
Wow that is incredible! six hundred rooms!
I thought chinampas were specifically for farming and providing a place to grow crops.
“Much of the city was built on large artificial islands celled chinampas”
Were the structures of the city and buildings built on them as well?
*called
There should be an index or glossary for key terms.
ur an idiot
This paragraph is about how the Europeans considered the Americas as a new world, but it was everything but that. There had been people living in the Americas for 10,000 years. It also says that the Europeans caused the greatest biological terror ever.
There shouldn’t be a period in “the New World.” as it is not dialogue but a quote, and the “But” after it should not be capitalized as it is not the beginning of a sentence. Even if it were, you dont start a sentence with a preposition.
I would say the title gives a great distinctive meaning. The New World as for a new beginning as where it stated that humans have lived tens and thousands of years and has become very diverse. Its pretty interesting to know that every single human being has a trait that makes them unique whether its the different culture, language and spiritual values.
The variety of languages culturally speaking depending on where most cultures migrate to help them learn the languages they might actually need to learn to help better understand one another.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 6 4 Archaeologists and anthropologists, meanwhile, focus on migration histories. ]
Studying artifacts was probably the most interesting job to have. There have been many items that were preserved for many years to show for in today’s time.
Illustrations make it easier to actually see how prehistorically times were. It looks like a village being created and not having much and materials being used to build housing. 1000 ce probably was a time that having important land to create housing and farming was important. Being near the Mississippi River was easy for them.
I would have to agree. I guess in this situation with not very many materials they had to use what was provided for them. I just couldn’t imagine having anything touch my body with a porcupine quill. Ouch.
[The peoples of this region depended on salmon for survival and valued it accordingly.]
Very interesting fact. Salmon was actually a source of survival for the Pacific Northwest region. To know they also decorated the fish and treated it as a spiritual respect is odd, but neat.
It’s so crazy that they are depicted like this hard working, resilient and brown.
I find it very interesting to me that the Native Americans had built and settled communities . That they had a “vast trade networks”. I didnt realize that. I always thought that was kind of after the Europeans arrival.
Awesome description from the Salinan people belief of how the bald eagle form the first man of clay and a woman of a feather. I find it very fascinating.
It seems odd to me that Native Americans never tried to discover different continents. I feel like some had to have tried but I have never heard anything about that. Except that they have only ever been in North and South America.
this is the only story I remember learning in Native American studies at my elementary school. I keep forgetting that there were so many different tribes with different beliefs as well
I cannot believe how much I have forgotten about the ice age. This is so fascinating that humans were able to survive these harsh conditions such a long time ago. I am curious what they did once it started to get warmer and the ice started melting. Or did it happen so gradually it was not a shock to anyone and no need to adapt to a different climate too quickly?
Why were they called the three sisters?
This is super fascinating! I love the fact that woman being considered a minority did not exist everywhere in the same time periods. So it was not something everyone was born knowing, it was taught that men were superior in most parts of the world.
This is mind boggling to me. Why couldn’t Europeans come up with something like this? It is still horrible to keep people captive but at least they saw everyone as humans and not as property.
that sounds insane. In one canoe? It is so fascinating how smart natives were with making sure they thought about the future when it came to harvests to they knew how to make sure they did not over harvest or overkill species to ensure that they survived and could rely on them the next season. Unlike theEuropeans who came in and wiped out the wild buffalo population
I want to know who was the first to go to Asia? How did they know that there was another continent over there with different goods?
I did not know this
How many people were originally on the boats and how many of them died?
There is no way that this is true. That sounds absolutely sickening
I would like to know who thought that it was God’s will to enslave people? What happened to loving your neighbors?
I thought exactly the same thing I in regard to how many various languages were spoken.
I then realized how many different tribes there were and it seemed to make more sense to me.
[bridged more than ten thousand years of geographic separation, inaugurated centuries of violence, unleashed the greatest biological terror the world had ever seen] This particular section I feel was so well put together that it almost gave me chills due to the fact that it genuinely did unleash the greatest biological terror on these poor unsuspecting people. I have no negative points on its contents with this section.
Revolutionary- A drastic change. In this context a change that is rather sad an unfortunate because it did permanent damage on the natives in every horrible way.
Self-Sufficient economies- This is when an economy such as the natives had was fine standing alone without foreign interference. another aspect of this is being able to last years and years off of everything from their selves and the land they had.
The New World- This is how the native’s land was seen as by the settlers who came across the Atlantic. The problem is the natives did not see it this way. This was especially true as time went on.
Geographic Separation-This goes hand and hand with self-sufficient economies because they were isolated from the rest of the world. Also, because it implies the rest of the world is not needed for them to thrive even with the separation.
Biological Terror- This particular one is especially sad because the natives had no idea, they brought such ravenous diseases that ended up wiping out 90-95% of all the natives there. I think biological terror was very fitting because I feel the average person would never want to even imagine the misery and loss these poor natives endured. The spread of disease really was the nail in the coffin for everything that preceded it.
Native Americans kept to themselves, but with the arrival of the Europeans and the resulting exchange. The world was forever changed.
It seems that Native Americans were doing well until the Europeans arrived bringing with them people animals, and diseases.
Many years ago a plethora of people migrated to different parts of America with the help of archeology and artifacts, dental they traced this back to thousands and thousands of years ago.
Native groups that hunted and spoke many different languages caused growth in the continent.
the native Americans thrived in the agriculture aspect growing especially corn, and squash beans they used handheld tools to plant the seed, by cutting the trees and burning the underbrush then planting seeds.
Native Americans to communicate used different graphic aspects to communicate like buffalo skin to place or write something on it different tribes used different objects.
The Missisipans populated the Chaco Canyon, and up to thirty thousand America did not reach this until after the American revolution.
At this time the Lenapes thrived and populated with a matrilineal-based social element
Salmon became revered and a source of nourishment for other native American tribes such as Tlingitis Haidas, in the Pacific Northwest.
The arrival of Europeans changed everything for native Americans.
Sugar became a desired commodity but it took a lot of work and labor so the Portuguese introduced slavery.
In 1325 the Aztecs prevailed great population huge temples building large artificial islands and pyramid temples.
Hernan Cortez conquered the aztecs and montezuma was killed.
[There, three crops in particular—corn, beans, and squash, known as the Three Sisters]
I wonder if this offended the Native Americans. Hearing someone refer to land that they had already made home as a “New World” almost as if taking claim to something they had no business claiming.
I find i so perfect that they grew the three things that covred all the bases as far as what our bodies needed. I think its incredible that the land there just so happened to be an excellent location to do so.
500 perecent! How does that happen?
I didn’t realize sugar’s origin. Pretty neat.
how sad to turn on a group of people he just spoke so highly about.
I am beside myself. Native Americans were here and doing fine and then they were overtaken and amounted as nothing but slaves. It is quite sad how we turn on people.
Just reading the intro shows how much the Americans know that world and they basically know exactly how their World is . The Europeans had a completely different World they came from so thats why they came up with the new world name. This text is definitely already intriguing … now lets see how the World starts to change .
They had to start somewhere , just like if you were to go to a new place now, it will be a “new world” but then once you learn what they’ve learned and do what they do then it becomes something just like you adapt to their world.
This showed how society had to learn how to adapt to certain things. Even though agriculture wasn’t good for peoples health, it still helped so much and brought benefits for more of the people and thats what mattered during this time. It was about the labor and opportunities it gave them.
Im not entirely sure this is right, there is evidence of Norse influence on the Native Americans, but there is no evidence that the Norse is their ancestry. There is also evidence of Norse trade with the Natives, which only further proves that their ancestry is not Norse, and they were there before the vikings ever visited the Americas.
Furthermore, if you do more research there is evidence that the Native Americans came from an ancient group called the ancient paleo-Siberians. They may have migrated from ancient east asia/siberia.
The use of the word “milder” as it relates to any form of slavery, abuse or abusive punishment comes off as highly inappropriate. Especially when being written from the perspectives of historians and not people who actually experienced the traumatic and abusive experiences. Abuse is not comparative. It is all unacceptable.
“On the Plains” should be “In the Plains.”
Or here’s an even better idea: how about we enslave nobody?
fuck me
paragraph 46 reads basically Indians where not going down without a fight the,n and even now shows that they have high morals, and that there past on ancestors are showing them the way they have tie knots to show that they are one
It would be worth mentioning in the list of countries here the impact that the Columbian Exchange– including the introduction of what have become dietary staples (ex. beans)– had on African countries and communities, since they also benefited from the population boom.
Hard to understand what you mean by “the ancestors paused-for perhaps fifteen thousand years” First, what does pause mean? Do you mean they settled for a while until weather or vegetation caused them to move?
Second, the earth is not that old. No matter what scientists say…Bible scholars say it’s only about six thousand years old.
This is what is so aggrevating about history. People tend to believe everything that someone wrote or claims to be true.
i completely agree. that is very stereotypical.
This is amazing information for me. I’ve been on an anime and manga called Vinland Saga, and typically I’m not the type of person to get every information about my animes like otakus. However it’s so interesting how the creator of the series took his own perspective yet kept some details about the historical events of the European expansion back in the years of 1000. Reading the first word of this starting paragraph, I was confused for I had heard the word before, and continue reading I see the sentence “Leif Erikson reached Newfoundland in present-day Canada”. Right then it hit me, very similar terms to character’s and events in Vinland Saga, which got me thinking… I looked it up and the internet provided me every dot I needed to connect. It’s an amazing bg story coming from the creator and I’m just amazed in general. Personally, I don’t like History due to the fact that I’m horrible with dates, let alone remember which group was which during the times, but reading along has e very invested and intrigued. Very informative, and reading other comments along with the paragraphs also keeps me entertained.
Yes, as with any new entity, as humans we have to it seems , keep learning this over and over again. Coved -19 comes to mind when I was reading this. Why are we like this? Perhaps it is something we brought on ourselves. Our history suggest a life time, of reckless abandonment. Towards friends and foe, it really did not seem to matter. There is no one nation and or country this self serving lust has not touched. We as men, and masters of our destiny seems to be the driving force, of self destruction. We are doing it to our selves, no one but us. All the research, all the mistakes, all the evidence that suggest, at some point and time if we don’t learn … we will pay with our existence.
I would just like to see some additional sub-headings for ease of reading and organizing information for students and myself to take notes in the textbook. The next several paragraphs are about agriculture, so label a heading “Agriculture”, “Aztecs”, “Incas” etc.
Label this as the “Lenape” as a subheading for example.
While I love the care that has gone into respecting Native origin histories in this transition, I do think that using the word “claims” here with regard to the scholarly narrative of migration sends the wrong message that Native origin stories and archaeological research are inevitably and actively in opposition. Just as the authors made the correct decision in separating out these two sections as distinct discussions, the content should avoid accidental comparisons of the two, just as one would treat the Judeo-Christian origin histories of Adam and Eve separately from a discussion of evolution without disparaging either. Partially, my suggestion is a result of the word “claims” being used with a connotation of potential uncertainty in day to day speech, which might throw students off. I suggest replacing the word “claims” with “concludes”– in the sense that the archaeological investigations have conclusions
[Native]
NatIive Americans did live many years here in America before the Europeans came to America. Yes they did migrated from place to place. I do not know whether they wared against each other or not. And they were mistreated by the Europeans.
The Native people have similar what they believed happened and told their stories of what had happened and what they saw. On the other hand, archaeologists and anthropologists focus on what they find. It’s hard to see both ways because of the amount of material that would have to be discovered and from the right period of time to put a story together.
It’s interesting to see how different cultures survived on what they had. Knowing they can survive following a food source, but what happens with diseases and different tribes. These tribes all shared similar traits and knew what to do to survive.
Native Americans still resisted through the hardest of times. They fought back and continued to fight against the colonist and against diseases. They knew and loved the land and knowing they would lose what they had, they still decided to fight for what they had.
All the Natives to the land they were living on all had to adapt to where they were. Building homes across mountains would have had to been tough. They learned and adapted to how they could survive. The diseases that came with the colonist took away what people could have learned from the Natives and the ways to survive.
The colonist coming to the new land knew they had found something that they wanted to “take”. They didn’t have to take over everything. They seemed to be greedy and wanted more and more. They destroyed the homes of millions of people.
The opening paragraphs of this section do a woeful job of establishing historical context and precedents for European expansion in the early modern era. Notably lacking is any meaningful discussion of the impact of Islamic civilization on medieval Europe and the Mediterranean. This is an inexcusable oversight that requires only a paragraph or two to rectify. As currently written, the implication of this section is that important technological and cultural advances developed organically in western Europe without any external influences. Please improve this narrative.
15. Reconstruction (127 comments)
Why was the south in ruins ?
Im thinking what could have happen for a person to think omg its so unbelievable what happen and I have no idea what happen in their own place that they live
“barely good roads”
WHAT HAPPENED???
missing ending parenthesis at the end of paragraph
You see, the thing about wars….
[These so-called Lincoln governments sprang up in pockets where Union support existed like Louisiana, Tennessee, and Arkansas. Unsurprisingly, these were also the places that were exempted from the liberating effects of the Emancipation Proclamation.]
Emancipation Proclamation was more of a blow to the rebelling states, not to actually abolish slavery. The less rebellious states were rewarded by getting to keep their slaves.
https://www.loc.gov/resource/mfd.23011/?sp=6
It looks like Douglass delivered this speech in 1878, not 1877. The title of the selection says 1877 and so does the sourcing note at the end.
is that a typo for level
[black behavior]
Should read “the behavior of Blacks…” It’s is an offense to refer to African-Americans as “black” and not “Black.”
the civil war?
Freed people sought out to find family members that had been sold when they were enslaved. So they can gain control over their own family.
In this paragraph, when you read it on the website and not on this section, it says “When lack Americans” when it should say black Americans.
Black Codes should be capitalized in last sentence.
Why frame this whole chapter from the perspective of white Southerners? Wouldn’t it be better to start from the perspective of a freed slave?
While it says, “black Americans” here, it still shows up on the web version I am reading as “lack Americans.”
In the sentence that begins when black Americans, in the reading, it says when lack Americans…
This paragraph is quite dated, still reflected the basic interpretation advanced by C. Vann Woodward in his 1951 Reunion and Reaction. A series of essays by historians in the 1970s and 1980s, including Michael Les Benedict and Allan Peskin, demolished Woodward’s basic argument about the quid pro quo of the supposed Compromise of 1877 (and Woodward himself later acknowledged that he was wrong).
There are several problems with some of the basic assumptions of this paragraph, particularly the sentence:
“Democrats conceded the presidency to Hayes on the condition that all remaining troops would be removed from the South and the South would receive special economic favors.”
1) Not all of the troops were actually removed after 1877, which Greg Downs as recently demonstrated.
2) None of the supposed economic favors for Democrats ever actually materialized.
Moreover, the claim that the compromise allowed Southern Democrats to act without fear of reprisal ignores the reality that Democrats had already been doing so for some time, and also implies Northern Republicans gave up on Reconstruction after 1877, which is also untrue.
While it is true there were likely some sort of conversations between Democrats and Republicans about Democrats conceding the election to Hayes, the specifics of this supposed compromise have been disproven now for nearly 40 years. Moreover the key actors in ending the filibuster that allowed the votes to be counted and granted Hayes the presidency were not Southern Democrats, but were actually Northern Democrats in Congress, which turns the entire premise of the compromise upside down.
The published version capitalizes “black” in the “Republican officials opened… on a segregated basis.” which is grammatically incorrect given “black” is not a first or last name.
As mentioned before it says, “black Americans” here, while it still shows up on the web version as “lack Americans.
Did ONLY South Carolina and Mississippi pass Black Codes?
Is it that only they use a specific phrase? Because certainly other states had them
I also wonder this, I believe every story has 2 sides and I have not yet read the rest but only including the story told by white southerners seems like it would be quite a bias story.
No, of course not. They were just used as examples of the horror that took place among most of the prior confederate states.
This shows up as ‘lack’ Americans in the text.
I believe to give this paragraph justice and its respect it deserves. The sentence should read as “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” If it is not included I feel that we are only cherry picking the Declaration of Independence.
What were the first steps in rebuilding the states and the first steps in bringing the states back to the union?
I thought it was crazy how long Black Americans didn’t have rights and weren’t seen as citizens in the South for almost another century.
How was president Abraham Lincoln able to piece back together the United States?
What else did the Emancipation Proclamation ensure?
Did the 13th amendment get rid of slavery as a whole?
“lack Americans”
Is no one going to address this? What’s the point of it being a collaborative text then?
I did not realize the Civil War did so much property damage the affected daily transportation.
Because of the Civil War.
What does Yawp mean?
I was thinking more along the lines of like county commissioners they were over the levee like for water, to help prevent the over flow.
Change anti-racist politics to pro-black politics. The modern idea of anti-racism includes remedying discrimination against all races, genders, and sexual identities. The reconstruction era black organizers were not fighting for rights and benefit of Native Americans, Chinese, Jews or oppressed white races like the Irish. Using the concept of Anti-racism is not a historical term and is confusing for a reader of the 21st century where the anti-racism was developed as a system to identify and combat prejudice among many different groups.
I really focused on the line where the South granted African Americans “legal freedom and little more”. Our freedom should come with being seen as equal and unalienable rights, yet back then it seems like having freedom in america, and being seen and treated as a human being, were seen as two completely different things.
The 13th amendment does not “abolish slavery ‘except as punishment for a crime.'” This is an inaccurate statement. The language of the amendment reads: “Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” According to the commonly used “last antecedent rule” the disjunctive conjunction “nor” separates “slavery” and “involuntary servitude” meaning that the latter term “involuntary servitude” is subject to the following qualification and not the former term “slavery.” This interpretation is consistent across existing precedential case law. Slavery, as defined by legally sanctioned personal ownership of a human being, was definitively abolished by the 13th amendment. The use of temporary prison labor without the condition of ownership as property is allowed by the criminal exception clause of the 13th amendment. The South’s use of convict labor to enforce social and legal racial codes and replicate hierarchies that existed under the slave system is a reality provided for by the inclusion of involuntary servitude in the 13t amendment, but it is an inaccurate oversimplification to say that slavery was never fully abolished in the United States.
It seems like the vast majority (paragraph 75 excepted) of Section VI, beginning with Paragraph 70/71, would flow better if used in Chapter 14 with the other Civil War information.
Is interesting to me the way certain things are worded such as “black Americans and their radical allies” this truly frames the picture for the period of reconstruction and the Jim Crow era.
Lincoln’s assassination seems impending just as the conflict that will take place at the end of the Civil War. In paragraph 7th the strategy of issuing a proclamation allowing southerners to take an Oath of allegiance to the Union when they knew how small a percentage the sympathizers were, leaves an unstable foundation to reconstruct without major compromising.
Interesting visual representation of the reconstruction period before it happened. Hierarchies are clearly represented here, while the main conflict is around slavery and the integration of the confederate states, African Americans are almost non-existent in the picture.
These policies of land reinstitution were in effect in all confederate states?
Economic interests are what drove slavery to what it was during the pre-Civil War era. So I see a disconnect between the economic interests of white Americans at the time, social and cultural fabric, and racial justice.
How emancipated Black Americans develop such a strong Christian dogma? I am curious since I am not sure how religion was taught before the reconstruction era and to my understanding, Christianity especially at the time derives from a white European tradition and aesthetic.
Reding this is striking since it explains why some Southerners still fly confederate flags and minimize the horrors of slavery.
the south was in ruins after the civil war
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 7 2 Reconstruction—the effort to restore southern states to the Union and to redefine African Americans’ place in American society—began before the Civil War ended.]
southern states were the only ones in shambles after civil war and they were trying to fix that
Naming Minor v. Happersett as the 1875 court case that limited the scope of what citizenship meant, especially for women voters in this case, would add more specific detail to this paragraph. Related to that, naming Cruikshank and the Slaughterhouse Cases as Supreme Court cases that limited 14th Amendment protections for black people would also better detail the role that the conservative supreme court played in limiting Constitutional democracy during this time period.
Basically a modernized slavery?
Slavery becomes modernized so it can be legalized
The following sentence is incorrect: “Susan B. Anthony was one of them and was arrested but then acquitted in trial.”
This caption is slightly misleading because it references the Fifteenth Amendment, but this amendment would not be ratified until 1870. This print, however, was published in 1867.
I think DaBaby hit pop rap artist is the best, and 1877 republicans were L ratio bummies am i right?
Oh I thought it was the name of that pokemon eevee
Somewhere in here, or maybe section VI, shouldn’t there be a nod to the Carpetbaggers (and Scalawags) and how they were received in southern society during Reconstruction? The concept of the Carpetbagger is a pretty bedrock topic for the postbellum South, and it carries meaning in modern society when referring to someone moving somewhere new to advance themselves. There are always choices to be made about what specific topics to leave in or take out of a text, but this seems like too glaring of an omission to not flag along the way here.
It’s like a weird noise.
With a lack of courtesy , freedmen did not gain land from the government, even after the Amendment was passed. Why was this?
This is where we are trying to build back up the freedmen with their families. The search for families wasn’t always a success. There were so many families separated.
That it should .
The confederate flag was just another way to act on criminal thought that was heavily carried on by the KKK.
The south was already in ruins. Especially when compared to the north
[The future of the South was uncertain.]
racial attitudes aren’t exactly something one could gauge and for a length of time.
[a new fight commenced to determine the legal, political, and social implications of American citizenship.]
fight was far from over…although physical detainment was mostly behind in history, social, political, and even emotional detainment hit the ground running during this time.
shady intentions
[the South was transformed from an all-white, pro-slavery, Democratic stronghold to a collection of Republican-led states with African Americans in positions of power for the first time in American history.]
revolutionary concept that catalyzed continual efforts for more permanence in change
[“we were promised Homesteads by the government. . . . You ask us to forgive the land owners of our island. . . .The man who tied me to a tree and gave me 39 lashes and who stripped and flogged my mother and my sister . . . that man I cannot well forgive. Does it look as if he has forgiven me, seeing how he tries to keep me in a condition of helplessness?”]
powerful quote of former slave speaking out on the brutalities of being a “freedman”
such a natural, god-given right…heartbreaking that this is one they had to fight for (reunification of family and children)
must catch up educationally (literacy rates)
so, Lincoln only promise freedom to those enslaved in the states that did not like him- but if you like him, you can keep the slaves? wow
above comment
[In nearly every conflict, white conservatives initiated violence in reaction to Republican rallies or conventions or elections in which black men were to vote. The death tolls of these conflicts remain incalculable, and victims were overwhelmingly black.]
death toll incalculable- noone took the time because they were black to give their death a number.
The sentence, “In churches, women continued to fight for equal treatment and access to the pulpit as preachers, even though they were able to vote in church meetings.” reads as though the women shouldn’t be preachers and should be grateful that they could even vote.
I suggest changing the sentence to something like, “In churches, women had won the right to vote, but they continued to fight for equal treatment and access to the pulpit as preachers.”
It reads less condescending, while still giving the same information.
This section is confusing; if the Emancipation Proclamation was issued January 1, 1863, effectively freeing enslaved peoples in the Confederacy, and Lincoln’s Amnesty Proclamation was issued nearly a year later in December of 1863, how was it possible that there was slavery under “Lincoln governments” in the former Confederacy? The Amnesty Proclamation stated that it did not restore enslaved peoples to their former masters.
“The Civil War showed white women, …, life without their husbands’ protection.”
Typo: “life” –> “live”
Add quotation marks after laws.
I just can’t believe the union destroyed literally everything they went through on their journey down south
I can understand how many could be mad at Lincoln’s new plan
This must have been incredibly hard for African Americans just gaining freedom and having the man who will help you go further dies, yikes.
African Americans were probably very scared having a southerner come in to power right after Lincoln.
This was a big step in the right direction in the Northern America freeing around 4 million people from such a long time in salvery.
This is a sad reality for the freedpeople. They just want to be reunited with their relatives, but have to put up posters to help find them.
This shows how women had to fight from themselves just to gain gender equality
Initiating violence is not always necessary, but it seemed like it was in the 1870’s just for the white conservatives to get their own way
It’s good to see that going through a war brought this, but it’s sad a war had to happen
stfu
from who?
its creepy looking
Oh my gosh such grammar nazis
lmaoo!
you forgot “did”
The fight for freedom seemed never ending for African Americans. It was always one step forward for freedom then three steps back.
I figured a lot of things were in ruins as a result of the civil war, but not the railroads, it makes sense now because that must be one major source of transportation.
I had no clue the Radical Republicans had something to do with the Declaration of independence, also did not know it was a violent era.
I totally agree
How did President Abraham Lincoln plan for the reunification of the United States?
Why did the proclamation of freedom not free all? Although it was eventually used as punishments, i still believe they are not fully free.
Was there some sort of punishment for John Wilkes Booth?
Without the black code, Black people couldn’t get married or own a property? wow. The racism was very apparent.
The quotation mark is missing at the end of laws
Only five states in the North were allowed to vote on equal terms? that is another level of racism to me.
What is antebellum period?
It seem like most African Americans were jack of all trade.
Ranging from local level? was that a typo.
I have heard having a land back then was equivalent to being wealthy. Also there are two brackets after 167.
That is certainly what it looks like.
The redress seems like one just thing that has happened for African Americans
It is crazy the freed famillies had to go through all that to find their family members when they shouldn’t have been sold in the first place.
Doing that could lead to fake marriages / unions.
Education really is key and they knew that even as slaves.
Proliferation of independent black churches and associations.
Black women suffered rape from white men too? It seems like the women did not give up, which is great. Their voices needed to be heard.
It seems like black churches were safe places to be heard which is a great thing, it was a constant progress.
Black churches seems to be a safe place for black Americans. Things kept on progressing
life and death but not for women?
Susan B Anthony was literally a hero. She made the journey to advocate universal suffrage.
Meaning of thwarted?
Why did the republicans chose Rutherford B Hayes as their nominee?
Why those three states only?
I had no idea Ulysses Grant was ever President.
Its a good idea the New Departure Democrats stayed away from slavery Democrats and Copperheads.
The Homestead Act was resourceful.
It is interesting to see how this plays out
Pretty much the fourteenth amendment worked hand in hand with the civil rights act to ensure its constitutionally.
The democratic probably would not have won without the black southern voters
They fought for their basic right and won eventually.
20. The Progressive Era (108 comments)
There is an extra A at the beginning of this paragraph
Fixed. Thanks!
The last sentence seems to have a flaw, all that is needed is to add the word “do”.
“…should ask themselves what they could __ to enact the kingdom…”
The last sentence of this paragraph refers to “Carnegie’s U.S. Steel,” implying that Andrew Carnegie was running U.S. Steel when Taft was President. I don’t believe that was the case.
It is the National American Woman Suffrage Association not the National American Suffrage Association.
You have it wrong here again: It is the National American Woman Suffrage Association
It should be U.S. Steel not Carnegie’s U.S. Steel.
Rose Schneiderman. Not Ruth.
It seems that you misspel led disenfranchisement unless you were intentionally saying disfranchisement.
[National American Suffrage Association]
It’s the National American Woman Suffrage Association.
The 4th sentence has no predicate verb; should perhaps be “However, the writings of Rauschenbusch and other social gospel proponents [were/had] a profound influence on twentieth-century American life.”
What does having a wealthy background have anything to do with pushing for antitrust legislation and regulations. Even more unrelated is the fact that he couldn’t rely on courts to break up trusts. This sentence doesn’t tie back to itself, instead stating unconnected facts.
I would have appreciated an explanation of what it means to “cast your bucket down”. It means to make the most of whatever situation you are put in. Basically, he didn’t think that leaving the south and going to the north was any more sensible in trying to achieve economic independence than simply staying in the south.
The gilded Age was a time in the United States where the economy and industrialization boomed
As the economy grew so did tensions between politics and the people
The progressive Era:
Women fought for their right to vote
Black Americans fought for Equality
Labors demanded a higher wage and work spaces
What Are Mobilizing For Reforms?
First Paragraph: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in manhattan Caught fire because manager held the keys to prevent unauthorized breaks. building caught on FIRE Side ladder of the building broke down. Women went to the roof and Jumped off for freedom or died on in the building.
The photograph demonstrates policeman placing the corpses in the coffin. This incident called for a lot of attention
A year after the Triangle Shirtwaist. factory in Manhattan caught on fire workers had gone on strike demanding:
Higher wages, and better Safety Conditions
One of the girls who worked in the factory said that every week one of the girls would be dead
Business became more sacred than the lives of humans
Owners of the Triangle factory were charged with manslaughter and two hours later where freed
Inequality grew and living conditions worsened it became difficult to make a change
The Triangle shirtwaist fire moved many Americans to Reform
Reform: Make a change
Everyone: journalist , religious leaders, politicians ETC
Reformers used book and magazines to spread the corruption of business men
coined term for corrupt businessman are Muckrakers Theodore Roosevelt
Jacobs Riis was a journalist who documented the Urban Poverty with videos and Photographs
Jacob Riis published How the other half Lives
Sinclair was another journalist who wrote the Jungle
The jungle was supposed to be a way to support socialist Movement by exposing the brutal labor in the meatpacking industry
Slaughterhouses where growing so quick for consumers the work place became unsanitary & Unsafe work conditions
Edward Bellamy’s 1888 Looking Backward was a national sensation
This novel was about a man who falls asleep in 18887 and wakes up in 2000
The man is confused because the world has altered: Disease and poverty grew, Industries grew as well to build a Utopia of social harmony and economic prosperity
Bellamy’s vision of a reformed society persuaded readers (Youth Readers) to reform on the STREETS
Charles Sheldon a congregational minister in Topeka Kansas Published IN HIS STEPS: WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?
His book was a best seller but moved multiple people because it addressed that if we worked as how Jesus would everything from economic, social , and Political issues would be reduced ti a MINIMAL
This turned into a movement called the SOCIAL GOSPEL
Women Clubs flourished in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries
Women suffrage groups where segregated at the time as well
Addams and Kelly worked together to push towards a better way of living for the communities
Such as 8 hour shifts for women and children, They also pushed legislator to pass other bills concerning the people
The growth of industrialization brought environmental problems Reformers began to create environmental protections
Rose, not Ruth Schneiderman
National American American Suffrage Association???
National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA)
Women demanded the vote might better be worded Women demanded to vote.
This fir in the Triangle Shirtwaist factory led to much needed reform. One of the biggest reasons being because Francis Perkins, the first women to serve on a cabinet, happened to be walking by at the time of the fire. She was so traumatized by is that she decided to try to aid in the reform. In turn some better conditions came to fruition such as regulating doors so they can’t be locked incase of emergencies.
To be more specific it touches on how corporations that controlled industries were shaping economics and politics and thereby working conditions.
Shouldn’t the date be 1890, when How the Other Half Lives was published?
There is an extra quotation mark before the quote: “This is not the first time…”
I realize you can’t include every aspect of Progressivism, but a bit more on public health would set the stage for the Influenza pandemic:
faith in experts
importance of prevention
importance of women, esp. nurses
using the state to achieve ends, etc.
although it is clearly more than an urban issue.
Grammar: “Hull House began exposing conditions in local sweatshops and advocating for the organization of workers.” should read “… conditions in local sweatshops and ADVOCATED for the…”
More insidiously, perhaps, reformers also associated alcohol with cities and immigrants, “unnecessarily” maligning America’s immigrants, Catholics, and working classes in their crusade against liquor.
“Many suffragists adopted a much crueler message. ” provides a value judgement and misses the opportunity to put the issue in context. change to “Many suffragists adopted a white supremacist messaging.” Also this “cruel” misses the fact, mentioned in previous chapters, that black leaders including Fredrick Douglas resented suffragists attempting to connect their issue with civil rights for black men. This text should attempt to avoid emotional language, especially when more precise language can help elucidate connections and rivalries between historical groups and events.
Could some of the specific reforms supported by the WCTU be noted here, instead of just mentioning “do everything” and “social welfare” ?” Home protection,” urban poverty, prison reform, 8-hour workdays, child labor, Christian Socialism– these would illuminate the contributions of the WCTU to the Progressive Era without taking up too much space in the text.
A small matter perhaps, but would it be worth it to mention, for the sake of capturing the tension existing then, that McKinley was assassinated by an anarchist? Just saying he died is a little understated. As I write this, I realize I skipped over Chap. 19, so maybe it’s there.
Yep, the assassination is mentioned in Chap. 19. Never mind, I guess. Though plenty of other topics in Yawp are repeated in multiple chapters.
Am surprised that throughout this entire chapter there is not a single reference to a Black woman Progressive or clubwoman other than brief mentions of Ida B. Wells. Perhaps could spend more time on Black women in the Progressive movement, the slogan of “lifting as we climb,” and cut some of the Washington/Du Bois debate as you have parts of it in the primary sources anyway.
Some suggestions: Mary Church Terrell, Jospehine St. Pierre Ruffin, Nannie Burroughs, Margaret Murray Washington.
I’m surprised there isn’t something about political reform in here. Perhaps in the prelude to reform section adding two paragraphs on direct election of Senators, income tax, city manager governments, referendum and recall? Or reorganizing the whole thing to discuss different pathways to reform electoral, regulation, social and then having them come together in the women’s movement to get the vote.
Make mention of the development of the National Parks System under Wilson, to give reader a sense of how preservation principles were evolving during the Progressive Era?
For the sake of synthesis, bring back the New South concept from Chapter 18 in order to connect Grady and Washington?
It is absolutely astonishing that this description of Du Bois’s philosophy does not discuss the “talented tenth” concept.
By any measure and as is evident in all the literature on the anti-liquor movement, the Anti-Saloon League had by far the greatest effect on achieving liquor control legislation. It needs a more prominent place in this discussion.
The description of Wilson is misleading. He did argue for strong anti-trust action in 1912, and pushed for stronger legislation. That was achieved in the Clayton Act. Where he moved closer to Roosevelt’s position was in supporting the Federal Trade Commission, which had regulatory powers.
Women opposing suffrage should be elaborated on as well in a paragraph in this section to create a more holistic history.
Fixed in 2021. Thanks!
Date updated in summer 2021. Thanks!
Updated in previous edits. Thanks!
Thank you. A paragraph was added on this, but much more can (or, needs to) be said. We would welcome submissions or suggestions for a fuller paragraph than the one posted now in the main text.
Added to the main text along the lines you suggested here. Thanks!
Fixed in the text during prior edits. Thanks!
Fixed during prior edits to the main text. Thanks!
Should be fixed in the main text. Thanks!
Thanks! Updated on americanyawp.com during previous edits.
Thanks! Updated on americanyawp.com during previous edits.
Is there a way this could be worded so that it does not exclude women as social advocates and does not stereotype all men as being sexist?
Beginning this sentence with “As men,” implies that if you are male, you do not care about the welfare and rights of women. It also implies that all men ignored the plights of women, and that all social advocates were male.
Just question how the use of this language used in the quote is necessary.
Please add a audiobook I have to read this for a history assignment and I just want a break from all the work they are giving me
I second Stephen Harper’s comment. I don’t feel comfortable assigning this to my students as it appears now.
Should “disfranchisement” in the first sentence not be spelled “disENfranchisement”?
There is a display error in the last sentence that makes the text smaller than the rest, starting at “home protection.”
This picture to me describes all the corruption the people are facing, well printed and written.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 79 0 W. E. B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington made a tremendous historical impact and left a notable historical legacy. They were reared under markedly different circumstances, and thus their early life experiences and even personal temperaments oriented both leaders’ lives and outlooks in decidedly different ways. Du Bois’s]
I most definitely agree, it did leave a notable historical legacy, there were two opinons and potrays of the books due to different circumstance and their early life experiences and even personal teemperaments and saw things differently.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 3 1 “Never in the history of the world was society in so terrific flux as it is right now,”]
should “in so terrific flux as it is right now” be “in such terrific flux as it is right now”
@Adrian Fermin I agree, the economy and the tension growing came in hand in hand, especially between the government and the people.
YES.
[Americans had many different ideas about how the country’s development should be managed and whose interests required the greatest protection. Reformers sought to clean up politics; black Americans continued their long struggle for civil rights; women demanded the vote with greater intensity]
Everyone really did have their lives and fights, they all had different interests which required the greatest protection. Reformers had Politics.
Black Americans fought for civil rights
Women demanded to vote with greater intensity.
It still has not been fixed.
[“This is not the first time girls have been burned alive in this city. Every week I must learn of the untimely death of one of my sister workers . . . the life of men and women is so cheap and]
OMG! That is dreadful. It is not the first time girls have been burned alive in the city and I am certain it isn’t the last time. They only demanded more sanitary conditions and more safety precautions in the shops which to me seems fair enough.
Reformers used books and mass-circulation magazines to publicize the nation’s poor and economy corruptions to the new industrial order, which is one way to spread the message globally.
Journalists were not the only ones who raised questions about American society, a writer Edward Bellamy’s 1888 titled “Looking Backward” which was a national sensation, describing a man who falls asleep in Boston in 1887 and awakens in 2000 to find society radically altered.
Other people like preachers and theologians also urged actions, other than jounalists. After nowhere to turn to, Americans started asking “What Would Jesus do”?. Which is also a novel written by Charles Sheldon in 1896, it told the story of Henry Maxwell, a pastor in a small midwestern town who confronted by an unemployed migrant who criticized his congregation’s lack of concern for the poor and downtrodden.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 The social gospel emerged within Protestant Christianity at the end of the nineteenth century. It emphasized the need for Christians to be concerned for the salvation of society, and not simply individual souls]
That I agree with, being a Christian is more than looking out for one’s self, but your community and society, the less fortunates, all Americans were urged to confront the sins of their society.
I see the mistake, it still has not been fixed
[Increasingly, these organizations looked outward, to their communities and to the place of women in the larger political sphere.]
Social organizations were for various purposes, much energy for women’s work came from female clubs, these organizations looked outward to ther communities and to the place of women in the larger political sphere.
The women’s clubs flourished in both late 19 and 20th century, they were significant in campaigns for suffrage and women’s right in reference to their name, which were split into two parts, the general federation of women’s clubs and the national association of colored women both which were dominated by upper-middle class, educated and northern women.
While other women worked through churches and moral reform organizations to clean up American life.
[Frances Willard invigorated the organization by transforming it into a national political organization, embracing a “do everything” policy that adopted any and all reasonable reforms that would improve social welfare and advance women’s rights. Temperance, and then the full prohibition of alcohol, however, always loomed large.]
“do everything” policy I assume it means doing everything in their power to improve social welfare and advance women’s right while the complete prohibition of alcohol kept increasing.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 27 2 Many American reformers associated alcohol with nearly every social ill. Alcohol was blamed for domestic abuse, poverty, crime, and disease.]
Many Americans were very very wrong then, especially on the domestic abuse, that happens because one is a beast and had no regard for human rights or beings, alcohol only brings out what already exists within them. Poverty has absolutely nothing to do with acohol, more like the economy is to blame.
[Hull House began exposing conditions in local sweatshops and advocating for the organization of workers. She called the conditions caused by urban poverty and industrialization a “social crime.” Hull House workers surveyed their community and produced statistics on poverty, disease, and living conditions. ]
The Hull house workers provided for their neighbors by running a nursery and a kindergarten, providing class for parents and clubs for children, while arranging social and cultural events for the community. Hull house provided reasonable reasons or statiscs on poverty, disease and living conditions.
ADddam’s was spelled with three a’s , is that a mistake or that is how it is spelt?
two d’s i mean
[ Notable victories were won in the West, where suffragists mobilized large numbers of women and male politicians were open to experimental forms of governance. By 1911, six western states h]
Suffragists eventually helped the women out, notable victories were won in the West, it worked out so well that six western states had passed suffrage amendments to their constitutions.
That is right. an alliance was formed of working-class, middle=class and upper-class women, they all formed an alliance to make their rights valid. Everyone came together for the women’s right.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 36 1 Many suffragists adopted a much crueler message. Some, even outside the South, argued that white women’s votes were necessary to maintain white supremacy. Many white American women argued that enfranchising white upper- and middle-class women would counteract black voters.]
Why couldn’t every women be equal? Why did white women’s vote have to carry more weight than others? They weren’t the only race back then, the black voters[women] were not wrong when they said it would counteract black voters and even other races.
[In January 1918, President Woodrow Wilson declared his support for the women’s suffrage amendment, and two years later women’s suffrage became a reality. After the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment, women from all walks of life mobilized to vote. They were driven by the promise of ch]
It is a good thing the President intervened, he made it possible for suffrage to become a reality, all women were eventually able to vote equally.
[Their cutthroat stifling of economic competition, mistreatment of workers, and corruption of politics sparked an opposition that pushed for regulations to rein in the power of monopolies. The great corporations became a major target of reformers.]
Target how? They tried changing it?
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 45 0 Big business, whether in meatpacking, railroads, telegraph lines, oil, or steel, posed new problems for the American legal system. B]
They were not illegal were they? Railroads and others opposed these regulations because they restrained profits and because of the difficulty of meeting the standards of each state’s seperate regulatory laws.
Yes, it was mentioned in chapter 19, I also did notice the repition but only with one chapter but hopefully once I go through the rest, I will see that.
My thoughts exactly, coming from a wealthy background or being a wealthy person should not have anything to do with pushing antitrust legislation and regulations
It is crazy and suprising that courts could be that slow and unpredictable, well unpredictable is understandable but not the slow part, that made people lose their trust in the court.
[Roosevelt adopted a New Nationalism program, which once again emphasized the regulation of already existing corporations or the expansion of federal power over the economy. In contrast, Woodrow Wilson, the Democratic Party nominee, emphasized in his New Freedom agenda neither trust busting nor federal]
Roosevelt always seems to come up with things outside the box, he came up with a new Nationalism program that emphasized the regulation of already existing corporations or the expansion of federal power over the economy.
Professional bison hunting expeditions almost cleaned out an entire species, even chemical plants was not excluded, it polluted an entire region’s water supply which was dangerous for the people.
[The project had been suggested in the 1880s but picked up momentum in the early twentieth century. But the valley was located inside Yosemite National Park. (Yosemite was designated a national park in 1890, though the land had been set aside earlier in a grant approved by President Lincoln in 1864.) ]
The project took about year before it could be put into use, taking time made sure everything turned out perfect, the debate over Hetch revealed two seperate positions on the value of the valley and on the purpose of the public lands.
[n Pennsylvania, local game laws included requiring firearm permits for noncitizens, barred hunting on Sundays, and banned the shooting of songbirds. These laws disproportionately affected Italian immigrants, critics said, as Italians often hunted songbirds for subsistence, worked in mines for low wages every day but Sunday, and were too poor to purchase permits or to pay the fines levied against them when game wardens caught them breaking these new laws.]
It did more harm than good. It affected Italian immigrants as they often hunted songbirds for subsistence.
[Dr. Alice Hamilton, investigated both worksite hazards and occupational and bodily harm. The progressives’ commitment to the provision of public services at the municipal level meant more coordination and oversight in matters of public health, waste management, and even playgrounds and city parks]
It was a good thing Dr Hamilton investigated both worksite hazards and occupational and bodily harm.
[ Many Americans took notice at the great extinction of a species that had perhaps numbered in the billions and then was eradicated. Women in Audubon Society chapters organized against the fashion of wearing feathers—even whole birds—on ladies’ hats.]
Women always had the hugest decision to make always, women really had to fight for their rights and all they wanted , from the jump , they organized the Audubon society chapters organized against the fashion of wearing feathers, even whole birds on ladies hats, weird t6aste of fashion but yes.
Yes, you are correct and the definition is the state of being deprived of a right or privilege, especially right to vote.
The disenfranchisement laws moved electoral conflict from tjhe ballot box where public attention was great to the voting registrar where color blind laws allowed local party officials to dent the ballot without the appearance of fraud which is 100 percent correct;
The nigger? oh wow. Blacks definitley were the target of the laws, but did not prevent the whites or some whites from being disenfranchised too.
[ In rural areas, white and black southerners negotiated the meaning of racial difference within the context of personal relationships of kinship and patronage. An African American who broke the local community’s racial norms could expect swift personal sanction that often included violence]
It seems like the race has always been between the whites and blacks, they negotiated the meaning of racial difference even though to me, the meaning seems pretty clear and straight forward, but context of personal relationship of kinship and patronage.
Everything was not on the black people’s side, especially segregation and denfranchisement rejected black citizenship and relegated black social and cultural life to segregated spaces.
[He believed that such skills would help African Americans accomplish economic independence while developing a sense of self-worth and pride of accomplishment, even while living within the putrid confines of Jim Crow.]
Did that actually help? The skills? I believe it somewhat did, accomplish economic independence while developing a sense of self-worth and pride of accomplishment all while still living within the putrid of Jim Crow.
Washington accompanied the racism, they were both praised as a race leader and pilloried as an accomplice to America’s unjust racial hierachy, alongside publishing a ton of influential books, they were very much active in journalism.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 81 0 Industrial capitalism unleashed powerful forces in American life. Along with wealth, technological innovation, and rising standards of living, a host of social problems unsettled many who turned to reform politics to set the world right again. ]
The industrial capitalism really opened really strong forces in American life, it brought significant wealth and rising standards of living , at that point\ moment a turning point had been reached for many Americans.
[. Du Bois addressed these domestic and international concerns not only in his classrooms at Wilberforce University in Ohio and Atlanta University in Georgia but also in a number of his early publications on the history of the transatlantic slave trade and black life in urban Philadelphia. ]
Du Bois was a philantrophist and a well known lecturer, that addressed both domestic and international concerns in his classrooms in Ohio and Atlanta, also a number of his early publications of the history of the transalantic slave trade and black life in urban Philadelphia.
17. Conquering the West (94 comments)
The Battle of Whitestone Hill took place from Sept. 3-5. Although the bulk of the fighting occurred on the 3rd, there were engagements on the 4th and 5th. Also, estimates of Sioux casualties range from 100-300. Might want to mention the name of the battle as well.
Annie shot apples off of her English Setter, I can’t find any information about a poodle.
Titling this chapter “Conquering the West” perpetuates a triumphalist view of westward expansion and valorizes the perpetrators of genocide against Native peoples during the nineteenth century.
I strongly disagree. The title is cynical is can be used as a talking point in class what “Conquering the West” really meant, themes that the chapter certainly doesn’t valorize.
For example, I title one of my lectures “The Wild West” not because I wax poetic on duels at high noon, but because it provides a jumping off point to describe the mythology of the Wild West and why Americans engaged in myth-making.
Should say “President Lincoln commuted all but thirty-eight of the sentences.” Missing a hyphen (-)
Should be Native American, not Indian.
Brigham Young did not become the leader of the Mormons after the death of Joseph Smith. On the westward movement they split. Brigham Young (the original leader) had a vision of the mountains in Utah but Joseph Smith and some of the other members wanted to continue on to California, which they did.
Several parapgraphs back the text mention the Dakota uprising and massacre.
I can guarantee most students are not going to connect back to it–in part because “troubles of 1862” is oblique–unless like the Troubles in Ireland, it is a phrase that means something in this context. So you need something more specific.
I think it is worth noting it took place in the Centennial year of the US.
It is worth noting that some military leaders were critical of Custer’s actions (I don’t know how much that was professional jealousy or defending their own reputation).
But a lot of Custer’s reputation was due to efforts of his window Elizabeth Bacon Custer–and reflect rising interest in celebrity as well as the “cowboys, soldiers, and Indians” in popular culture.
Suggestion to change “had” in the first sentence to “have.” Though I know that past-tense is typical of textbooks, changing this sentence to present tense is important as it showcases the continued existence of Native Americans in the United States to present day. Many students of US History are unaware that indigenous communities still exist. Changing the language can highlight the importance of indigenous communities in the present day.
I was under the impression that the west was already being colonized prior to the civil war. Is this passage just explaining how although colonization had moved west native Americans still had plenty of land to live on or did people not travel west of the Mississippi before the civil war?
I feel like the wording of the textbook would have gone right over my head if you hadn’t pointed that out. I agree that it is necessary to acknowledge native American’s continued existence in our country. I know that I personally live only about 30 minutes from a native reserve so I can connect with this comment.
It is interesting how the gold rush actually was beneficial to the growth of America despite the lack of profit for miners. I wonder if the people who created rumors of gold actually knew there was gold or if they were just trying to populate the west. (kind of a conspiracy theory however I thought it might be interesting to look into).
It is interesting how the government encouraged settlement westward by rewarding “free” land. I think that this may have appeared to be a good deal to a lot of people however I anticipate that several families found life to be difficult because they did not have strong support from any established communities.
I find it interesting the textbooks continue to refer to Native Americans as Indians when that is not the case. Although natives were thought to be Indians by Christopher Columbus, we have since known that was not the case.
Natives were able to maintain controll while America was busy with the civil war and had its focus elsewhere.
This goes to show how the American government didn’t really care about the native Americans and that the reservations were basically a dump of land to dispose of people that were in the way of western settlement.
The end of this paragraph shows how tired the natives were of conflict and how even the toughest would give up eventually. This is saddening to hear despite it being a part of the history that lead to the United States today because our prosperity today was dependent on the suffering of these native people.
I like this picture because it depicts the first cross-continental transportation system in the U.S.
The poor pay and dangerous nature of work reminds me of the life of people during the industrial period of our country where there were unrealistic work hours in the factories.
Turner had a very interesting view that was welcomed by many during the time that a frontier line was important in the development of westward expansion. He feared losing the frontier however there were new technologies and government influences that would make life without the frontier a non-issue. I feel like there are some parts of this I don’t understand so if anyone could further clarify this part of the reading that would be great.
I thought it was smart of Buffalo Bill to monetize the romanticism of western culture even if he didn’t agree with the depiction because as a business major it showed me an example of taking advantage of the opportunity.
did the prophets foretell a better future for natives or did they simply fight back against western expansion by Americans?
That is interesting how during that time they were able to determine that bison skulls provided an ingredient important for fertilizer.
This name is misspelled across the site. Should be “Hornaday.”
Why is ‘Indian/Indians’ used so often during this chapter? Every other chapter I’ve read(which isn’t all of them, mostly just those in Volume 1) has used Native American, or even better, Indigenous Peoples. It’s insulting to Indigenous Peoples, it’s insulting to actual Indians, and it certainly should insult everyone else. It’s super inaccurate, we should know that the Indigenous Peoples of America are NOT Indians, they have no relation to India and they are not from there, etc.
PLEASE CHANGE THIS!!!!!!!!!
Sioux is an outdated term. Unless you give context to how the Dakota received it (through the bastardization of an Ojibwa word that settlers began to use) it would be more appropriate to use the term Dakota.
I noticed there wasn’t a conclusion for this chapter
Uses of “Indian” to refer to Indigenous peoples or Native Americans have been replaced with Native American or Indigenous peoples in the updated text of the chapter. The use of “Indian” remains in the titles of books, government bodies, and Indigenous organizations. Please provide further feedback on the updated text to note any missed instances or any terminology not in line with contemporary practice. Thank you.
Updated in text during summer 2021. Thank you for your feedback!
Uses of “Indian” to refer to Indigenous peoples or Native Americans have been replaced with Native American or Indigenous peoples in the updated text of the chapter. The use of “Indian” remains in the titles of books, government bodies, and Indigenous organizations. Please provide further feedback on the updated text to note any missed instances or any terminology not in line with contemporary practice. Thank you.
Thank you for your feedback. This should have been corrected in the updated text in the summer of 2021. Please flag any additional discrepancies you notice in the posted text on Americanyawp.com.
Fixed in summer 2021. Thanks!
Text updated in summer 2021. Thank you!
The current digital version of the textbook refers to a Civil War general named “William Sheridan.” I believe this is an error, and that the book is meaning to refer to General Philip Sheridan (later announced in this chapter). While I do not see the problematic text here, it is still in the current digital version of the textbook. The sentence I refer to is “…celebrity Civil War generals such as William Sherman and William Sheridan exploited and exacerbated local conflicts sparked by illegal business ventures and settler incursions.”
I am certain that the reference to “William Sheridan” is an error and that the authors mean to refer to Philip Sheridan.
DEEZ MUTZ
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints do not believe Americans to be exceptional. We are all children of God, and none are better than others, so Americans were not chosen specifically to spread the Gospel.
The term “Mormon” is incorrect. We worship God, not Mormon, so we shouldn’t be called that. We can be referred to as the LDS church, or as Latter-Day Saints.
I am surprised to see no mention (not just in this chapter, but other, related, chapters) of the Chinese Exclusion Act (1882). The act and its context provide an important point for discussing AAPI experience as well as the legal structures of American racism.
I see that the Chinese Exclusion Act is named in Chapter 19. It would helpful to add reference here as well, including that it is discussed in greater detail later on.
This incorrectly states that the Homestead Act only applied to males. In the next paragraph, it correctly states that unmarried women could file claims, but should be corrected.
This has nothing to do with the content of the text. It would just be really helpful if there were page numbers that correspond with the physical copies of this text.
Members of the church are commonly called Mormons, and the term was endorsed by the church. From 2010 to 2018, the church ran an advertising and outreach campaign called “I’m a Mormon”. The church spent millions on producing a 2014 documentary entitled “Meet the Mormons” and advertised it in every Ensign issue.
The quotation marks at the end of the paragraph should not be there. If they are a remnant of a quote, the textbook is plagiarizing, and that should be corrected one way or another. If they were placed b accident, they should be removed.
This paragraph says that indigenous groups “controlled most” of the West well into the 19th century- most, but not all, as although there was colonization of the West before the civil war, it was not as large- scale as after.
The quote “annihilating time and space” does not refer to the railroad. It refers to the invention of the electric telegraph. It is from a newspaper article published in the New York Herald newspaper in 1848 titled “The Age of Miracles.”
“We have had geological periods, traditonary eras, historical ages, and now we have just commenced, on the 1st of January, 1848, the electric, or miraculous age…Printing was the first invention, steam was the next discovery, and the third was that of the telegraph…In fact, time is not only beaten, but it is annihilated.”
I have to correct my own “well…actually” comment. I remember now that John Muir wrote an article in 1872 in which he referred to the transcontinental railroad as “annihilating time and space.”
They get so sensitive about their religion
COLT COLT COLT
b accident
haha not
I wonder if that is all that links the native Americans and the American West, trade, travel and warefare?
Is there an order the United States removed Native groups ? Why the West first before finally turning them as states.
What type of pivotal transformation? I would want details on how it was a tragedy for some and a triumph for others?
The statement Americans poured across the Mississippi River in record numbers’ I am curious to know what that means.
The pouring of the California rush 1848-1849, droves of prospectors poured in after precious-metal strikes in Colorado in 1858, Nevada in 1859, Idaho in 1860,Montana in 1863 and the Black Hills in 1874, this seems like they happened back to back except for the Black Hills which came up about 11 years after. It is typical that even back in the day that women were tasked with housework, well I guess that is how it all started even now.
Bison herds? So animals were skinned alive for human gain. The clothing industry, like the leather used in belts, shoes etc. It is still done in our century.
I agree. Mormon is a member or follower of millenarian christian movement founded in the U.S in 1830 by Joseph smith. So i wonder why they “fleed” from religious persecution.
The mormon moved because they were not allowed to practice their faith.
I totally get your point, we are all wonderfully made and no one is limitted to spreading the gospel.
Did that also include women?
Married women were excluded because they were considered the legal dependents of their husbands, but single women could file claims on their own? Wont it be better to remain single then? If married women were considered legal dependents of their husbands, what about their kids?
How is it fair that only first sons inherit land in Scandinavia, but I guess the other sons are not left emptyhanded, they founded farm communities.
I could not have said it better.
Why was the sand creek massacre, both condemned and applauded? *Native Peace Commission* Did it work? The religiously minded men, were they able to persuade “indians” to accept them.
Why was the fieldwork, the traditional domain of white males, primarily performed by Native women?. Viewing reservations Indians as lazy and thought of native cultures as inferior to their own was not right.
When is it ever okay to use force? Of course the Native group resisted.
Why did the Comache band refuse to resettle? Maybe the Red River War could have been avoided.
I do not think they ever cared about the Indian rights, it has always been about money, or getting rich.
Wow, that is sad.
I have not heard about the Utes and Paiutes, where did they come from?
Exactly, my point earlier.
They had to keep pushing and forcing people out of their hometowns now? And if they resist they get shot. It is a Long Walk alright.
If they didn’t get shot, they get locked up. Good thing the Treaty of Bosque Redondo came along, allowing the Navajo to return from the reservation to their homeland.
This paragraph was so sad to read. The U.S Army even helped record like they had no part in it. They were really tired of the conflicts, it got so tiring and i do not blame them because even the toughest of humans needs a break too.
The word collect what was left just seem so brutal, with no remorse.
Even the children were not safe. Everything was used for their own gain .More money to their pocket.
It captured it alright. It was a vivid story/explanation, I was not there but i believe I have a vivid explanation of everything that went down.
Turner’s view was accepted by all or most, the frontier line between savagery and civilization was washed across the continent.
What a way to settle an argument. Women will always be part of a greater process.
Two Bill Show is a funny, yet cool name to give a show and I certainly see where it comes from. Buffalo Bill’s Historic Wild West and Pawnee Bill’s Historic Wild West.
The Native cultures were becoming distinct, good thing the wild west shows started displaying more of the native cultures and somehow create another source of income for the Native Americans.
More death of the Natives? wow
There is a really good show on netflix called Bigfoot. It seems like just random firing has been in America as long as i remember, just full on killing people in the name of protecting themselves, especially Black Americans.
Please incorporate the correct spelling of Chief Hinmuuttu-yalatlat. It’s nice to see the correct pronunciation, but Chief Joseph was not his name and it should not be honored as such. Understandably for American History, it’s important to include all of the facts. He was known by American settlers as Chief Jospeh. To his peers he was known as Chief Hinmuutu-yalatlat. He was later known as Hinmatóowyalahtqit.
Turner was right to worry about the United States future because no on had a clue what could or would happen.
I think it is a little bit of both, they did fortell a better future for natives soo they fought for it, they fought against western expansion by Americans.
Native Americans has a better ring to it than ‘Indian peoples”.
$20-25$ sounds like chicken change for a day and that was their monthly salary? I guess back then it was a lot of money, it is double that with years of experience which is also little but to them it was a lot.
Chicago became the most important city back then because of their railroads serving as a means of transportation and also income, by bringing cattles from Texas to Chicago for slaughter where they were killed and later shipped out for more sale in New York City.
Oh yes, I believe I have seen something like that.
I agree with you but i think it was a lot harder for single women to travel out west by themselves not just because they were single but also because many of them didn’t know what to expect.
They originally came from Utah and Colorado.
There’s a typo referring to the pictured as “Ogala” instead of “Oglala”.
16. Capital and Labor (85 comments)
I believe Bryan served in the US House, representing Nebraska, not “the Nebraska House of Representatives.” Similarly, he was unsuccessful in his campaign for the US Senate, not “the Nebraska Senate.”
typo: poise should read poised
In the reference material section, the Industrial Workers of the World are mistakenly listed as the “International” Workers of the World.
“In the summer of 1886, the campaign for an eight-hour day, long a rallying cry that united American laborers, culminated in a national strike on May 1, 1886.” What kind of sentence is this? It’s like a run-on sentence made of sentence fragments. Should “long” be “rang”?
Nevermind. I get it.
should there be a comma?
The artist’s name is misspelled – should be Snyder not Synder
Paragraph 1 seems to have an editing error, as the second sentence does not make sense.
It should possibly read as follows:
“That year, mired in the stagnant economy that followed the bursting of the railroads’ financial bubble in 1873, rail lines slashed workers wages even as they reaped enormous government subsidies and paid shareholders lucrative stock dividends.”
Honestly the sentence should possibly be broken down into multiple sentences, as it seems like a run-on sentence.
Didn’t laborers at this time work roughly 16 hours a day, 6 days a week? This would calculate to over 90 hours a week, not 60.
From it’s beginnings in the early to mid nineteenth century during the Industrial Revolution to the modern era of today, the labor movement has fought hard forming labor parties and labor laws to give the American worker the rights they deserve. The scene in this chapter shows the defiant labor movement(armless) being chased out by armed soldiers to quell out their demonstration.
[A month of chaos erupted. Strikers set fire to the city, destroying dozens of buildings, over a hundred engines, and over a thousand cars. In Reading, strikers destroyed rail property and an angry crowd bombarded militiamen with rocks and bottles. The militia fired into the crowd, killing ten. A general strike erupted in St. Louis, and strikers seized rail depots and declared for the eight-hour day and the abolition of child labor. ]
I think , the use of armed men to deal with the railway strikers is not the best and killing of innocent people; the best way however is to use dialogue between the workers union leaders’ and the government representative to make tranquility and sanity prevail
The Federal government actively promoted industrial and agriculture development. It enacted high tariffs that protected American industry from foreign competition, granted land to railroad company to encourage construction, and used the army to remove foreigners from Western land by farmers and mining company’s to pave way greater achievements.
Replace “committed suicide” with “died by suicide” or “took his own life.” https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/09/health/suicide-language-words-matter/index.html
Isn’t this five years? 1898, 1899, 1900, 1901, and 1902
Just a grammatical error. On sentence #4 it should be “among” investors, manufacturers, and retailers, not “between.”
Missing word “it” at the end of the second to last sentence: Republican dominance maintained a high protective tariff, an import tax designed to shield American businesses from foreign competition; southern planters had vehemently opposed this policy before the war but now could do nothing to prevent.
This appears to be the first reference to the Gilded Age, and the term shows up a lot. How about defining it?
I see the error about Bryan has STILL not been fixed. The sentence “He soon won election to the Nebraska House of Representatives, where he served for two terms. Although he lost a bid to join the Nebraska Senate,” is incorrect. He was a member of the US House of Representatives, and was unsuccessful in his bid to be elected to the US Senate. Also, there is no such thing as a Nebraska “house of Representatives” as they have a unicameral legislature.
Industry has its place, but the rich only became richer and the great divide if inequality continues today. Donald Trump.
Social Darwinism is rough, but someone has to be on top.
Social Darwinism should be encouraged, but their should be a limit
typo: poise should read poised
[“It is no longer a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, but a government of Wall Street, by Wall Street, and for Wall Street.” ]
Mary Elizabeth Lease
Its scary that they will resort to killing their citizens because of them protesting
Something about this picture makes me uncomfortable…
I’m not sure if anyone can ask this question, and this is not the right place to ask it, but since we’re trillions of dollars in debt with no hopes of paying it back, can we just keep building a debt and forget about it forever with no consequences? If not, is the nation just going to implode? Man, I gotta get outta here.
How can a campaign “in the summer of 1886” “culminate in a national strike on May 1”??
The comments on the 1894 election are inaccurate: their representation in the House declined while Republicans made enormous gains. At most the Populists were threatening the major party status of the Democrats. And why, given the vast literature on Populism since the 1960s (and in just the last 25 years), why rely on Hicks’ very dated work?
Fixed on the website during previous summer edits. Thanks!
Thank you! Fixed in text during previous rounds of edits.
Fixed in text during previous rounds of edits. Thanks!
Fixed in text during previous rounds of edits. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Changed in text during previous rounds of edits. Thanks!
Thanks, Phil! We have tempered the concluding language here.
Fixed in text during a previous round of edits. Thanks!
Fixed in text during a previous round of edits. Thanks!
Fixed in text during a previous round of edits. Thanks!
Fixed in text during a previous round of edits. Thanks!
Fixed in text during a previous round of edits. Thanks!
The term “flat” money supply is used in the third sentence of this paragraph. The term “flat” money is incorrect; should be “fiat” money.
half century -> half-century
grammar
thanks for creating this awesome site
(if the creator reads this)
This is just sad as hundreds of people had died because they were fed up with long work times and work accidents when they had enough, and when they wanted the higher up’s to know about it, they quickly getunned down by the military just so the company cacouldn its doors again.
um no
nerd
Yo was good my gs. Today I’ve been consuming copious amounts of mosquito larvae. Delicioso
“Darwnism” should be “Darwinism”
I don’t understand why the hyphins are on the last sentence, makes the whole sentence does not make sense.
The strikers would rather destroy the entire rail property than allow militias reopen the rail service. The militia fired into the crowd killing 11 people and wounding more people which is considered dangerous. Alot more deaths happened, they also tried going on a strike but to no avail.
Workers destroyed nearly 40 million worth of property which is a whole lot of damage. Nearly 100 Americans died in “The Great Upheaval’.
What is Wrought? How did Taylorism increase the scale and scope of manufacturing?. I agree that if managed by trained experts, specific tasks could be done more effectively.
The first sentence is proof that money don’t solve all the problems because even the wealthiest cannot assume the risks because it would be too great to bear especially individually.
Unprecendented sort of means never seen before?
Why is it so-called robber barons
How many other popularizers does Darwin have?
why not?
Industrial capitalism was a good thing that happened .
You right, I did not notice at first.
I was a bit lost on that too
I think it could be either or. The sentence looks fine to me.
I do not think the apostrophe after Knights is nessacary
After repeated wage cuts, wow. That just seems unfair
How long was Debs locked up for?
lol nice one. Totally correct
Farmers in some of the Western part of the world still depend on weather and local markets for growth or income.
the first set of farmers must’ve saved the entire clan
The democratic candidates won four governorships and 48 congressional seats in 1890 which is a whole lot , makes me wonder if there has been more in the past years.
The democractic candidates won four governorships and 48 congressional seats in 1890 which is a whole lot, it makes me wonder how many more votes they have had over the years.
They killed two birds with one stone by proposing an unprecedented expansion of federal and advocating the country’s railroad and telegraph systems with the best interest of people at hand.
250,000 members at the southern alliance and formed a segregated sister organization, you would think they won’t all be subjected to race and class hostility.
“last night I found that I had a power over the audience”. The a in the sentence should be removed. Last night I found that i had power over the audience is correct.
Fiat money? what is the definition of that.
Bryan must have ruled effectively for him to have received gifts even while in office. Two thousand letters of support daily? A whole record breaker.
Oh wow. He got defeated?
Bryan in a snake form eating the democratic party. The irony, snake in the western form is another word for embezzling from the government
Socialists were very accurate with their argument that wealth and power were consolidated in hands of too few individuals, that is still the case now.
Government oppression? it is hard to believe that exists
I have read a little part of the counter cultures, really nice.
The editor was so sure about socialism is coming, he went ahead to say it is coming like a wild fire/ prairie fire and nothing can stop it and he was not wrong.
The world began to change for the better as it evolved so did the cost. The farmer was used to one way of thinking as they changed, they were forced to adhere to the economic system.
“wall Street owns the country” I believe is a statement of fact. The country may have been for the people and ran by the people but during this time the country experienced hardships. The hardships led to change and the change seem to have more to do with how to run a country instead of just being a friend. Leadership was being implemented in new ways that benefited the country as a whole, but the people didn’t see it that way at first because they weren’t used to it.
As the labor force grew and changed, it changed the way farmers were doing business. It was a hard a very large adjustment.
If Bryan weren’t a democrat i think he would have won the presidency at the time he ran most were in favor of the republican party
Because the industrialization and dangerous working conditions in factories workers protested over the states and the low wages that they were given, as a result of this is the workers rights .
After the civil war time, a lot of technological advances took place and a lot of investments were made on these advancements.
30. The Recent Past (78 comments)
I think you have done a wonderful job of scholarship on what you have in this chapter, but I believe that there are some key aspects that shouldn’t get left out. H.W. Bush’s Panamanian invasion and the ouster of Noriega is missing here. I believe that it fits in with the long shadow of both Cold War anticommunism, globalized economics, Latin American foreign policy and the Drug Wars. I would be happy to provide content if you wished. My feeling was that it belonged somewhere between paragraph 10 and 11.
Should be “Katherine Harris” instead of “Kathleen Harris”
I would suggest less on Clinton’s attacks on Iraq while being sure to mention that a key cause of the Iraq war (besides WMD)was the false allegation that Saddam was allies with al Qaeda. Thank you!
Issue 1
“his narrowly passed 2017 tax cut continued the redistribution of American wealth toward corporations and wealthy individuals.”
This is a highly opinionated statement in the absence of any citations, as it erroneously implies that there were no benefits to low and middle income earners. Provisions of this law included elevating the standard deduction and increasing the child tax credit; items that would have benefited many families.
As an example, the NY Times published a tax cut calculator in 2017 describing the impact of the tax law:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/17/upshot/tax-calculator.html
Per the calculation, a married couple filing jointly with annual income between $75-100K, 2 children, and using the standard deduction a would receive a tax cut between $2,260 and $2,690.
Issue 2
“The tax cut exploded the federal deficit and further exacerbated America’s widening economic inequality.”
So should the reader’s conclusion be that higher taxes would lessen the economic divide? Econonomic inequality is a complex, multifactorial issue with many possible causes. For example, affordability of higher education, personal health, individual motivation, offshoring of jobs, replacement of workers via automation, etc. Claiming that the tax cut worsened economic inequality is a dramatic oversimplification of a complex issue, and should be avoided.
Also, I think “exploded the federal deficit” should be altered, as “exploded” pushes an opinion without factual data.
Recommended Change
In closing, I suggest changing the wording as follows:
“his narrowly passed 2017 tax cut returned wealth to individuals and provided incentives to businesses, but did so at the expense of increasing the federal deficit.”
That’s a more neutral treatment of the subject and allows the reader to form their own conclusions.
self-described “DEMOCRATIC socialist”. There is certainly a strong distinction, especially considering Sanders’ brand of democratic socialism could be more accurately described as social democracy, in the vein of the Nordic countries.
Perhaps something should be added about the partisan nature of the #MeToo movement, in regards to centrist/moderate Democrats using it as a tool against Republicans, especially in light of how quickly these same Democrats who were #MeToo advocates in 2018-2019 were suddenly nowhere to be found when presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden had accusations against him. Meanwhile, Democrats and independents on the left who were #MeToo advocates continued on, even against a moderate Democrat like Joe Biden.
I think you meant “beat Reagan” not “best.”
agreed
The Republican’s choice of Donald Trump should be amended with the word “alleged,” to read “…nominated a real estate developer, celebrity, and alleged billionaire …”
The change should be made since Trump’s billionaire status is in question.
the
Definitely agree with the addition of the false allegations of Saddam Hussein having WMDs and allying with al Qaeda.
“In 2014, Latinos surpassed non-Latino whites to became the largest ethnic group in California”
Should be changed to become.
“best” can be used as a verb meaning “beat” and is appropriate here.
I believe the word “after” should be added to the sentence about Willie Horton (after being released).
You should mention Jimmy Carter started aiding the Mujahideen during Operation Cyclone.
On the latest version, there is no citation of the Jan 6th Insurrection image.
Agreed! This page needs to take a more neutral stance! The intro paragraph now showing is not up for edits and it needs a lot of them. Just because the writer claims a view does not mean that is the view to be claimed. Give the claims of both sides, and then let the reader do his/her own research to take the side they believe. Don’t pollute this one good source.
It doesn’t show in this view, but when viewed in the website, the second half of this paragraph is duplicated in a new paragraph.
The opening few paragraphs on January 6, don’t naturally flow into the rest of the chapter. It stands out and will cause many students to stop reading. There is a way to incorporate it, but that is not effective.
But WHY did al-Qaeda/bin Laden attack? That’s an important part that was left out of this.
This implies that Obama was President when the Great Recession hit. Obama was not sworn in until 2009. Then the Tea Party. Then Occupy Wall Street in 2011. This chronology of this whole section is jumbled and confusing.
In light of the events in Afghanistan over the last few days, there needs to be an update of the situation and clarification of the timeline of our total withdrawal. A comparison to Saigon is not unwarranted, IMHO.
Starting with section VIII New Horizons-
you have two different versions
The Version that one would read from the table of contents has a chapter titled “American Carnage” which has a paragraph that is slightly edited and repeated (first 2 paragraphs after picture of Trump-not in this section, so I don’t have paragraph numbers).
When you come to the comment section, VIII New Horizons is a completely different section on LGBTQ, #Me Too, and BLM.
Both need to be included in the actual text.
I hope someone will read this and improve this section.
The title for the section on Trump’s presidency is “American Carnage.”
This is extremely biased and misleading. There was no “carnage” or increase in deaths as a result of Trump’s presidency. War deaths were down. The economy was up sharply until the Pandemic as a result of Trump’s policies.
A better title would be “A Populist President.”
Funny how the current intro talking about the January 6th incident isn’t available for us to leave feedback about. Since I can’t leave a comment regarding that specific paragraph, I will have to use this one. That intro is full of lies and, you leftists’ favorite word: misinformation. The January 6th incident is still under investigation with lies still coming out about what actually happened and who were actually involved. Same goes for the election. If you don’t have 100% facts about either incident yet (as both are still being investigated), probably best to not include it in your history book. This makes me question the accuracy of any and all of this textbook if you are so willing to publish something so fresh that still isn’t 100% reported accurately, especially with biased journalists and media. Do you want to include all the nonsense about Covid too? Mask? No mask? Vaccine? No vaccine? This is ridiculous.
I feel like replacing “#policelivesmatter” with “#bluelivesmatter” more accuratly reflects the times, as #bluelivesmater was used much more than #policelivesmatter.
The part that I cannot comment on is what I have a suggestion for. I am a “one way or the other” voter. Not a TRUMP supporter per se. However, the first paragraph that we cannot comment on, is complete “misinformation” and up to opinion. It’s correct to state that these things happened, as it is in fact history. However, “…fueled by an onslaught of lies and fabrications and conspiracy theories surrounding the November 2020 elections…” is a matter of opinion. Purely and simply an opinion. IF this had been written by a conservative it would say the opposite which I would also oppose because it is still an opinion. Opinions, without being stated as such, do not belong in history books. History is neutral. Viewed from BOTH sides. Don’t make a history book about one side’s political agenda. There are blogs and social media platforms for that.
I am *not a “one way or the other” voter.
For some reason, the paragraph in the online textbook is not here. But I must mention something extremely important. In the seventh paragraph under “New Horizons”, George Floyd is quoted as saying, “I can’t breath.” This is probably a typo and it is supposed to say, “I can’t breathe.” For something that is so significant in our lifetime, I feel that this is a crucial detail!! Please fix!!!
Concerning movements during the past decade and past couple of years, it would seem appropriate to discuss the March for Our Lives movement in response to the Parkland shooting and the context about mass shootings in the United States during the 2010s
It is not shown in this version, but upon reading the final paragraphs regarding the Trump presidency on the main site, the 2nd impeachment concerning January 6th was mentioned, however, there is no prior reference to the former president’s first impeachment concerning his communications with the Ukrainian president a year earlier.
Why would you call the first African American president a lame duck? In my opinion that’s very racist and prejudice to compare him to a weak creature, because he is not. If he became President that means every act he did before the he was President was phenomenal, because he was destined to be an African American.
This doesnt talk about the all time low unemployment rate under President Donal Trump. 3.5 % the lowest it’s been in 50 years, since 1969
Yeah that’s the crucial detail.
This paragraph and the one with the January 6th “insurrection” disproportionally depicts the right wing as the “bad guys,” there was no talk about the 20 people that died and the one $1 Billion dollars of personal property damages that was cause due to the #BLM riots.
Although it looks alright here. Part of this paragraph is repeated in the next paragraph when normally viewing it. It is a few identical sentences around “He began ordering the deportation of so-called Dreamers—students who were born elsewhere but grew up in the United States…”
Third party candidate Ross Perot should be mentioned as a contributing factor of the 1992 election outcome? Perot received nearly 20 million votes – votes that would have likely otherwise gone to Bush. This affected the outcome in several states that narrowly went to Clinton.
The intro is an untrue left leaning smear. You really need to get your facts straight and stop spreading your opinion because that’s all it is, is YOUR opinion, nothing factual.
How is Ross Perot not even mentioned? Perot received 19,743,821 votes that were mostly Republican votes. Perot is THE reason that Clinton won the election. In many states, Clinton won less than 40% of the popular vote but received ALL the electoral votes because of the third party candidate. Clinton also secured the Presidency with the lowest percentage of the popular vote since Woodrow Wilson in 1912.
What you have written in the first paragraph about Trump is untrue. I have a feeling this chapter is going to be liberal left written. I haven’t even finished this chapter yet. Shame on you YAWP. You should have waited for the truth to come out instead of writing this chapter. Your credibility is questionable.
A lot of this stuff said about Trump is super, super biased. Also, I think that, concerning the 1/6 event, you should discuss how so many people claim that none of that actually happened- because they were actually in DC at that time. You should also think about how so many people say that the left actually did that white house storming.
Also, discuss how TONS AND TONS of ballots were “randomly” found buried underground? what about that? As a side note, wouldn’t you be upset if you worked so hard to win an election, and then it was stolen from you through compromise and fraud, and literally every person in the gov. was against you?
All the conspiracy theories are coming true.
Do your research and don’t just say what everyone else is saying…
Concerning the covid talk in the 3rd to the last section, I think you should discuss how many of the “positive” cases were given to people who didn’t even die from covid.
r.e.s.e.a.r.c.h.
Sorry not sorry but you’re incorrect.
There is no evidence to corroborate that the 2020 election was “stolen”. In fact, it was one of the most secure elections on record.
Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, and Joseph R. Biden won the presidency.
The jury is still out on the conclusion of what actually happened, you have drawn a conclusion right from the start without all the facts. I am reluctantly reading this liberal one sided view of history. States such as Arizona are working to decertify their election vote, and still more to come.
Updated. Thank you.
Thank you for your feedback. Any specific stylistic suggestions would be welcomed.
Thank you for the suggestion. We’ve updated the text to reflect America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Thank you for your comment.
Updated. Thanks!
Updated in an earlier edition. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
In the contributors section for the second part of the book (with the last substantive chapter on the recent past), on p. 443, my last name is misspelled. It should be “Daniel Burge,” not “Daniel Birge.”
Thank you.
Precisely, which parts are untrue? Be specific.
Is the jury still out? I’m not sure which part was untrue, however poorly it may reflect on the former President.
The intro is filled with opinions and misinformation about what happened on January 6, especially regarding the section about the President’s involvement. History should be objective.
The first paragraph purposely leaves out information. It fails to state that President Trump told his crowd to “march on the Capitol and peacefully make your voices heard.”
Pretty funny you don’t allow comments on the part about the capital, typical left not allowing truth to be heard to push their agenda.
Wouldn’t a widening economic inequality mean I as a middle class individual suffer from his tax cut ? I seemed to prosper through the Trump economy.
Section repeats itself in two consecutive paragraphs: Border apprehensions and deportations reached record levels under the Obama administration, but Trump pushed even farther. He pushed for a massive wall along the border to supplement the fence built under the Bush administration. He began ordering the deportation of so-called Dreamers—students who were born elsewhere but grew up in the United States—and immigration officials separated refugee-status-seeking parents and children at the border.
The paragraph that I would like to comment on does not appear on the comment page, but it appears as the final paragraph before the “New Horizons” in the actual text.
This paragraph states that those Americans who were skeptical of the COVID vaccines were either conspiracy theorists or political radicals. This is not only a gross exaggeration, but appears biased, as Americans may have many reasons for concern over the COVID vaccines that have absolutely nothing to do with political radicalism or social-media-fueled conspiracy. This chapter has somewhat of an anti-conservative feel to it that spills over into statements like the one listed above.
This is by far an opinionated chapter and is fairly disappointed. Many points in this chapter are not backed up by evidence and lots of recent history is still being investigated. On the accounts of Donald Trump and January 6th, the section fails to maintain a historical standpoint. For Donald Trump and other presidents, it fails to recognize the good that people did and instead focuses on the negative connotations of America just like the media does. It is truly sad to see that we went from a truly great analytical standpoint to pure bias and hate that has no place in history. Along with this, it is clearly shown that this is a leftist perspective which is expected since this is in partnership with Stanford University which is truly disappointing as well. Learning should not be indoctrination supporting far left democrats when both political parties have brought good to the nation that is failed to be recognized and instead, this page has become one of many media outlets that will forever damage the integrity of the recent past.
I believe this “collaborative text” has accepted a bias view on Trump’s presidency. Although it is acceptable to cover some of his short comings, this chapter literally ripped his term apart and solely focused on his failings. I do not appreciate a text–especially one used for school or textbook purposes– that leads one to believe that the writer has written with a prejudice pen.
Please revise the original chapter entitled “American Carnage.”
I would like to bump Chris Parisi’s suggestion here. While I am not well-schooled enough in the US invasion of Panama to provide a narrative, it is critical to understanding the long history of US-Latin American relations, especially in the face of the 1990 elections in Nicaragua that ended the Sandinista Revolution. Even a cursory mention that there are significant differences between the US’s official report on citizen deaths and international-Panamanian estimates would benefit readers. Additionally, the effects on Panama, such as homelessness mentioned in Zinn’s “A People’s History,” would also help readers consider the effects of the aftermath of interventions and “collateral damage.” What must be avoided is “both sides-ing” the narrative, should it be included. Below is a brief paragraph from a typical corporate survey, which I believe is more damaging than leaving it out completely:
“Six years later, in 1989, President Bush sent more than 20,000 soldiers and marines into Panama. Their goal was to overthrow and arrest General Manuel Antonio Noriega on charges of drug trafficking. Noriega had been receiving money since 1960 from the CIA. But he was also involved in the international drug trade. After a Miami grand jury indicted him, Noriega was taken by force by the American military and flown to Miami to stand trial. In April 1992 Noriega was convicted and sentenced to 40 years in prison. Many Latin American governments deplored the “Yankee imperialism” of the action. However, many Americans—and Panamanians—were pleased by the removal of a military dictator who supported drug smuggling.”
The author is obviously biased against Trump, never mentioning any successful policies or achievements by the former president and uses biased news reports as sources. Had the entire American Yawp been this slanted I would have dropped this history class. Chapter 30 needs an unbiased revision!
why did you say r.e.s.e.a.r.c.h
The current text in this paragraph reads, “The deaths of Eric Garner, twelve-year-old Tamir Rice, Philando Castile, and were captured on cell phone cameras and went viral.” Something is missing at the bold section.
A lot of the knowledge I have seen on this page seems to be opinion and not fact-based. I wish it was just information with no left or right opinions stated
Hmm, perhaps the bit referring to a comment from Trump that was taken completely and blatantly out of context and would have never made it into any legitimately unbiased historian’s account. Since Trump officially denied condoning the events that took place on January 6th, there is a clear bias in drawing this conclusion.
“Crucial,” is a strong word, even for something so “significant in our lifetime.”
Well, not to be the bearer of bad news, but there is a bit of evidence that could suggest fraudulent activity in the electoral process. However, the Yawp thankfully said nothing about this claim, as it could perhaps be interpreted as political bias, and we both know how straightforward and unbiased the Yawp is.
Thank you so much for pointing this out. In addition, the authors did not even bother to address how the pandemic measures affected people employed in the private sector, especially working classes, and those who had already been living on the margine of poverty, as well as how the pandemic measures affected people’s psychological health overall. For instance, in my country, just in the first months of the pandemic, between 30 000 and 50 000 people lost their jobs, and many more, who had already been toiling for a minimum wage, had their salaries cut down. Considering we’re a country with 3,5 million people, of which at least half if not more comprises the elderly or pensioners, it becomes evident how much the pandemic measures devised by the Western political elite have affected us. In addition, domestic violence reports increased 30% just in the first week of the pandemic when we had a minor lockdown.
C-19 pandemic is an incredibly important historical event in human history – for the first time, the humanity adopted a systemic approach towards a global pandemic. To be blind and act like the global measures did not impact people at least as equally or even more than the virus itself, is truly abhorent, epsecially if it is done by historians and intellectuals. It’s like writing about the Industrial Revolution but focusing only on its achievements and failing to mention the exploitation of immigrants, women and children in the industrial sector.
Lots of one sided and personal attitudes of the author(s), at the cost of facts and real consequences. Will definitely be preparing the topics in the last chapter from other sources.
I think the term “lame duck” was used with context to the rest of the paragraph, since the congress blocking his administrative power made it difficult to make meaningful change well before a time which that change would rationally end
To much to read please shorten.
This is 100% misinformation in this chapter. Sadly, you only offer once perception, one viewpoint, one interpretation of the facts of our history. Biased and negligence of far left, liberal views rather than the actual truth and facts. THIS IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH HISTORY. A LACK OF HONEST FACTS and TRUTH. The sources alone prove this from the WP and NYT. How about we state ONLY FACTS rather than opinions and unbiased interpretations of truth.
All facts are interpreted. We interpret facts differently. The difference is in the way we interpret facts. We start with different presuppositions, things that are assumed to be true without being able to prove them which then become the basis for our conclusions. All reasoning is based on presuppositions (or rather axioms) which is especially relevant when dealing with past events.
When you look back in history, there are specific moments, events, and people that have stood out. Today, we live in a society of clashing worldviews, a lack of foundation where our worldview is built upon, and until that is sorted out, we will never learn to agree or to change our perspective, or even have self-reflection of our very short-sighted lens on how we interpret and experience things. History is very complicated. There is much that we do not know, and it is easy to look back and say that they should not have done this or that. When discussing humanity, we will never fully be able to even begin to deal with the issues of the past unless we have the true, hard, and correct history to study. And furthermore, we cannot go back and reconstruct every event and understand every injustice, decision, tolerance, and norm of our past – and certainly, there have been many mistakes. The only way to begin to deal with such complex issues regarding humanity requires us to know the true and full history of humans – no matter how evil or despicable. We will never learn from our history if it keeps being written with presuppositions.
It is not until we recognize that these arguments are really about the presuppositions (the foundation of our world views) that we have, a biased or perceived view, lens, before we start to begin to deal with these foundational reasons for our different beliefs or views. A person will not interpret facts differently until you change your perceptions or reflections, putting on a different set of glasses or lenses, to change our presuppositions.
Very disappointing to see our history defined by one viewpoint and not that of truth and facts.
There must be additional sections added pertaining to the recent political and military conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, China and Taiwan, and Israel and Palestine since the United States is heavily funding and expending its budget for these wars.
Will the Trump and COVID 19 information be edited. It seems like an opinion column.
President Batak Obama was very new to his whole experience in the White House and ruling the nation. He did did try to combat the grey recession but was a failure to it because he did not have many supporters by hui side. The economy itself was already bf falling and it still is today because of all the finance that needs to be grated to help all these wars happening now. The stimulus was placed in a time when it was relevant to the economy as how it would be today. Inflation have taken a toll on humanity today because work has become harder to sustain and people are increasingly looking for jobs and a change in the economy. The assistance for the government had deteriorated to about half of what they used to provide for the people who were on government assistance. The freedom of speech allowed one to express their frustrations and needs for a better future living in America but it’s not making any progress within society or to the person in higher power. Expression one self now is saying so much but saying nothing at all really. As the years go by and a new president steps into office nothing have really changed. Obama reign had lasted its time but what can the people say much to how he contributed to the economy and the people.
COVID-19 definitely gave Biden the White House. The misinformation from Biden that gave him an advantage during the election blaming Trump, for the pandemic was atrocious. Dirty politics and frustrating tactics indeed.
I don’t see anything in here about all the record jobs that Trump created.
Also, nowhere in this chapter is anything about the Clinton military drawdown, which incredibly weakened our military, making us suspect to attack during the 911 and subsequent Jihadist awakenings.
18. Life in Industrial America (75 comments)
I suggest a word change in this sentence:
Immigrant communities published newspapers in dozens of languages and purchased spaces to maintain their arts, languages, and traditions alive.
Either remove the word “alive’ or change the word “maintain” to “keep.” Such a change will improve the readability of the passage. Thank you.
This paragraph should mention and define patronage so students reading this will wonder why in the world machine bosses engaged in these types of “mutual aid” activities.
There is a typo towards the end of the paragraph:
“A Russian Jewish family persecuted in European pogroms…” should be programs.
“Pogroms” is the correct word here. A pogrom is an organized riot/massacre. I’ve only ever heard the term used in this specific situation, where Europeans planned the wholesale destruction of a Jewish community.
The supposedly “new South” grew in industrialization but remained heavily segregated giving the worst jobs to African Americans
Lynching was fine in the South if members believed that an African American made a crime they would publicly kill them
Presented the KKK as vigilantes that assist the community -> romanticized the KKK
The South grew in constructing Railroads
John D. Rockefeller was the richest man in America but also hated & mistrusted because many believed that he got his money illegally by immoral business Clergyman Washington Gladden protested to accept the 100,000 Rockefeller donated to the American Board of Commissioner for Foreign Missions because he didn’t trust his dirty money
The board president Samuel Capen did not defend Rockefeller but he did say it was a gift and they can’t asses the origin of every donation but the debate shook Capen
The tainted Money debate that Gladden had with the board of commissioners and the rising income inequality rose concerning questioning about the morals of the new industrial United States
Religions were confused with who they would support either the or the disempowered?
Steel Magnate Andres Carnegie popularized the idea of a “Gospel of Wealth” which was the rich to donate to charity to make up for the inequality of of income between the rich & Poor.
Eventually American Churches adapted themselves to the new industrial order Even Gladden who debated against Rockefeller’s money started to accept it
Meanwhile many churches questioned the COMPATIBILITY of large fortunes with Christian Values
The economic and social changes of the late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth centuries challenged traditional norms
the increase in urbanization,immigration, and advancements in Science and technology, patterns of consumption and the new availability of goods and awareness of economic inequality brought a drive to make change traditional gender and sexual norms
Many women carried campaigns that lasted long int the past fought for equal rights
Many women became activist and targeted municipal reforms, launched campaigns and above all HIGHLIGHTED the suffrage movement
Urbanization and immigration fueled anxiety for old social mores and created tension for these old policies and so called “norms”
The unpredictability of urban spaces created opportunities for in particular female sexuality and for both male and female sexual experimentation. Along with this a spectrum of orientations and gender identities
Young women who went against social norms such as premarital sex where considered feeble minded: they lack the normal ability to make conscious decisions. Some women would even be considered clinically insane rather than them making a decision willingly
Woman fashion changed as well by loosing physical constraints like corsets and ad hemlines rose (Length of dresses)
While many women fought for equality others worked to uplift each other. Women’s work against alcohol increased the temperance into one of the prominent moral reforms of the period
Middle class typically protestant women dislike alcohol because of their feminine virtues,Christina sentiment and protective role in the family and home.
Jane Adams and settlement house workers sought to include a middle class education on immigrant and working class women through the establishment of settlement homes
Other reformers shared a “scientific motherhood”-> the science of hygiene was deployed as a method of to both uplift and moralize particularly of working class and immigrant women
Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s shorty story “The Yellow Wallpaper” challenged the social role of women and she criticized( the Victorian psychological remedies: the ways doctors practice therapy)
While women are working towards equality man are worrying about their masculinity and their role in society neurologist George Bared even coined a medical term “neurasthenia” for a new emasculated condition that was marked by depression,indigestion,hypochondria and extreme nervousness
Churches worried that women would influence the church and change the image of Jesus as a strong carpenter to a mushy and sweetly woman like man this was said by Walter Rauschenbusch
Muscular Christianity sought out to strengthen young man. churches even created gymnasiums to strengthen their boys. Young Men Christian Associations who coined the term bodybuilding and other invented the sports of basketball and volleyball. These organization were built to strengthen young man.
I think it’s to increase there’s ego or “Masculinity”
Muscular Christianity was about even more than building strong bodies and minds
Age men were encouraged to embrace a particular vision of masculinity connected with rising tides of nationalism,militarism and imperialism
During the Spanish American War in 1898 Teddy Roosevelt and his Rough riders idealized the image of a tall,strong, vile, and fit American
Roosevelt and others believed this image of masculinity would preserve the American Race’s superiority against foreign foes and the effeminizing effects of civilization
Luna Park one of the original amusement parks on Brooklyn’s famous Coney Island Attracted Amusement Hungry Americans
Between 1880 ans 1920 Vaudevillla featured comedians,musicians,actors,juggler and other talents that could captivate an audience
Vaudeville was considered a family friendly entertainment even though the made racist jokes on African American and immigrants
The renowned Palace theatre in New York City signaled true stardom for many performers Charlie Chaplin and Magician Harry Houdini made names for themselves on the Vaudeville circuit
Edison pioneered two technologies the Phonograph and motion pictures. It revolutionized the world. it became a device for music and other factors
Edison thought it was going to be used for dictation,recording audio letter,preserving speeches and dying words of great men, producing talking clocks, or teaching elocution
By the turn of the century American were purchasing phonographs for home use
Phonograph parlors were places where people could pay a nickle to heard a piece or music
Edison decided in 1888 to develop an instrument which does for the eye what the phonograph does for the ear
The inventions are called a kinetograph and a viewer a kinetoscope. Many entertainers purchased this device all over the world. It drew many from arcades to movie theaters.
Most of the content that was displayed was boxing,baseball, and even Indian dances. The content only last for a couple of minuets
Designers of the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago built the White City in a neoclassical
This type of style for the buildings, walkways, and landscapes brought more than 27 million people to Chicago helping to establish the ideology of American exceptionalism
After enduring four bloody years of warfare and a strained, decade long effect to reconstruct the defeated South, the United States abandoned itself to industrial development. Businesses expanded in scale and scope.
during this time the US started to change socially. Industrialization took over. The South Jim Crow Laws decreased the US started to change and create more opportunities
Spellling error. In 2nd part of sentence, ‘ Rose Cohen was born in Russia in 1880 as Rahel Golub. She immigrated to the United States in 1892 and lived in a Russian Jewish neighborhood in New York’s Lower East Side. Her, she writes about her encounter with the world outside of her ethnic neighborhood.’. It should be ‘Here’ not ‘Her’
I’ve already posted this but it seems to disappear. Anyway, it seems a bit strange that a site sponsored by Stanford seems to be snubbing the most recent work of one its most talented historians, Dr. Richard White. Although you have included the Middle Ground in Chapter 2 and It’s Your Misfortune in Chapter 17, Railroaded and The Republic for Which it Stands are essential reading for Chapters 16-18.
I feel that in this paragraph, that along with the mention of the film Birth of a Nation, that it should also be mentioned that it was the first film seen in the White House. Just to show how high up the KKK got in this country at the time.
Fixed. Thanks!
Nikola Tesla should at least be mentioned in these paragraphs. There was a long standing legal and personal rivalry between the two men. Tesla created AC current while Edison created DC current. Without Tesla’s inventions and AC electricity, we would not have Niagara Falls as a power conductor. Both AC and DC is used today depending on the electrical needs of equipment. As an immigrant and former employee to Edison, Tesla’s ideas were often overshadowed by a native-born American inventor. The naming of a car, Tesla, also prompts discussion of how the past relates to the present.
Kipling talks about his first impression of Chicago during the late 1800s and how he was “impressed with a great horror” because “there was no color in the street and no beauty.” 1889 is during a time where the Gold Rush just ended and the railroads were just built and the Railroad Acts were just put into place. The population had grown a substantial amount as well as the economy.
“Chicago embodied the triumph of American industrialization” going back to my last note this was a time, for America, of the economic boom.
Railroads specifically brought in an increasingly amount of business. This was become railroads “impelled the creation of uniform time zones across the country, gave industrialists access to remote markets, and opened the American West. At the time railroads were the nation’s largest business.
Totally, we see that in the first paragraph, Chicago is a really busy city now, so I can only imagine how busy it was back then and it is one of the reason it was described as HUGE WILDERNESS.
[In 1850, Chicago had a population of about thirty thousand. Twenty years later, it had three hundred thousand. Nothing could stop the city’s growth. The Great Chicago Fire leveled 3.5 square miles and left a third of its residents homeless in 1871, but the city quickly recovered and resumed its spectacular growth. By the turn of the twentieth century, the city was home to 1.7 million people.]
Chicago kept growing constantly and rapidly that they eventually started to call it “The Great Chicago”. Nothing could stop the city growth, by the turn of the 20th century, the city was home to 1.7 million people which is just unimagenable for back in the 200th century
In the 1900, nearly 80 percent of Chicago’s population was either foreign-born or the foreign-born immigrants because many other American industrial cities was also an immigrant cities and most newcomers came from Germany,Italy, Hungarians etc.
The final destruction of independent farming, breakthrough technologies, environmental destruction created a new America. This is a real example of something good always comes out of something bad and there is a reason for everything.
[ Hundreds of millions of acres of land and millions of dollars’ worth of government bonds were freely given to build the great transcontinental railroads and the innumerable trunk lines that quickly annihilated the vast geographic barriers that had so long sheltered American cities from one another.]
The fact that the government were able to give that much amount of money is new and beyond me.
Factory work became a source of income for many wage earners for the moment till they could start up their own small business.
What does it mean that the food production and consumption was utterly nationalized.
End famine and pauperism and all for $5-$6 per machine? That really is a joke, because it is so cheap.Well maybe not back then.
Edison exhibited his system of power generation and electrical light for reporters and investors by selling generators to businesses?
I have no doubt about electricity revolutionizing the world, it revolutinizes our world now, because without electricity we would not be able to progress.
Like now? where we all mostly struggle to make ends meet by working a 9-5, paying bills, etc, which change the American culture.
It is good that businesses still expanded in scale and scope despite everything, labor of nature also shifted, the populations also continued to increase. Although consumers lost themselves in new goods and technologies.
Edison found a whole lot of use for technologies, especially the greatest use which is the field of mass entertainment which was already in use especially in so-called phonograph parlors where customers paid to hear a piece of music.
I do not see how Believing that a strong , fit, tall and vile American Roosevelt actually had anything to do with the things he was capable of, all those things did not prove strength.
“Many feared that the feminized church had feminized Christ himself”, which is kind of ignorant, but I guess they did not know any better. The gender of God is not certain, yet most people these days believe he is a man and i also agree with Adrian, Yes women can be sweet and have that mother lovey dovey aspect to them but we are also super strong. Stronger than we let on, so maybe it won’t be all bad if a woman was god.
Being a tough woman or a woman in general always brings a sense of insecurity out of men, to the point that they feel like it was affecting the American manhood.
The fact that women had to fight for everything they rightfully deserved was astonishing. Women probably had to protest of alcohol because they say the ugly side of it in men.
There was not much of difference between capitalism and religion. They had to question wat tainted money is/ was, also question what obligations did wealth bring? Once those type of questions are being asked then there is definitely a problem.
Agriculture was one easy to become wealthy back then, but seeing that people in that line of business were still poor/ lived in poverty is shocking.
The boosters campaiging was very much needed and right, they argued that the construction of new hard-surfaced roads as well as improved roads would further increase the flow of goods and people and also entice northern businesses to relocate to the region.
Right? That would definitely have been helpful.
Good thing the Jim Crow law was legalized, Southern states and municipalities enforced racial segregation in public places and private lives. Soon the daily parts of people’s lives became segregated.
Oh wow, lynching was not just about murder, it was ritual with symbolism?. That is new to me.
Mutilation seems a bit much, that is so hurtful. Georgia first off sounds like a woman’s name, him killing his white employer and raping the man’s wife is so drastic. Was he Black American/African.
True, I had to look it up lol
How did Los Angeles become a model for the suburban living and urban spaces?
I wholeheartedly agree.
I totally agree. We also saw in the other book we read how railroad became a source of income for the people in Chicago. They were able to transfer cattles from one city to another, slaughter and process, then ship to New York city to sell.
I see what you mean.
A New South was very much needed. because of the havoc on the southern economy and crippled southern prestige.
I do not see how lynching was something that was needed, that is justyfing blood on your hands which there is no right way to go about it.
Now the blacks were not safe, they were limited to voting since reconstruction and were being oppressed by the whites. I mean having to pass a test to be able to chose a leader that could affect anyone long term.
They looked outward for ‘support’ like they did not have enough support? They even went as far as opening up a civic religion known as “Lose cause” which sounds about right.
The New south provided more means of employment which was seen as a good opportunity for the poor rural who could no longer sustain themselves through subsistence farming.
They were right to mistrust him, wealthy people, well most of them have their bias side, they should not be fully trusted, most of them look out for themselves.
In your words, many women became activist , I am not sure it was not because they wanted to, but because of the things they were subjected to. They had to fight for equal rights, they targeted municipal reforms, launched labor rights campaigns, and above all, bolstered the suffrage movement. They really could not catch a break.
It sort of also served as a means of income. It drew many arcades to movie theaters, also a mean of entertainment.
They at least seem to be like-minded, with such cultures and languages. 80 percent seemed to be a great number.
[In 1850, Chicago had a population of about thirty thousand. Twenty years later, it had three hundred thousand. ] Says a lot about how Chicago embodied the triumph of American Industrialization. They continued to develop and grow, from people from all walks of life, from the countryside, towns, and cities.
Maybe what we always see as bad or not so good, is another way of God closing the doors, to open bigger ones. If not for trial and error, we would not have gotten to where we are today.
Sounds hideous, but the story was a joke. Maybe they were wishfully thinking of no more hard labor. And that maybe, it was something they could afford.
[In September 1878, Edison announced a new and ambitious line of research and development—electric power and lighting. The scientific principles behind dynamos and electric motors—the conversion of mechanical energy to electrical power, and vice versa—were long known, but Edison applied the age’s bureaucratic and commercial ethos to the problem.]
Edison was a very smart man, and even smarter to invite others that were like-minded to all, put their heads together, and come up with brilliant ideas and inventions.
[ Much of that urban growth came from the millions of immigrants pouring into the nation. Between 1870 and 1920, over twenty-five million immigrants arrived in the United States.] America’s population grew quite substantially, with the help of urban and being in an urban area ourselves. Demands for labor were great and life appear to be quite different from those who are now in much need of our help. They found solutions than,m why not now?
New to me too, so sad that others would go out of their way to participate in such acts.Thousands of participants.
Supposedly, at the time they did not know that it not only affected African Americans but others too. Let’s make America great again! Just saying!
so much for the reliving and reminder of the past, much was still gloated and continued, just in other ways of needs.
Newfound physical freedom, let freedom ring. I wonder was it that it wasn’t only people of color or the minority.
By the turn of the century, two technologies pioneered by Edison—the phonograph and motion pictures—stood ready to revolutionize leisure and help create the mass entertainment culture of the twentieth century. ]
Little did he know, that those technologies are still being used today. What an incredible invention. Today, reliable devices are going above and beyond. See this is just another example of how the past history of others, or a map for our today.
10. Religion and Reform (71 comments)
Mormon should be changed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This was and still is the real name of the religion.
Spelling correction: runaway
honestly taught me nothing, horrible website, never to be used again. #disapointing
This is a very shallow summary of the life of Joseph Smith and the impact he had on religion in America.
A few clarifications—the rites he instituted in the temples were not “secret” as it says. They were held very sacred to members of the church, and were not to be shared outside the temple because of its sacredness.
When this mentions polygamy, it mentions nothing about why it was instituted among members of this church —the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (not the “Mormon Church”). Polygamy was very distasteful to most members of the church. They were only willing to participate in it because they believed it was a commandment that god restored once again—a commandment which he had given to many other biblical prophets. Joseph Smith never claimed ownership of the idea of polygamy, but that he received divine revelation and commandment from God to institute it among the people for the purpose of accelerating the growth of a righteous people. This is why they did it, not because they were experimenting sexually.
The way this paragraph is worded is mildly offensive
Also, Joseph Smith did not borrow the idea of sending out missionaries from the Methodists. He was a prophet who drew upon revelation from God, not from existing religious organizations. He also drew inspiration from the New Testament, The Book of Mormon, and from revelations given to him (since he was a prophet) which are now compiled and known as the Doctrine and Covenants.
It is Mary Lyon
NOT Mary Lyons.
Please show more respect towards The Church Of Jesus Christ of latter day saints. There are many things people say about the church that are not ture. I hope you don’t want to be like those people.
Yes the churches name never started as the name mormon.
Please add at the end of this paragraph that polygamy is NOT practiced by Mormons anymore. It is widely misunderstood that past polygamy practices by Joseph Smith and his followers are still popular today, when they are not. It is actually forbidden in Mormonism. It is specifically stated in the Mormon document “Family: A Proclamation to the World” that marriage shall only be between one man and one woman.
Thank you for this, Tyler. I strongly agree. I think this paragraph was offensive, and it made it seem that polygamy is still being practiced by Mormons today. Many people nowadays have the misconception that it is, when it is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN against. You are right about Joseph Smith. He was confused and lost before he went into the forest and received revelation from God. The Godhead gave him the knowledge that he needed, which he used to found Mormonism.
Please include in this that polygamy was not practiced by Joseph Smith or any other member of the Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints for SEXUAL REASONS. Polygamy was only practiced by said members in order to help and provide for sisters in need. ALSO, as asked by current prophet Russell M. Nelson, it is asked that Mormons be referred to as “Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” because, we are christians and do not worship Mormon.
“Many of these different types of response”
CHANGE TO: “Many of these different types of responseS”
or “Many of these different responses”
–> Add and -S to “response”
Voluntarily Benevolent
Voluntary should be an adverb –>
BTW, I’m a big fan of the textbook and all. I use it for school. Do you have a merch shop online? If not, I highly recommend that you should open one.
“Increasingly, for example, abolitionists aided runaway slaves established international antislavery networks to pressure the United States to abolish slavery.”
Should be an “and” in between slaves and established? Or somehow indicate they’re two different things.
Mary Lyon! Lyon not Lyons! Anyone who visited Mount Holyoke will know this.
Hello to another historian product of Mount Holyoke?!
In addition to the others’ points, I would like to add that most early members did not have multiple wives. If they did, they usually only had one extra wife and that was because the church asked them to take another. Also, the people who had lots of wives did not necessarily consummate all of their marriages, they only had children with a fraction of their wives. The other marriages were for caretaking.
Also, the others have said this, but please add something in here about the fact that plural marriage has been discontinued for over a century in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which does not include the split-off sects, which are not part of the Church. This text seems to imply that plural marriage still continues in the Church, which it most certainly does not. I should know since I’m a member.
Lastly, in the following paragraph, the term “sexual experiments” is insulting, designating 1800s Latter-day Saint plural marriage as a sexual experiment when it required immense sacrifices that very few, if any, of us will ever understand. The emotional, mental, physical, and financial stress of caring for so many family members is likely impossible for the average modern American to understand.
Please view and address the comments for paragraph 14.
I think it would be more accurate to say “human decisions” here rather than “human action.” Methodists, Baptists, and most other Protestant groups emphasized the role of belief, not behavior, in salvation (though behavior was seen as a product of belief) — the conversion experience or moment of commitment was prioritized over actions.
“Mormon” is a nickname created by the public for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. In recent years they have reinforced their correct name to the public and I think that it would be wise and respectful to change from “Mormon” to their full name.
I agree to what everyone else has said. Please make it correct as other forms are VERY DISRESPECTFUL to us and our beliefs.
At the end of the paragraph it is mentioned that “in their understanding resort lost” BUT IT IS TRUE. Please do not assume we are wrong. it is rude and does not belong in a history book
ALSO JOSEPH SMITH was a Prophet, but he is not the FOUNDER of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Jesus Christ is. That is why we ask to be called by the true name of our church and not a nickname given to us originally by those who persecuted us. Thank you.
Worship in the temple is not secret, but rather sacred. Please do not make it seem like we are a cult. We are not
Again, as stated, ‘sexual experiments’ is DISRESPECTFUL AND DEMEANING. Please do not refer to something you don’t understand as such. We did not use Polygamy for that purpose. Just like Abraham in the Old Testament did not. Please make this correction.
The last sentence of this paragraph has a typo. explained that the residents of this area had experienced so many revivals by different religious groups that that there were no more souls to awaken to the fire of spiritual conversion
The term “Mormon” began as a derogatory term for members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. While in the past it has been embraced for convenience, yet does it detract in an unfair way to the beliefs of those people, namely that they are Christians attempting to worship in a way that the surrounding culture opposed, primarily for reasons such as enabling blacks and women to hold positions of authority.
I will get right on that.
facts
Hola, please mention Maria Stewart, she started the woman’s rights movement by giving a speech to abolitionists 15 years prior to the Seneca Falls Movement.
Include a beginning about Maria Stewart. She was a very important woman to begin the women’s movement and her speech was very influential. Also, Nannie Helen Burroughs should be discussed in her efforts to spread the movement by way of literature and publishing articles.
Add information on Maria Stewart
— First woman to speak to audience of male + female and multiracial audience
— Advocated for universal rights – all races + genders
Add information on Mary Church Terrell
— One of the first African American women to earn college degree
— One of the founders and first president of National Association of Colored Women
American Yawp, it is imperative that you add more women of color to this paragraph in the women’s right section. One great example is Mary Ann Shadd Cary, she dedicated her life to women’s rights, was one of the first female black lawyers in the country and was a safe house for many run-away slaves. Please consider adding her to this section.
During the time of women’s suffrage there were many prominent African-American women speakers that should be mentioned. Mariah Stewart did an important speech in front of a group of mostly men, justifying that the democracy in America cannot be truly democratic without giving all people the right to vote. Whether they are of a different race or gender. Another woman worth mentioning would be Frances Ellen Watkins Harper who was one of the few African-American women to attend suffrage meetings from 1854-1890. She was also a poet and writer who focused primarily on the rights of women.
There should be more Black women mentioned in this paragraph. Women like Maria Stewart and Mary Ann Shadd Cary were Black women who advocated for both womens’ rights and Black rights. Maria Stewart was the first woman to give a public lecture to both men and women, and she advocated for tying the two causes together in order to make more progress. Mary Ann Shadd Cary was an abolitionist who published an antislavery newspaper and was one of the first Black women to become a lawyer, with a degree from Harvard Law.
When addressing the 19th-century women’s rights movement it is important to include black women’s impact. Many textbooks fail to mention many of the roles African American women played in the women’s rights movement. A couple of important women you could include are Mary Church Terell and Maria Stewart. Mary Church Terell advocated for black women’s rights and was the first African American woman to earn a college degree. Maria Stewart spoke to abolitionists(both men and women) about gender inequalities and the important roles women could play in society if given the opportunities and if America was able to move past their prejudices.
Mariah Stewart was the first American woman to speak in front of a group of both men and women and was an important part of the women’s rights movement and should be included in this section. Mary Church Terrell is another important figure of the women’s rights movement who should be added to this text. She was one of the first African American women to earn a college degree. She also helped found the National Association of Colored Women and served as their first president.
Hello American Yawp, love your work, but it is truly important that you include the notable women of color that added to the suffrage movement. Maria Stewart was actually the first woman to speak at a formal public lecture in front of both men and women. Nannie Helen Burroughs was also an important figure in the movement; she established the National Association of Colored Women in 1896 and the National Training School for Women and Girls in 1909.
I feel this section could be improved significantly if it included more African-American women who were often overlooked. They were instrumental in bridging the gap between the suffragist and abolitionist movements, creating an idea of unified equality. In particular, you should consider Maria Stewart, who was the first woman to address woman and men in a formal public lecture, and Mary Ann Shadd Cary, who was one of the first black female lawyers and was heavily involved in both the abolitionist and women’s rights movements.
Thank you.
In this section, the textbook would benefit from including the story of Maria Stewart. In 1832 she delivered the first lecture by a woman to both men and women, comparing the plight of women and the plight of African-Americans.
Additionally, this section should include Frances Ellen Watkins Harper. She was one of the very few African-American women to regularly attend civil rights conferences and meetings for almost 40 years. She also was a popular write of both poetry and prose.
I believe two African American women should be included in this chapter, as they played integral roles in furthering the women’s movement. The first is Mariah Stewart, who should be included because of her efforts to pave the way in advocating for women’s rights. Fifteen years before the Seneca Falls, Stewart was the first woman to address a group of men in a formal public lesson (Boston, 1832 at an abolitionist convention). She capitalized on her audiences’ sympathy for victims of injustice and influenced them to broaden their activism to that of women and their rights. Another African American woman who should be included is Daisy Elizabeth Adams Lampkin, an organizer who hosted local suffragette meetings in the Pittsburgh area. She also organized black women to engage in consumer groups and became the president of the Lucy Stone Woman Suffrage League.
When presenting this section of women’s rights history it’s important to remember the role women of color played. Maria Stewart and Mary Ann Shadd Cary were groundbreakers in women’s suffrage. Stewart was the first person to address a crowd of women and men while she addressed the issue of inequality for both women and people of color. This was before the Senaca Convention which means she should be put in our history books as a leader in the movement. Cary additionally made revolutionary impacts. She founded an antislavery newspaper in Canada as well as lecturing around the country and at schools on women’s rights issues. She went on to be one of the first women of color to become a lawyer in the country.
I find this segment to be a great introduction to the topic, but it overshadows many of the efforts of African American women like Mary Ann Shadd Cary (1823) and Frances Ellen Warkins Harper (1825) whose efforts in abolition and publications were certainly to the benefit of the movement, such as Cary’s newspaper articles or Harper’s protest poetry. Not only this, but these women (many of whom went on to higher education) also played instrumental roles in the founding of deeply influential organizations like the National Association of Colored Women, as well as Nannie Helen Borough’s founding of the National Training School for Women and Girls. Their roles in the juxtaposition of the abolitionist and suffragist movements’ oversight of black women are deeply influential and truly ought to be taken notice of.
This isn’t a comprehensive enough list of feminists at the time. Mariah Stewart was an incredibly important figure in both the abolitionist and feminist movements. She was the first woman in American history to officially speak in front of a crowd of both men and women. She played a huge role in uniting the two movements she was a part of in to one cause, universal suffrage. Also include other significant Black women, like Mary Church Terrell (one of the frist black women to graduate college in America), and Francis Harper (a popularizer of African American protest poetry).
In this selection discussing women’s rights history, it is important to include information about women of color and the role that they played. Maria Stewart, the first African American woman to publicly deliver a lecture to a multi-racial audience of both men and women discussing gender issues deserves to be recognized. She addressed and advocated for not only for the women’s rights movement, but also the abolitionist movement, and was the first to combine the ideas of the two movements together. Additionally, Nannie Helen Burroughs also deserves recognition. She empowered many women through sharing articles, and established the National Association of Colored Women and the National Training School for Women & Girls in Washington DC. Both of these African American women played key roles in the early women’s rights movement, and deserve acknowledgment.
White women were not the only ones who participated in the womens right movement. There were several African-American women who also were very involved but are often overlooked or discredited for their work as they were seen as minorities. However, women like Maria Stewart and Mary Ann Shadd were just two of many women to be involved. Maria Stewart was the first woman to present a speech in front of both men and women which addressed the inequalities of women and women of color. Mary Ann Shadd was known for being an anti-slavery activist, as well as one of the first women of color to attend law school.
This text should add the work of many African American women that did their fair share in the women’s rights movement. Two of which are Mariah Stewart and Mary Church Terrell. Mariah Stewart addressed an abolitionist party years before the Seneca convention. She tied women into the fight for civil rights. Mariah Stewart brought up equal opportunity before Susan B. Anthony of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and she should be recognized for that. Mary Church Terrell founded and was the president of the National Association of Colored women. Terrell also did a lot of civil rights work. These women along with many others should be recognized in this textbook for the work that they did.
I believe information about Mariah Stewart would be helpful to include here, because it provides a key connection between the women’s rights and abolitionist movements of the time. In 1832, she became the first woman to give a lecture in front of an audience of men and women, where she compared the social problems that both women and slaves faced.
African-American women’s role in the suffrage movement isn’t sufficiently represented in this section. Maria Stewart, an integral figure in the movement, was one of the first advocates for the unification of the abolitionist and suffrage movements, as they had similar goals. Others, such as Mary Ann Shadd Cary, worked by spreading both suffrage and abolitionist ideas through newspapers, and eventually, public education after the Civil War. These activists have been overshadowed by white women due to the 1869 split in the AERA (American Equal Rights Association) between the leaders in the women’s rights movement and the abolitionist movement after the 15th amendment was ratified.
Please consider adding more revolutionary African-American women such as Maria Stewart who gave speeches on the importance of not just female, but racial equality to crowds of different races and genders. Another possible add could be Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, an overlooked African-American writer and poet who discussed women’s suffrage. Thank you.
Throughout the women’s suffrage there were many significant African-American women advocates that should be mentioned in this paragraph. They had a notable impact in the women’s rights movement, and deserve the same historical recognition as the white women of America. For example, Mary Church Terrell and Frances Ellen Watkins Harper were one of the few African-Americans who were prominent participants in the moment. However, they are not mentioned in this article meant to cover the women involved and the overall women’s rights movement. To properly educate the American students, black women must be recognized and honored the same.
Though this section presents some informative details, when communicating this information it does appear to show the white woman’s curated view of the movement, rather than all of the other, perhaps less glamorous perspectives and roles in it. By this, I mean that it does not include some aspects like the role played by black women it the movements – both the important roles that many of them played like Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, who was one of the few (key word: few) African American women to be present at many of the conferences which discussed the issues of women’s rights but also how often these black women were not included center stage in these topics, with control mainly being taken over by white women and black men when the fight for women’s rights coincided with the abolitionists. I also feel that an important addition to this section would be details on the AERA (American Equal Rights Association), specifically its division following 15th amendment where Stanton and Anthony immediately went back upon their previous work and ideas to criticize the right for black men to vote before white women as the men were not as educated, etc. Both of these ideas, I feel, are just as important aspects of this movement given that they show another side to politics that is often overlooked, and also shows that these early defining actions were not always what they seemed to be.
TLDR – Add details about specific black women into this section, as well as the roles they played, or were not allowed to play. Also add details about AERA and Stanton and Anthony’s roles in its split, as it adds another level of characterization to the movement that is important to be shown.
This paragraph should highlight the relationship between the Women’s Rights Movement and the Abolitionist Movement. When Elizabeth Cady Stanton pushed for women’s right to vote, she was supported by notable abolitionist, Fredrick Douglass. He believed liberty had no extent and both African Americans and women deserved the right to legal freedom. When African Americans called for an end to their enslavement and for basic human rights, suffragette Lucretia Mott spoke out and wrote “I have no idea of submitting Tamely to injustice inflicted either on me or on the slave. I will oppose it with all the moral powers with which I am endowed.” Even though a majority of people on either side that didn’t support the other, there were multiple people who showed their support for both the Women’s Rights Movement and the Abolitionist Movement.
In this section you should consider adding Maria Stewart with her involvement as a pro abolitionist speaker, being the first African American woman to give a lecture in front of a multi-racial audience. I would also like you to consider adding Mary Church Terrell as she helped to found the National Associated of Colored Women where she served as their first president.
Although this paragraph may represent some Women’s Rights activists at the time, there are none that represent any African American women, who played a very prominent role within the women’s suffrage movement, such as Maria Stewart, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony co-authored the book titled History of Woman Suffrage in the 1880’s, in which they detailed how many white suffragists would ignore African American’s within the movement. Other’s like Mary Ann Shadd Cary would both support and work against the 15th amendment, as although it took the steps toward equality for all, it did not include women within the amendment.
Frances Ellen Watkins Harper is a great example of a black woman that could be used to display female education and it involvement in the women’s rights movement.
Daisy Elizabeth Adams Lampkin dedicated her life to supporting women’s and civil rights. She would be a great addition to this text because of her experiences as a black woman and her fight for her own rights and the rights of other black women.
I think that Maria Stewart should be added in this section when talking about women’s rights and the antislavery movement. She was the first African American woman to give a lecture to a group of people of multiple different ethnicities and sexes. Another woman that should be added should be Mary Church Terrell as she had done a lot to further the antislavery movement such as partially founding the National Association of Colored Women.
This paragraph would be a convenient place to add details about prominent African-American suffragists. While they are often overlooked by modern textbooks, they made notably important advances in the movement and left a lasting mark on history. For example, Frances Ellen Watkins Harper was an early leader for the abolitionist and women’s suffrage movements. She became a well-known author, and her writings helped popularize African-American protest poetry. Another African-American suffragist-abolitionist who would be a valuable inclusion is Mary Ann Shadd Cary. In 1850, she published an anti-slavery newspaper in Canada. She later became a public school teacher in Washington, DC and began giving public lectures promoting women’s suffrage. She even became one of the first African-American female lawyers in America later in her life.
More focus on Natives instead of Mr. President – ex. Trail of Tears
Although Sojourner Truth is mentioned, this paragraph is disproportionately centered around the white women of the suffrage movement. The history of women’s suffrage is incomplete without the mention of the women of color who helped shape it. To round out this paragraph, mention a few more women of color such as Frances Ellen Watkins Harper who was one of the first and few African American women at conferences about women’s suffrage from 1854-1890. She’s also a poet who’s work focused on slavery, gender, and racial discrimination and helped popularize African American protest poetry.
Mariah Stewart should be someone that is added to the reading seen as she was the first that addressed men and women before other women did during the time. Another woman that should be added is Frances Ellen Watkins Harper because she was a poet and writer that wrote about women’s suffrage.
I believe you should mention more infromation about the roles of black women in these movements, who are repeatedly underrepresented. Perhaps infromation on Mary Ann Shadd Cary, Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, Mary Church Terrell, Nannie Helen Burroughs, and Daisy Elizabeth Adams Lampkin, all strong black women that advocated for women’s rights and the women sufferage movement.
American Yawp, please include Mary Ann Shadd Cary, an African American whose parents were deeply immersed in the fight for equality. After being freed by the passing of the fugitive slave act. She became an educator in Washington D.C., she would commonly lecture on women rights. She was very well educated, graduating from Howard University, class of 1883 and she was on of the first black female lawyers.
Though the American Yawp does a good job of giving credit to the African American women who laid the foundation for feminism. The Authors of Yawp left out some key names who played a major role in the suffrage movements. For example, Nannie Helen Burroughs devoted her entire life to empowering black women in the 19th century. Burroughs helped establish the National Association of Colored Women in 1896. She also founded the National Training School for women and girls in Washington, DC in 1909.
Recommended Reading duplicated.
I think another important component of the women’s suffrage movement, that should be highlighted in the American YAWP, was the American Equal Rights Association. Founded as a fusion between the abolitionist movement and the women’s suffrage movement, it combined the ideologies of both to create a newfound purpose – enfranchising not only African Americans but women as well. Led by advocates such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B Anthony, and Frederick Douglass, it shifted the purpose of reform to include women in all the same rights that men had.
-you and less than 2% of Americans feel that way
Book of Mormon was a great live at Broadway!
OMG who the fuck cares at least it’s not more reading to do
Polygamy is gross
19. American Empire (67 comments)
Mahan was arguably the most influential American strategist of the 19th and early 20th Centuries. It would be helpful to include a selection from his work, “The Influence of Sea Power upon History” in the primary sources for this chapter.
This paragraph basically reproduces the content of paragraph 39.
“For instance” used twice in close proximity. Consider revision.
Perhaps: “In spite of their christian motivations, some Missionaries worked alongside business interests. American missionaries in Hawai’i, for example, obtained large tracts of land on which they started lucrative sugar plantations.”
I think the topic of Hawaiian annexation needs to be addressed with more detail. Sanford B. Dole, King Kalākaua, The Bayonet Constitution, Queen Liliuokalani and other details deserve to be discussed.
The separation of Panama from Colombia took place in 1903, not 1901.
Could put the time period of when the chapter takes place in the introduction. Ex: 1990 – 2000
Please consider adding more information about Puerto Rico. In this and most other history books, it is simply listed along with Guam and the Philippines as the spoils of the War of 1898. It ignores the fact that unlike the Philippines, Puerto Rico has remained connected to the United States, with a proscribed citizenship since 1917. The US-PR relationship has left the island in limbo since the Insular Cases defined as being “foreign in a domestic sense,” and it faces the same problem in academic history. It is neither claimed by Latin Americanists, nor by United States historians. It is time to acknowledge the intrinsic connection between the US and PR, its imperial nature, and its catastrophic consequences.
I HATE this picture! Just tired of constantly having to see this!!!!!
Caption is misleading (or just wrong): Although Philippines, Porto Rico (i.e. Puerto Rico) and Cuba had been controlled by Spain, Hawaii and the Isthmus of Panama had not been. Hawaii was an independent country before annexation and the isthmus was part of Colombia and we intervened so that Panama could be independent of Colombia (but beholdened to the US). The date of the cartoon, 4/26/1914, places it shortly after the completion of the Panama Canal on 4/1/914.
Navy And Military titles are supposed to be capitalized.
All branches of military are to be capitalized.
I agree that more on Puerto Rico. My students get a lot out of the Philippines information and documents. I would love to see similar inclusions for Puerto Rico, either here or in a later chapter.
It seems somewhat relevant that the US ambassador to Mexico before Woodrow Wilson came in office was a supporter of Huerta/tacitly encouraging Madero’s removal due in part to Madero refusing to listen to US orders.
[the United States expanded on a long history of exploration, trade, and cultural exchange to practice something that looked remarkably like empire. ]
… and provided nitrogen compounds that were required to manufacture explosives for military and industrial uses.
. . . had a competent but lackadaisical managerial style that allowed Roosevelt a great deal of freedom, which he used to network with such luminaries . . .
Eliminating the repeated use of “Roosevelt” hear makes the sentence smoother and easier to read.
Hello,
Just noticed a typo here: should read, “Expansionism” (vs. Expanionism).
Best,
Nanosh
This would be a good spot to drop in information about the Platt Amendment.
If not in section III, then this would be the place to drop in the Platt Amendment. It’s pretty standard history for the post-War of 1898 Cuba.
A document from the Congressional inquiry on how the Filipino-American War was conducted would be a nice addition here.
It feels like a massive oversight or lie by omission to discuss the impact of American trade with Asia without mentioning Perry’s gunboat diplomacy in Japan during 1853. It’s an explicit example of the fusion of American trading policy and American military power and it’s completely on topic for the idea of the roots of America as an empire. Please consider adding this topic to the text.
Updated during previous edits. Thanks!
Fixed in text in summer of 2021. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Updated in text during earlier edits. Thanks!
Great suggestion! We’ll consider that when we next update the reader.
No place to comment on
African Americans Debate Enlistment (1898)
But a spelling error in the introduction: HARTFORD
“Here, the Indianapolis Freeman reports on recruiting efforts in Hartfod, Connecticut.”
fff
Empire does conjure the thought of Rome, Persian Empire and the British Empire combined, they do also take forms and imperial processes which can also occur in many contexts. I would want to believe the United States did completley win its independence to an exent.
Makes me wonder is it to have another sources of income after gaining their independence?
Did the American trade affect that of the Asian trade? If not, why did it remain comparatively small and yet it was their idea?
What other travelers travelled in the Pacific. aside from the Americans.?
Why Latin America? I guess they entered with an aggressive attitude because that was best for them?
[But in 1910 the Mexican people revolted against Díaz, ending his authoritarian regime but also his friendliness toward the business interests of the United States. In the midst of the terrible]
Why? Why did the Mexican people revolt against Diaz? It was relevant that United States Ambassador put pressure on Wilson for Mexico’s new regime.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 When Mexican forces mistakenly arrested American sailors in the port city of Tampico in April 1914, Wilson saw the opportunity to apply additional pressure on Huerta. Huerta refused to make amends, and Wilson therefore asked Congress for authority to use force against Mexico.]
Seems like Wilson saw an excuse or reason to apply more pressure on Huerta, but he stood his ground, which was a good thing to do because he eventually took back his power.
What is the meaning of satirical travelogue?
[These new conflicts and ensuing territorial problems forced Americans to confront the ideological elements of imperialism. Should the United States act as an empire? Or were foreign interventions and the taking of territory antithetical to its founding democratic ideals? What exactly would be the relationship bet]
Maybe the new conflicts that happened were for the best, they forced Americans to confront the ideological elements of imperialism.
I wonder why things did not work out for Cuba, why they could not gain their independence from Spain. They had to leave, living in certain cities to relocate to military camps.
[ Then, on the evening of February 15, a titanic explosion tore open the ship and sent it to the bottom of the ocean. Three quarters of the ship’s 354 occupants died. A naval board of inquiry immediately began an investigation to ascertain the cause of the explosion, but the]
The explosion was so horrible, a whole lot of people died, ,more than a whole lot in fact. 354 is mind blowing, I cannot even begin to phantom this, all that lives lost, all the families sadness etc and blaming the Spanish treachery is even more disapointing, with no proof or investigation.
[Roosevelt had been the assistant secretary of the navy but had resigned his position in order to see action in the war. His actions in Cuba made him a national celebrity. As disease began to eat away at American troops, the Spanish suffered the loss of Santiago de Cuba on July 17, effectively ending the war. The ]
Roosevelt seemed to have served his country faithfully, which earned him the title “national celebrity”
Haphazardly- in a manner lacking any obvious principle of organization.
All the researches / books are mostly related.
I see what you mean, I can definitely see why.
I would like to think the Americans made their choice between the Filipinos and Spanish when the American forces followed instructions of securing Malina without allowing the Philippine forces to enter the Walled city
[began in early February; and in April 1899, Congress ratified the 1898 Treaty of Paris, which concluded the Spanish-American War and gave Spain $20 million in exchange for the Philippine Islands. ((Susan K. Harris, God’s Arbiters: Americans and the]
$20 million seems little for the whole of the Philippine Islands but i am guessing back then, it was a lot
The Filipinos had to fight, it was really their only way out, just like the Cubans did and eventually worked out for them.
ImperIalism is a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through diplomacy or military force. Yes, when i heard the American was framed, I was suprised because they did rule the Philippines with imperialism.
[ For whatever reason, however, the onset or acceleration of imperialism was a controversial and landmark moment in American history. America had become a preeminent force in the world.]
I guess it came in clutch for them anyway, ruling with military force became a landmark moment in the American history, and it still is like that now.
Roosevelt led the U.S in the 196th century to the military regime, although he got things done like territorial expansion, and economic influence , it may not have been the best way to get things done or even gain the people’s respect.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 35 2 In return for Roosevelt’s support of the Republican nominee, William McKinley, in the 1896 presidential election, McKinley appointed Roosevelt as assistant secretary of the navy. The head of the department, John Long, had]
Sounds about right, appointing Roosevelt as the assistant secretary of the navy since has always valued the military force\regime. He was allowed so much freedom that he used to network with such luminaries as military theorists and naval officers etc. He wanted to expand the American’s influenc.
I totally agree.
Alfred Thayer Mahan’s theories influnced Roosevelt a great deal , hence naval could ships could engage and win decisive battles with rival fleets.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 38 0 Roosevelt insisted that the “big stick” and the persuasive power of the U.S. military could ensure U.S. hegemony over strategically important regions in the Western Hemisphere. The United States used military interv]
How sure was he though? Did he put that theory to test\
use?.
It seems like Roosevelt did not want to let Cuba go, he kept overexerting control over Cuba even after gaining their independence, he eventually came up with an alright reason on why he should still be interceding in the Latin Americans nation, and it was in other to “correct administrative and fiscal deficiencies”.
[ Roosevelt, for instance, preached that it was the “manly duty” of the United States to exercise an international police power in the Caribbean and to spread the benefits of Anglo-Saxon civilization to inferior states populated by inferior peoples. The president’s language, for instance, contrasted]
I am not aware American was a “man” or should I say is a man.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 42 0 Creditors could not force settlements of loans until they successfully lobbied their own governments to get involved and forcibly collect debts. The Roosevelt administration did not want to deny the Europeans’ ri]
Debtors were forced to pay their debts, they had to involve the government to forcibly collect debts, I hope when they say “forcibly” no one died just because they are oweing.
[Roosevelt did not necessarily advocate expansion by military force. In fact, the president insisted that in dealings with the Latin American nations, he did not seek national glory or expansion of territory and believed that war or intervention should be a last resort when resolving conflicts with problematic governments. According to Roosevelt, such actions were necessary to]
To my own understanding\, Roosevelt always has his own personal reasons for doing what he does, he stated he did not do it to seek national glory or expansion of territory and believed the war or intervention should be a last resort when resolving conflicts with problematic governments which is kind of suprising because he believes in the military force.
Margaret McLeod, made a name for herself at 21 years of age, even in a strange city such as Australia on family business and in need of income and she found just that, she was described as “pure womanhood”.
[. But in fact, U.S. imperialism, which focused as much on economic and cultural influence as on military or political power, offered a range of opportunities for white, middle-class, Christian women. ]
They created something for the purpose of the people, to serve more opourtunites for white, middle-class and Christian women. They found more use to women, they had them serve as missionaries, teachers, artist writers and medical professional which is a huge step. Women really stepped up their game.
Did many whit women think christianity was only for the less fortunate\ less priviledged than themselves. The imperialism significantly raised the stakes of women’s work, white women now had a crucial role to play in maintenance of civilization itself.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 53 0 Of course, not all women were active supporters of U.S. imperialism. Many actively opposed it. Although the most prominent public voices against imperialism were]
I was wondering if all women were into imperialism, although it favoured most of the white women I am sure it had its downside.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 55 0 For Americans at the turn of the century, imperialism and immigration were two sides of the same coin. The involvement of American women with imperialist and anti-imperialist activity demonstrates how foreign policy concerns were brought home and became, in a sense, domesticated.]
I figured that imperialism and immigration came in hand in hand and are two sides of a coin.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 57 0 Although the growing U.S. economy needed large numbers of immigrant workers for its factories and mills, many Americans reacted negatively to the arrival of so many immigrants. Nativists opposed mass immigration for various reasons. Some felt that the new arrivals were unfit for American democracy, and]
It is kind of understandable that people would be worried about Nativists moving to their economy that is already not all that perfect but it should definitely not result to a riot\ fight.
Is there anywhere that racism was not an issue, now it is to the Chinese people. How could the chin ese immigrant be associated with morally corrupting American society? Something that has already been corrupt from the get go.
[These “new immigrants” were poorer, spoke languages other than English, and were likely Catholic or Jewish. White Protestant Americans typically regarded them as inferior, and American immigration policy began to reflect more explicit prejudice than ever before. O]
They did not speak or understand English only due to the lack of learning or teaching, I am sure if they had someone teach them English, the would have picked it up effortlessly.
[Mexican and Mexican American Catholics, whether recent immigrants or incorporated into the nation after the Mexican-American War, expressed similar frustrations. Could all these different Catholics remain part of the same Church?]
I do not see why not, why can’t all these different Catholics remain part of the same church, because being from different tribe has nothing to do with religion, I believe as long as they are all serving the same God, that should not be a problem.
[They anticipated that the Catholic Church could thrive in a nation that espoused religious freedom, if only they assimilated. Meanwhile, however, more conservative clergy cautioned against assimilation.]
Old practices like what? The U.S and their constant use of military power, to exercise varying degrees of control over nations and people, whether as formal subjects or unwilling patners on the recieving end of Roosevelt’s “big stick”.
02. Colliding Cultures (58 comments)
Font size does not match the rest of the chapter. Besides this paragraph, the font size is not consistent in other parts of Sections 1-3 of Chapter 2. Please fix for readability, especially for visually impaired readers.
Puritans were stereotyped as killjoys, Puritans did not succeed. Puritans would not stay away from alcohol or sex based on their religion or life style.Puritans believe that the European church was to close to Catholicism.
I feel that you should include the term iconoclasm here as this was the name given to the abolition or ornate churches, and that the definition should be expanded upon a but to show the full breath of reforms that the Puritans were attempting to achieve.
There needs to be a section dedicated to the explorations of de Soto.
Not sure where you are getting your information from, but Oñate cut off the foot of every male above the age of 25. He enslaved everyone between the ages of 12-25.
Diseases wiped out entire civilizations
nutrient rich foods help European population
Spaniard slaughter acoma of 1500 inhabitants
Black legend – drew on religous diff, and political rivalries
Middle ground The great lakes had lots of success
Labor shortages crippled the Dutch
the puritians commited to reforming the church of england
Did they really only import eleven slaves?
Why didn’t the Spanish try to keep their discoveries to themselves to gain advantage over their competition?
if the youngs kept dying why didn’t the french try to come up with solutions and try separating themselves from giving one another diseases?
The French were able to come to terms with this new society, why couldn’t the competition do the same instead of murdering communities?
if the dutch bought into democracy, could they have gone further in their financial organizations?
The Spanish did try to control access and information as best they could, but that was a tough thing to keep secret! One key is that Spain’s Hapsburg kings also ruled much of what is now the Netherlands, Belgium, and adjacent areas of Germany. When the Protestant Reformation spread to the Spanish Netherlands, Dutch printers such as Theodore de Bry translated, illustrated, and printed Spanish accounts of the conquest in order to inform their anti-Catholic propaganda.
Maybe a quick note that Spain had a vast European empire, and fought for decades to defend its interests against the rise of Protestant powers informed these processes could go here. (The Spanish rivalry is noted).
paragraph 76–with citation for Winthrop, gives the date of 1830 for the Modell–I think you mean 1630.
HOWEVER the new book by Mark Peterson _The City-State of Boston_ totally complicates the matter. It does not appear that Winthrop delivered the talk on the Arabella–and there is no contemporaneous references to it. He MAY have delivered in in England. But it does not gain traction until the 1830s.
Regarding the lost colony of Roanoke, the word found carved in the tree was “Croatoan,” not “Croatan.”
Because of the existence of the British East India company, the text should mention that the Dutch East India company is separate to avoid confusion
[Fears of racial mixing led the Dutch to import enslaved women, enabling the formation of African Dutch families.]
ah yes the dutch fear racial mixing, so they bring in enslaved women, which enable racial mixing
it all makes sense now
[ Jean Calvin]
John Calvin*
I know Wikipedia is a reader contributed site so I’m not sure if my info is correct, either. I’m curious about your use of the word, “Hapsburgs.” Wikipedia calls it Hadsburg and says the Netherlands was in an 80 year war from 1568-1648. I’m wondering about your “officially broke away from the Hapsburgs…” statement as to its accuracy? Thank you for you input to this inquiry. Lloyd F Barb
JOHN Calvin, not Jean
Would some details about the 1680 Pueblo Revolt help students better understand how Southwest Indians contributed to the shaping of the colonial New Mexico’s identity?
Surprising lack of any reference to the first settlers of New England (the colony of Plymouth) and the parallel Separatist movement that fueled the first settlement. Should definitely include something about the Pilgrims in 1620 and their journey.
[Spain benefited most immediately as the wealth of the Aztec and Incan Empires strengthened the Spanish monarchy. ]
Seems as if
Do we know around how much gold and other valuables the Spanish took from the Aztecs? Do we know how many Aztecs died as a result of this?
As a college student and enthusiastic book-lover of all genres, this is the worst history book I have ever read. Yawp is the perfect word for it. It’s incomprehensible yodeling; American Yawp exasperates me. Despite the fact that the history of America is fascinating, this book basically collects each important name, something those people did, and the year they did it in and drops those facts onto the page in a manner that tries to sound intelligent. Where is the STORY in hiSTORY???
I am disappointed that my college chose this textbook… how do I survive a whole semester with this? Now I am going to have to double my assigned reading each week because I need something to supplement what American Yawp is refusing to give me.
More context for almost every topic mentioned in this book is needed. Please stop jumping around all over the place. And I’m begging you; please make it more memorable. Your readers need to be at least 1% interested, or the book is worthless and the information unhelpful. Historical information is already hard enough to memorize. Please don’t leave me wondering what on earth I just read after every chapter.
“Divine Wind” is invoked for Kamikazes and the old storm that saved Japan from Kublai Khan, whereas “Protestant Wind” is typically the go-to phrase for the storm that engulfed the Spanish Armada.
new empires merged
Hearing about the casualties that Onate caused was hard to read, especially about the 15 year old boys that got their foot cut off for surviving.
The paragraph on the Portuguese/Spanish is really misleading. Treaty of Tordesillas did not occur AFTER the riches from the New World started flowing to Spain. The Aztecs were not conquered until 1519. Also, the Doctrine of Discovery did not instruct Portugal and Spain to “treat the natives with Christian compassion.” Instead, the Pope said that they can do whatever they want to non-Christians: “They are to put them in perpetual slavery”. This becomes the legal argument to expand conquest and the US Court later uses this to argue that white Americans had the right to seize all indigenous lands.
I remember this in school, they taught us how spain ruled over a lot of countries especially after the European diseases wiped millions of people. Weakness was in the air.
[ Spain used its new riches to gain an advantage over other European nations, but this advantage was soon contested.]
I think they thought this was a good idea up until it actually was not.
I would have to agree with you. This is something I feel has stuck with me because Spain was so powerful over others.
This was completely the fault of the new colonizers because they brought unknown diseases to a group of people who couldn’t fight it.
I agree
That is actually insane that someone could do that to people.
I think it is insane and disgusting that people could commit such acts against each other. This was acceptable in that time and some people even encouraged it.
Why did onate even do this to the people? Was there a real reason?
I think this is probably the primary reason Spain grew so large in this time. I mean when your greatest competitors are too busy fighting themselves your free to win alone.
This is absolutely disturbing to know that they slaughtered half their population including the children.
I would have to agree with you, it’s like free game.
So the French would make profits off different trades? Or make the Huron people really convert to Christianity?
I feel as though the Dutch could have gone further , but it’s like they were almost comfortable where they stood because they had enough power so why even continue it states them being the most “advanced capitalist” in the modern world.
[The colony’s first African marriage occurred in 1641, and by 1650 there were at least five hundred African slaves in the colony.]
This is quite interesting to know. To know that exactly five hundred African American slaves were brought into the colony in little over 9 years shows how drastically things changed or developed.
In what way exactly was this helpful for them? Were they able to gain more wealth than others?
I bet this really made them a great profit. This is how wealth is pretty much formed back then.
There is evidence of an African presence before the slave trade and it’s not mentioned here. Columbus even described the color of the people here but yet it is omitted from most texts, including this one. There’s no accurate reporting of history without telling all relevant information.
At the time that the French man were traveling, would it have been important for them to emigrate if New France didn’t criminalize protestantism?
How did the head right system work, and why was it so important that a lot of new settelers join into it?
Columbian brought in foodstuff that was exchange, with that exchange it did kill the people with disease. Also helped out the Aztec and Incan Empires to get stronger. With that being said they took advantage over the European nations.
with Native Americans THAT was typical among the Spanish and English.
what does “daie” mean in this paragraph? What does one mean when they “stand all the daie?”
I agree with what every one said. Why did Mr. Onate feel he had to have all of the women and children slaughtered and the young men’s cutoff.
Caption for John White’s “Village of the Secotan” engraving/drawing is missing an end quote.
Currently shows as: John White, “Village of the Secotan, 1585.
“Indenuous” is written instead of “Indigenous.”
Having the relationships with the Native Americans made trade easier for the French. By marriage it also would have been easier to deal with trade between the French and the Native Americans.
By having a small colony in 1641 and only having 11 slaves shows the changes/expansion being placed from 1641-1650. In 1650 they at least 500 slaves in the colony.
Interesting to think that they had all these slaves and still brought more slaves into the colonies as they knew they would have resistance. I feel that any cultures were mixed together bringing in new people which would blend many cultures together and share ideas about a resistance.
Interesting to think that one item can save the state from ruin. Tobacco made the state flourish with new opportunities because of the trade for tobacco.
Trading goods is the key foundation in a new colony surviving. Having goods that people wants brings in new settlers and gives you money/resources you need to be successful. Tobacco is an example of this.
Paragraph 33: sentence 3 — In response, the colony imported eleven company-owned slaves in 1626, the same year that Minuit purchased Manhattan.
It shouldn’t be implied here that they were enslaved Africans. Please specify they were company-owned [Dutch West Indian Company] African slaves in 1826.
Thank you.
22. The New Era (51 comments)
[In 1919, the UNIA announced plans to develop a shipping company called the Black Star Line as part of a plan that pushed for blacks to reject the political system and to “return to Africa” instead.”]
I see that there is an unnecessary quotation after Africa at the end of this sentence, but please let me know if it is there on purpose.
In the 6th paragraph of the primary source, on the 4th line, the word “the” is not spelled correctly. There is also an “s” in the middle of the sentence, where it is supposed to be attached to the end of the word “it.”
Secretarty of the Navy Edwin Denby was never convicted and was never sent to jail. Please reference the Denby Family Papers in the Library of Congress Database.
This chapter does not mention anything about Native Americans becoming citizens of The United States for the first time ever.
If mentioned, please disregard.
Caption is wrong. It should be National Woman’s Party not Women’s. Plus it it is pretty poor caption. They implies ws was won by the NWP alone. What is the purpose of the tea party?
last line: an America (not American) riven
I think it would interesting to have a section on the Buck v. Bell (1927) case, as well as the eugenics movement more broadly. It’s hard to know where to put it, but my best thought is here, right after the paragraph on immigration quotas.
Eugenics always fascinates my students, especially because it was embraced by people on all sides of politics, who were in favor of all types of causes. It’s hard to decide whether it was the darkest manifestation of social Darwinism or the darkest manifestation of progressivism.
Remove the final quotation mark.
Remove the last sentence, that is 100% opinion and not history.
Did anyone ask? No. No one cares about bias. Darrow did eloquently fight for academic freedom, and you can’t do anything about it. Too bad so sad!
This paragraph would be more useful to students in Chapter 18 with maybe an extended discussion of Wanamaker’s and Macy’s. It could be substituted here in Chap. 22 by a discussion of Helen Landon Cass (“See them their dreams and you won’t have to worry about selling them goods”) and Bruce Barton/The Man Nobody Knows in order to cover an update of consumerism for the 1920s.
Nickleodeons were gone by the 1920s.
The Ku Klux Klan is still an active terrorist organisation in America that did not dissolve after any of the periods listed here. Even if this paragraph doesn’t explicitly state otherwise, I think it’s important to be clear that groups like the KKK are not relics of the past.
Fixed. Thanks!
Fixed in text during earlier updates. Thanks!
Fixed in text during earlier updates. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Fixed in the official text in an earlier update. Thanks!
An outlet for marketing, communication and ways to increase business.
In March 1921, Warren G Harding took the oath to become the 29th President of the United States with the promise of returning things to normal. Should President not be in capital letter?
There was a lot of deaths in this era, more than 115,000 American soldiers lost their lives in barely a year of fighting in Europe, then between the years 1918 and 1920, {two years} nearly seven hundred thousand Americans died in a flu epidemic that hit nearly 20 percent of the American population and that is only from the flu epidemic, which sucks a whole lot.
America was given a couple of names due to the decade so reshaped American life, some of the names are the New Era, the Jazz Age, the Age of the Flapper, the Prosperity Decade and most commonly, the Roaring Twenties, which is my favorite. Due to all the bad things that went on, many Americans turned their backs on political and economic reform, which i definitely see reasons why, they still fought hard for equal rights and cultural observers.
Harding’s presidency was not one of the best , it eventually went down in history as the most corrupt in history, but his cabinet appointees were people of true standings and answered to various American constituencies.
[ Harding took vacation in the summer of 1923 so that he could think deeply on how to deal “with my God-damned friends”—it was his friends, and not his enemies, that kept him up walking the halls at nights.]
Harding taking a vacation to clear his head/ mind is definitely a rich man’s thing lol, but it was very much needed for him, he needed to think deeply on how to deal with his “God damned friends” because I think he felt betrayed by them and alone
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 The son of a shopkeeper, Coolidge climbed the Republican ranks from city councilman to governor of Massachusetts. As president, Coolidge sought to remove the stain of scandal but otherwise continued Harding’s economic approach, refusing to take actions in defense of workers or consumers against American business. “]
Why did Coolidge decide not to step up? You would think he can relate heavily to the people or the community seeing that he is a son of a shopkeeper, he stated that he was going to the stain of scandal but he continued the Harding’s economic approach, refusing to take actions in defense of workers or consumers against American business.
In 1920,, American women, won the vote with the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, the female voters like their male counterparts had the oppourtunity to pursue many interests, worried about poverty, and domestic violence women already lent their efforts to prohibition which also went into the effect under the 18th Amendment in January 1920.
[ Hoover claimed in 1928 that America had never been closer to eliminating poverty. Much of the election, however, centered on Smith’s religion: he was a Catholic.]
Hoover was not wrong about America never being closer to eliminating poverty, but its definitely not due to lack of not trying. Most of the candidates won a little bit over the world, Hoover won in a landslide, Smith won handily in the nation’s largest cities.
Change is really our thing in America, if only we can make changes that actually benefits the society and community as a whole.
[To attract customers, department stores relied on more than variety. They also employed innovations in service (such as access to restaurants, writing rooms, and babysitting) and spectacle (such as elaborately decorated store windows, fashion shows, and interior merchandise displays). Marshall Field & Co]
All these are great ideas, access to resturants, writing rooms and babysitting, as well as designs, decorated store windows, fashion shows and interior merchandise displays all to attract customers. Marshall Field & Co was among the most successful of these ventures.
[By 1927, more than 60 percent of American automobiles were sold on credit, and installment purchasing was made available for nearly every other large consumer purchase. Spurred by access to easy credit, consumer expenditures for household appliances, for example, grew by more than 120 percent between 1919 and 1929. ]
More than 60 percent of American automobiles were sold on a credit, which is a whole lot and installment payment was available for almost every other large purchase which is a bit similar to what happens these days, there is a down payment for almost everything, houses, cars, tv’s etc.
[We would each like to be Tarzan,” he said. “At least I would; I admit it]
Tarzan like the movie? The cartoon?
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 22 0 As the automobile became more popular and more reliable, more people traveled more frequently and attempted greater distances. Women increasingly drove themselves to their own activities as well as those of their children. Vacationing Americans sped to Florida to escape northern winters. ]
The automobiles ended up a right source of transportation, no more railroads. Gave women a chance to drive themselves to their own activities as well as those of their children. The growing number of drivers, Americans came up with gas stations, diners, motels and billboards along the roadside.
[ But as filmmakers captured the middle and upper classes, they maintained working-class moviegoers by blending traditional and modern values. C]
Yeah, to be a filmmaker, you have to be able to bring two worlds together and show shows or movies of both of the world, the traditional and modern values. Theater in New York held more than six thousand patrons who could be escorted by a uniformed usher past gardens and statues to their cushioned seat which is way better than the movie theaters we have now.
Things were starting to look up and civilized, radios became available in 1920 when they boomed across the country. By 1930 around half of Americans contained a radio by 1930, radio stations brought entertainment directly into the living room through the sale of advertisments and sponsorships.
Football was another thing Americans began to discover, Red Grange carried the football with a similar recklessness helped popularize professional football was which was already in the shadow of college game.
[ Even ignoring stubbornly large rates of poverty and unparalleled levels of inequality, he could not see the weaknesses behind the decade’s economy. ]
That sounds egoistical, because dealing with poverty is such a huge thing all across the world but somehow Herbert Hoover can’t see it or he chooses not to see it. Although the new culture of consumptions promoted new insecurities as well which was well said. Overall an economy based on credit exposed the nation to a whole lot of risks.
[ Ku Klux Klan i]
Ku Klux Khan was organized by Colonel William Joseph Simmons, this new clan modeled after the fraternal organizations with elaborate rituals and a hierarchy that remained largely confined to Georgia and Alabama until 1920.
The Ku Klux Klan often recruited through fraternal organizations and through various Protestant churches. The Klan established a women’s auxiliary in 1923 headquatered in Little Rock, Arkansas. The women in KKK were based on ideology and soon had chapters in all forty-eight states, attracting women who were already part of the Prohibition movement.
[ Additionally, Darrow posed a series of unanswerable questions: Was the “great fish” that swallowed the prophet Jonah created for that specific purpose? What precisely happened astronomically when God made the sun stand still? Bryan, of course, could cite only his faith in miracles.]
Bryan used the bible to prove and defend his case, Darrow also posed a series of unanswerable questions related to the bible and basically answered them in his own beliefs also related to the bible. The case got thrown out the door out of technicality, but to his defenders he won.
Christian faith rested on literal truths for example Jesus would physically return to earth at the end of time to redeem the righteous and damn the wicked which is kind of a philosophy thing as well. Eventually they all agreed that modernism was the enemy and the Bible was sortof the truth, truth of God.
They needed the Church to adapt itself to the word of God, according to the Baptist pastor Harry Fosdick the coming of” Christ might occur, slowly but surely” it will happen.
[The number of immigrants annually admitted to the United States from each nation was restricted to 2 percent of the population who had come from that country and resided in the United States in 1890. (By pushing back three decades, past the recent waves of “new” immigrants from southern and Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Asia, the law made it extremely difficult for immigrants outside northern Europe to legally enter the United States.) ]
Why were the number of immigrants limited to only two percent of the population who had come from that country and resided in the United States in 1890. The act excluded Asians and Mexican immigrants. WHY?
1920 was a difficult time for radicals and immigrants and anything modern because it caused lots of problems for the society. Despite worldwide lobbying by radicals and a respectable movement among middle-class Italian organizations in the United States. They’ve both suffered in their word. Radicals and Italians.
Broadway presented black actors in serious roles for the first time in a long time, and the whites loved their jazz music, eager to hear more jazz the whites journeyed to Harlem’s Cotton Club and Smalls which presented a place where gays thrived which is suprising, I did not think gays were accepted back then.
The Fifth Avenue and Eighth Avenue and 130tth street to 145th street expanded to 155th street and was considered a home for mostly African Americans. It brought together a mass black people energized by race pride, military service in world war 11.
[ While gay males had to contend with increased policing of the gay lifestyle (especially later in the decade), in general they lived more openly in New York in the 1920s than they would be able to for many decades following World War II.]
I just knew there was no way Gay community would be accepted all around especially back then, the increase policing of the gay lifestyle was no news, they lived openly in New York in the 1920s than they would be for so many decades following world war 11.
[ A woman’s race, class, ethnicity, and marital status all had an impact on both the likelihood that she worked outside the home and the types of opportunities that were available to her. While there were exceptions, for many minority women, work outside the home was not a cultural statement but rather a financial necessity (or both), and physically demanding, low-paying domestic service work continued to be the most common job]
There are a lot things to determine where women could work, like race, class, ethnicity and marital status which does not seem all the way fair, all these determined if a woman would work outside the home which also demands low payment and domestic work.
[Today’s woman gets what she wants. ]
Do they really? About a decade in which images such as flapper gave women new modes of representing femininity and one in which such representations were often inaccessible to women for certain races, ages and classes.
The young, middle-class and white women were most likely to fit the ambitious image of the carefree flapper which was the most common workplace, the office. While other women that did not fit into the criteria got to work as clerks, a job that was meant to be for men.
An era of destruction and doubt brought about the world war 1, Americans seemed to like the rebel of leaders, people who seemed to break the law effotlessely.
Women almost got their power back in the 1920s.
24. World War II (50 comments)
“Comprehending Japanese motivations for attacking China and the grueling stalemate of the ensuring war are crucial for understanding Japan’s seemingly unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii”
Is the word “ensuring” supposed to be “ensuing”?
Yes it was. It’s fixed now. Thanks!
Important
Not a criticism but more a request. I didn’t see much or any mention of the lend-lease program championed by Roosevelt preceding the U.S. entry into the war. This chapter would benefit from a section on it as this was vital to Roosevelt’s attempt to bypass the rest of the country’s isolationist perspectives.
Reintroduces and re-explains material introduced in paragraph 63.
The most plausible response for the U.S. military was to bomb either the camps or the railroads leading to them
(remove the first instance of “was”)
Japanese troops surrender on June 3, 1943.
From June 5th, 1942 till May 30th, 1943, a Japanese garrison occupied the Aleutian Islands of Attu and Kiska, which are a part of Alaska. The “Battle of Attu” took place there, and that was the first and only battle to be fought on U.S. soil during WWII.
I feel like that’s a pretty important thing that is not mentioned here at all.
[conference at Dumbarton Oaks, outside Washington, D.C.]
Dumbarton Oaks is in Georgetown a part of Washington D.C.
It would be helpful to include more information on appeasement policies. I feel this issue is extremely important and a lesson we need to focus on so that we can learn for the future. It is referenced but briefly.
I feel this page would benefit from information on American Neutrality prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The Lend Lease program and the “great arsenal of democracy” while the US specifically passed bills to attempt to stay out. Our involvement in the war prior to Dec. 7th, 1941 seems to be brushed over as well as the American desire to stay out of another European war.
You’re welcome.
The United States did send aid to China in the form of groups of airmen such as the Flying Tigers.
Doesn’t mentioned that the Soviets attacked Poland from the East in addition to the German attack from the West
The casualties from the Bombing of Pearl Harbor were closer to 2,600
The “Army Air Force” wasn’t called that, it was called the Army Air Corps, and there were still air raids that were flown without fighter escort, but used a different tactic instead of flying straight to the target cities.
Also doesn’t mention the first bombing strike against the Japanese capitol a few months after Pearl Harbor, which is very important, The Doolittle Raid.
True, but this was not until after the Lend-Lease Act when the United States was already on the road to war. The flying tigers, for instance, were not formed until the summer of 1941, only a few months before the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and after the invasion of French Indochina, a point of contention between the United States and Japan.
You are welcome as well
Alan Turing is the name of the man who cracked Germany’s enigma code. Alan Turing created the Turing machine, which cracked the German’s code, which changed every 24 hours. By cracking their code, the war ended much quicker and so many lives were saved. Alan Turing’s Turing machine was actually the foundation for modern computers. He is a genius and a hero and deserves to be recognized. He is often left out of history, due to the fact that he was gay and found out. He was deemed a criminal for being a gay schoolteacher. He took his own life due to this. The queen of England pardoned him but it wasn’t until the 2000s I think. Remember the name Alan Turing because he stopped the war and saved countless lives.
“At home, Japan was driven…” not riven. Grammatical error.
Misspelling, 2nd to last sentence: should be “inflamed” not “enflamed”
May want to specify that it did NOT affect the military.
I am not sure students understand what “defense industry” means–shouldn’t it mean the armed forces?
defense industries or companies with defense contracts
might be clearer.
The line the But while the U.S. denounced Japanese aggression, it took no action is misleading. It overlooks the U.S.S. Panay incident and the steel and oil embargo placed on Japan on July 26th 1941. It also overlooks loans and arms sales to China in 1940 and 1941 and the formation of the American Volunteer Group.
Oversimplified, the Nationalists were still pursuing the Communists until Chiang Kai-shek was kidnapped by his generals and forced to establish an alliance during the Xi’an incident in 1936 to recognize Japan as the ultimate threat.
Misleading first 2 sentences, the Nationalists were also engaged with fighting the CPC during 1935-1936 which was why they were in dire need of people and supplies following the Long March in Shaanxi in the first place. Additionally, phrasing of “stubborn communist insurgency” downplays the many violent purges Chiang Kai-shek carried out during the White Terror to eliminate communist threats. Overall the way this paragraph is written inaccurately portrays the sides of the Civil War with the KMT in an overly glorified light as some sort of hero being subverted by the Communists. This is particularly apparent with the introduction “As Chinese Nationalists fought for survival, the Communist Party was…” Paragraph should be rewritten to not portray either side in a biased way.
It should be addressed that Howard Miller’s ‘We Can Do It‘ poster would not have been widely recognized at the time as it was only posted inside Westinghouse Electric Corporation factories and only for two weeks at that – as it says on the bottom of the poster. Because of its internal posting it also was never intended to bring women into the workforce, but instead motivate those who were already working.
The poster only achieved fame when it was ‘rediscovered’ in the 1980s and used as a feminist icon.
The actually well-known Rosie was Norman Rockwell’s ‘Rosie the Riveter‘ published as the cover of the nationally circulated Saturday Evening Post on May 29, 1943.
Howard Miller’s ‘We Can Do It’ was only posted inside Westinghouse Electric Corporation factories and only for two weeks at that – as it says on the bottom of the poster. Because of its internal posting it also was never intended to bring women into the workforce, but instead motivate those who were already working.
(Similar comment on par.68)
Definitely needs it.
It alludes to it slightly with the ‘splitting with nonagression after,’ but then avoids poking at why France and England didn’t also declare war on Russia. Given, that is a quagmire of treaties, empty promises, and an interwar tradition of politically ignoring Russia.
I agree about lend-lease, as well as adding in the 1937 Neutrality Act. Chamberlain should be mentioned by name.
The Korematsu case would clarify how something like this could happen in America.
I’d be happy to add a few sentences or a short paragraph from my new book, Enemies Among Us, dealing with the relocation, internment, and repatriation of German, Italian, and Japanese Americans during the Second World War– it just came out through the University of Nebraska Press… could you please add the book to the bibliography for the chapter?
Enemies among Us : Nebraska Press (unl.edu)
“Homosexual men and those thought to be homosexual”
Men accused of homosexuality carried a hegemonic tone.
Homosexuality is not a crime to be accused of.
Due to its brevity, the point you’re trying to make here about culturally-bound understandings of honorable warfare comes across as essentialist and reductionist. My students will read this to mean “Japanese soldiers committed atrocities because they were Japanese.” I’m quite sure that’s not what you mean to communicate. Please reconsider — I’d really like to keep assigning American Yawp, but this may be a dealbreaker!
Since this is a US History text, this paragraph (or an adjacent one) needs to integrate Roosevelt’s Quarantine Speech and his tacking towards readiness and intervention amid the prevailing isolationist mood in the US.
Somewhere in here, it would be good to integrate the progression form the Neutrality Acts to readiness and alliance, such as Destroyers for Basis and Lend-Lease.
The last sentence of this paragraph marks Germany’s retreat from the Soviet Union in December 1941 while it sources Beevor’s book with the title, Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege, 1942-43. Beevor’s book title is the correct date.
Hi, I’m a student, and I noticed an error. The G.I. Bill was not “the brainchild of William Atherton.” There seem to be two mix-ups here. The bill was the brainchild of Henry Colmery, the former head of the American Legion. Atherton was the current head of the Legion, but it was the former head who actually drafted the legislation. Atherton just advocated for it. That’s mix-up one. Mix-up two was that Mr. Atherton’s first name was Warren. William Atherton is an actor, best known for playing that guy in Ghostbusters about which Bill Murray says “that man has no dick.”
I totally see how this mix-up happened, and I find it hilarious. But please get this fixed so people don’t get confused. The ghostbusters guy had nothing to do with the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944.
Source: https://www.neh.gov/humanities/2014/julyaugust/feature/how-the-gi-bill-became-law-in-spite-some-veterans-groups
I’ve been experimenting with my use of Yawp this year as an AP text, but I’m leaning back towards my hard copy textbook next year. The best parts of Yawp are better than my text, but Yawp is so uneven. For instance, the lack of discussion about Lend-Lease seems like such a bizarre omission.
Clarified the implied timeline under discussion in the official text during our summer 2021 edits. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Thank you. We’ve inserted a clarifying statement to, hopefully, reduce any such reductionism. But we will need to explore this in much greater nuance and detail. Suggestions and possible submissions welcome!
A+ comment.
Any mention of the MR pact should be preceded by the fact that the USSR offered a defensive alliance against Nazi Germany to France and the UK multiple times, all being rejected by France and Britain.
I believe the Battle of Britain was from July 10th to October 31st.
more and more and more and more and more– this paragraph sounds like someone trying to fluff up a college essay. How many times does “more and more” need to be written in such a short period?
I’m pretty sure that Guandong is spelt Guangdong, as per the spelling everywhere else.
Would be improved by including exact date of D-Day (June 6 1944)
It would be useful to know how many soldiers were part of the U.S military during this time, to better understand exactly how “lacking” it was in comparison to the Japanese military.
No one really cares about that though
03. British North America (49 comments)
it didnt even work…smh
maybe please don go
In an open-book exam, I asked students to describe the difference between indentured servants and enslaved workers, and many students went to this paragraph to seek an explanation. The inclusion of “tithable” is confusing to students, and while this point in the legal history can be clarifying for scholars, it makes no sense to readers in an introductory survey course. Also, I never found a clear statement of the distinctions between indentured servants and enslaved workers, but maybe I have missed it.
It might be more useful to include this specific reference to the notion of an African woman being “tithable” in a footnote, but to state the legal status of enslaved people more plainly.
The Old Plantation has been attributed to John Rose, and is more closely dated to 1785-1790.
https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1457&context=adan
I think the Gallay reference should be in an endnote?
Unnecessary “the” before “even the Welsh”
The Quinnipiac River and the Connecticut River are entirely separated by the Metacomet Ridge. They are not part of the same valley.
Super weird that we say “powerful planters” for black people. pretty high key racist, also weird in the text it says “enslaved laborers” but when I click the edit feedback section it says “slaves” as it should. they were slaves. call them slaves, dont try to rewrite history so it isnt as bad. this is not history
The first paragraph is confusing. It talks about all the eighteenth century wars, and then in a later paragraph says, “By the eighteenth century, colonial governments discouraged the practice…” Is there a better way to write this so we can delineate the point you’re making?
Unnecessary “the” before “even the Welsh”
How is there any difference between “enslaved laborer” and “slave”? The only difference there is a matter of syllables.
I think, Snyder, Christine. Slavery in Indian Country: The Changing Face of Captivity in Early America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010. would be a great addition to this section!
I see two others have already made note of this error, but as it has yet to be removed, I feel that it is necessary to point it out once more.
“or the even the Welsh”
“or the even the Welsh”
“or the even the Welsh”
“or the even the Welsh”? “or the even the Welsh”??? Shouldn’t this be, “or even the Welsh?” Or perhaps just omit the “even” entirely.
The Glorious Revolution was not a peaceful coup d’etat. It gave rise to intense warfare in Ireland, part of the imperial metropole, between James II and William III of Orange. Can this be amended?
[manufactured as pretenses]
I think high school students will have trouble understanding what this means.
[By the eighteenth century, colonial governments often discouraged the practice, although it never ceased entirely as long as slavery was, in general, a legal institution.]
Unclear what practice is being discouraged. Can easily be misinterpreted that claiming land is the discouraged practice…
Fully agree
The term enslaved laborer could be confused with indentured servant. An indentured servant is not the same as a slave.
I would have to agree with you on this statement. It’s history so of course the terms didn’t make much sense.
If this were the proper term, why even have them? If they were good for nothing obviously they were good for something.
[I can’t think there is any intrinsic value in one color more than another, nor that white is better than black, only we think it so because we are so.” ]
One of the best quotes I have come across. No matter the color whether black or white one is not better than the other. We are all equal in each others eyes.
The government was once controlled by King? If so how was that able to work when we have different forms of government to successfully succeed.
I did some research on your response it seems like the Quinnipiac river is located entirely in Connecticut BUT it’s about 153 miles from the Connecticut river. So about 2 hours in travel time.
Being able to pay for their own land and gain as much for each family member I’m sure gave them minority to create a family farm and access to gain and grow crops to sell and make profits.
Slave ships were the main course of transportation for African Americans. They were chained like stated and often very crowded due to the amount of slaves they have had aboard.
This plan was created as a separation of land. It was like a peace offering for colonies that William Penn created.
I remember learning about this in high school. I believe it was a time where settlers were trying to get rid of Native Americans in Virginia. It lasted about a year. I do not know why a pig would have been something to argue over, but I guess it made sense to them.
I’m confused so are we also correcting grammar in the text? I see other responses regarding “welsh” and how its placed.
Wrong.
Using the term “enslaved laborers” is fine if referring to male and female chattel slaves performing manual labor in agricultural or industrial settings. There were enslaved craftsmen, enslaved cooks, enslaved caregivers, etc. Giving agency to these folks does not alter history but rather more accurately depicts it. Real people, real places, real events.
I agree 100%
In yhe dictionary the word enslaved means; made a slave; held in slavery or bondage:
Enslaved people were seen not as people at all but as commodities to be bought, sold, and exploited. SO, I agree with what Mr. Muse said.
…
I totally agree with you..
The phrase “enslaved laborers” is problematic because it does not represent the other oppressions of enslavement. For example, slave breeding (which existed in the period discussed but increased in prominence as US/GB banned the Atlantic Slave Trade in 1808) is not represented by the phrase “enslaved laborers” and would be better included by the word “enslaved” without a descriptive modifier.
I love hytory and thank tyou for provided this history .
The capitalization of white and black is not consistent at the end of the paragraph.
Having 24,000 and 51000 Native Americans were forced into slavery, I would have thought that more rebellions would have happened.
Thinking how big a ship would have been and how many people were estimated to come across the Atlantic Ocean makes people realize how many people were involved in slavery for that many people to be in slavery.
Wars were being fought often between certain colonies and or groups. I didn’t know that people were able to switch sides. Would think that would cause more problems.
After twelve years you would have settled another place already. What was the importance of going back after twelve years, especially being weaker.
After 12 years you would have settled another place already. What was the importance of going back after 12 years, especially being weaker.
Even if the lands were being bought from the Natives, they were still getting paid almost nothing. They had everything taken away from them.
“became a chief point of contention between the Pennsylvanian government and the Delaware during the upcoming Seven Years’ War.”
This sounds awkward. I would suggest changing it to:
“became a chief point of contention between the Pennsylvanian and Delawarean governments during the upcoming Seven Years’ War.”
Or perhaps:
“became a chief point of contention between the Pennsylvanian government and the Delawarean government during the upcoming Seven Years’ War.”
They may have created new worlds but not all starting from level ground. The advantages that the powerful planters had over the others was substantial and would lead to the degradation of the other lower classes.
It is hard to imagine how these women may have felt about motherhood considering that they would be bringing children into a world of enslavement. Born slaves? Im sure some went to great lengths to try and prevent becoming pregnant.
This is heartbreaking. It is a gross exaggeration of restraining human love and affection.
The natural reproduction of slaves? So, that is why they passed the law stating that a slave woman’s child would be born into slavery for life? Basically reducing birthing age slave women to become slave making machines.
These colonists justified slave ownership because of the war?
“Color is only skin deep!”
11. The Cotton Revolution (41 comments)
a a = remove one of them
In fact, the South experienced a a greater rate of urbanization between 1820 and 1860 than the seemingly more industrial, urban-based North.
independant = incorrectly spelled
The link to University of Virginia doesn’t work, or at least didn’t work for me.
Found a typo, I believe there should only be one “a”
Didn’t work for me either. I googled “The Atlantic Slave Trade and Slave Life in the Americas” and found an archived version of the page at the LOC.
https://www.loc.gov/item/lcwa00096033/
Slaves had become more valuable and expensive.
This paragraph, following Johnson 2013, misidentifies Petit Gulf as Gossypium barbadense. It was G. hirsutum. See Olmsted and Rhode 2018. Petit Gulf was, in turn, bred and hybridized into many other forms – it’s more accurate to state G. hirsutum rather than Petit Gulf became the typical “American” long-staple cotton. G. barbadense does not need to be saw-ginned (roller ginning is still preferred today) and saw gins damage the fiber.
See botanical as well as historical literature for evidence documenting this point (for example https://books.google.com/books?id=CvEhAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA470&lpg=PA470&dq=petit+gulf+g.+hirsutum&source=bl&ots=a5PZtJZ9qi&sig=ACfU3U17HVi4LDMyIDDSZ6Qm0iVTKcDP_w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjMpLC5vbzjAhUBQ80KHbc3BlIQ6AEwDnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=petit%20gulf%20g.%20hirsutum&f=false
It seems as though this section indicates that the rise of American cotton is directly responsible for the advent of the modern fashion system, which is not the case. “Fashion” – where styles change for change’s sake – has been present since the 1400s. People have been wearing decoration on their apparel that goes beyond utility since apparel was developed.
The use of the word “honest” seems disingenuous as well – all clothing has a function (to cover the body; to differentiate gender, age, status, etc; to protect from the elements…). What does “honest” refer to?
Morgan — and others, including John Thornton — show that those first “20 Negars and then some” were not exactly unfree. Or if they were, they were as “unfree” as poor white indentured servants from England were. Virginia colonists baptized those first 20 men from Africa (who were traded for food). According to English law, a person who was baptized could not be enslaved. This would change, of course. See “The Terrible Transformation,” part of the PBS series, Africans in the Americas.
The story of Anthony Johnson is instructive. He arrived in the VA colony somewhere around 1619. He was baptized and he somehow managed to survive his term of servitude (unlike most in the first generations of the colony — the colony was a death trap). Johnson got his freedom dues and at some point he purchased “head rights” so that by 1655 he owned a modest plantation on which he grew tobacco. That was the year that one of his servants, a black man from Africa named Cesar, sued Johnson for his freedom. Cesar lost. Significant is that the local magistrate not only heard the case between two black men, but less significant is that he ruled in Johnson’s favor.
When I teach Morgan and I pull out this primary source it doesn’t take long for my students to figure out why the magistrate ruled in Johnson’s favor: he was a landowner.
Colonists were still working out how racial inferiority and slavery was going to operate in the colony (and also neighboring colony of Maryland). You begin to see this gradually; but after Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676 planters begin to move toward racialized slavery faster and systematically for a variety reasons, not least of which was that they wanted to continue to exploit workers to produce cash crop and at the same time mitigate the possibilities for interracial uprisings against the ruling elites.
[The world was slowly but surely coming closer together, and the South was right in the middle.]
The students in my class at Lehigh University felt that this sentence did not fully communicate how the brutality of slavery underwrote the dawn of globalization.
“violent”?
Replace “violent” with bracketed phrase.
“Of course, tobacco is, and was, an addictive substance, but because of its (violent) [inconsistent, if not diminished,] pattern of growth,”
“yields” instead of “pattern of growth”
“Of course, tobacco is, and was, an addictive substance, but because of its inconsistent, if not diminished, yields,…”
“reduced” for “diminished”
I know…angels on heads of an editorial pen:-)
There is no end to this quote. Where does it end?
1785 peel
The second sentence in this paragraph doesn’t read correctly.
It should be Selina, not Celia, in the paragraph.
The second sentence of this paragraph is incomplete. “Fashion trends no longer required an honest function—such as a broad-brimmed hat to protect one from the sun, knee-high boots for horse riding, and linen shirts and trousers to fight the heat of an unrelenting sun.” Might I suggest changing it to, “Fashion trends that no longer served their original purpose—such as a broad-brimmed hat to protect one from the sun, knee-high boots for horse riding, and linen shirts and trousers to fight the heat of an unrelenting sun—lost popularity at an astonishing rate.”
The second sentence should say “The revivals of the Second …” instead of “The revivals the Second …”. As it is currently stands, the sentence does not make sense.
Should be one “a” instead of “a a.”
You need an “of” see above.
If the value of land is static, it would not increase. The next sentence contradicts this as the value of the land increases from $600 to $100K over 25 years.
The sentence “This, most importantly, allowed for the maintenance of cultural traditions, such as language, religion, name practices, and even the rare practice of bodily scaring.”
I believe the author meant “bodily scarring” or “scarification” it was probably a misspelling.
Also I was unable to find other references to this “rare practice” and suggest that it be cited or removed from the text.
This sentence closes a paragraph that is focused on the power balance of global trade, and not a statement on the moral values or brutality of slavery.
A good fix would be changing “Fashion trends no longer required an honest function…” to “Southern fashion trends no longer required and honest function…”
I agree that the original senetence was overly broad.
I think you are confusing Robert E. Lee’s slave in the photograph (paragraph 60) with the slave “Celia” who was raped by Robert Newsom as described in paragraph 59. I think the original text is correct.
Please ad the word “of” in the second sentence as described in previous comments.
This comment applies to Paragraph 45.
The statistic on the percentage of enslaved people in the South appears to be incorrect. The total population of the South (free plus enslaved) was 12,240,293. This means that enslaved people (3,950,511) made up about 32% of the total southern population. The figure of 45% in this paragraph seems to have been derived by dividing the enslaved population by the free population, not by the total population.
As the other person has stated, the word should be “scarring,” not “scaring.”
In the America other natural significant is paddy.A wee authored yap_i mean a gammae having to do it” is India Kerala. Where ther is no ion or money a sun- and some signs man abod these ways in the state.Serfiklin asks+this” I open to you a boat and rouym: Ask how Parker you bet troug this pebble as if it’s missisipi.Monoree I say. Often.. you play ibe it’s even rhymne..
So it’s mustard.. an ellocine seems while you fill from West therse torries that may spin top”!.. How you Phillip a word of premlinece to take me purse?(now the American sleeps)/ Since I say capinmcee” you bother your brother and not me mud .Jin in th cark”_₹….
However margenitly who is wit ever even say brother: gets bothered and we meet.
The revivals OF the Second Great Awakening established the region’s prevailing religious culture. –This sentence needs the word “of” added.
[Led by Methodists, Baptists, and to a lesser degree, Presbyterians, this intense period of religious regeneration swept the along southern backcountry.]
This sentence is out of order as well. Along and the need to be switched.
I noticed the word scaring, which should be scarring. There are no references for this sentence, however, so either the text should fix the spelling, or remove the reference to scarring in its entirety.
[and the South was right in the middle.]
On the text book version it say, “and slavery was right in the middle.” This creates confusion. Did you mean “slavery” or “the South?”
Please fix this typo.
textbook* and says*
Um, Georgia et all are the US Southeast, not the Southwest, which is AZ et al.
wtf are you saying?
Keloids
They’re fucked up for killing women and children
In paragraph 32, the sentence reads “To many enslaveers in the South, slavery was the saving grace of not only their own economic stability but also the maintenance of peace and security in everyday life.”
Though on this feedback page it reads “slaveholders”, it still says “enslaveers”; it has not been updated.
04. Colonial Society (41 comments)
The sermon was delivered in Enfield, Mass/Conn., not Northampton.
The line “15 to 20 percent of Pennsylvania’s colonial population was enslaved by 1750” is not supported by the reference, which shows that approximately 2% of PA residents were enslaved.
I believe the two women are named “hypocrisy” and “deceit”
My students have been pretty confused by this paragraph b/c it makes little distinction between trade regulations pre-1764 and post-1764. Seems like there should be at least some mention that the Sugar Act was in large part about better forcing existing duties through Admiralty courts, etc.
Unclear which of the particular regulations listed were passed in 1705 and which came earlier.
Georgia was founded by a philanthropic group, known as the Georgia Trustees. Oglethorpe was just one member and it is incorrect to label him the founder. The Georgia Trustees banned slavery.
I noticed a small error in the American Yawp version of Gibson Clough’s War Journal.
Here is a short quote from the current Yawp version of Gibson Clough’s War Journal:
“Here begins the New Year 1700”
The actual version on the Essex Institute Historical Collections in the Internet Archive cited below the online version on this cite reads:
“Here begins the New Year 1760”
The last sentence repeats the House of Burgese’s Slave codes and I find the last sentence redundant.
This is really quite vague and dated. First, Fred Anderson’s excellent Crucible of War has become the go-to book for the French and Indian War. Second, there has been much recent scholarship on American colonists — both wealthy speculators and their agents (Washington was one of these agents) — giving land grant in the Ohio Forks region. These grants were what spurred the French to build forts, and this in turn provoked the English to respond. The Yawp text here is grossly over-simplified; especially considering that conflict between British administrators and American land speculators and squatters will be one of the major reasons for the Revolution. And we know this because it says so in the Declaration of Independence.
Alan Taylor, American Revolutions.
Colin Calloway, The Indian World of George Washington.
While I have enjoyed reading the information provided, I believe that Queen Anne’s War (1702-1713) and King George’s War (1744-1748) also need to be included into the text. These two wars not only assist in laying the foundation for the French and Indian War and showing continued conflict between the two empires, but also shows growing frustrations with the colonists and the British crown. The treaties of Utrecht and Aix-la-Chapelle could both be seen as a slap in the face of the colonists who fought hard to win territory, only to have to return it to the French.
Wow Now I am starting to understand how we as americans became the worst at creating a society of consumers who love to create waste.
This is a generally nice chapter, but the key concept of “salutary neglect” is notably absent. The concept is particularly relevant when considering the consequences of Britain’s imposition of taxes following the Seven Years’ War.
Amongus
sus
The British were subjects until 1948, not citizens.
This whole section is confusing. My students are coming away thinking that the Seven Years War was about religion. Which it wasn’t.
The colonists were not calling themselves Americans at this point, at least not in the sense that modern students interpret that word to mean. What about the Catholics in former French areas? Native Americans? “British colonial subjects in the Americas” would be more accurate here.
Being able to produce their own goods probably made it easier for them to survive.
[Britain relied on the colonies as a source of raw materials, such as lumber and tobacco. Americans engaged with new forms of trade and financing that increased their ability to buy British-made goods. But the ways in which colonists paid for these goods varied sharply from those in Britain]
So having these goods the colonist had to pay based on trading other goods? Is this how financing started?
The slave trade which took affect as The Act Prohibiting the Act of slaves was legal and took place as cargo ships were being shipped across to give permission to seize any ships and confiscate cargo.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 15 1 Beginning with the Sugar Act in 1764, and continuing with the Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts, Parliament levied taxes on sugar, paper, lead, glass, and tea, all products that contributed to colonists’ sense of gentility. In response, patriots organized nonimportation agreements and reverted to domestic products.]
The Sugar Act of 1764 was commonly disliked by colonist when they raised taxes on this because it helped make rum which they favored which was a trade export in their country. I would consider this fair because I mean when you have a popular item its all about supply and demand. You must raise prices to keep stock.
Very interesting catch.
Oh wow this is something I did not know. I wasn’t born in Georgia, but have grew up in Georgia and feel like I have learned about Georgia history and this is something I probably overlooked to know if it was taught to me.
Even back then a woman did not have control over her own body. The rituals of having to marry young and be a housewife is mind-blowing that at a point in time women had to be okay with this. I’m glad eventually more and more women were able to assert control.
This was a major war known as French and Indian war. I believe it ended as the Treaty of Paris. To know this was a costly war that eventually lead to trading to keep up.
Until I read this i unknowingly assumed paper money became when “jobs” formed. Knowing the system of notes were developed first is interesting. So was .this like a “book keeping” or was it just a note the person was given and whoever they gave it to it just took their word it was good? Anyone know?
I agree with you here and in the same breath I feel they could have put a limit to the amount each consumer was able to buy. We resort to constantly raising pricing to keep supplies coming, but then we have greedy three person household buying in bulk when supply is low. I think about the toilet paper shortage in 2020 and I recall reading a facebook post of a woman who had over 200 PACKS just stored in her garage just for HER!
This was in response to Gabrielle Smith’s comment, I apologize.
This section in particular is confusing to some students. It discussed the Seven Years’ War in the section discussing Pontiac’s War. Furthermore, the final sentence discusses the excitement of newly acquired lands west of the Appalachian. However, because of the Royal Proclamation of 1763, settlers were restricted from settling these regions. Earlier in this paragraph, this proclamation is mentioned as sparking discontent, but then the final sentence seems to disregard it. This is rather confusing for some readers, especially students.
I don’t think Among Us existed in colonial America
yes it did.
i believe you mean capitol, not capital.
Hi,
Left a comment here about 2 months ago, it’s still in moderation – is there any chance I could get some feedback?
Thank you!
UM (.)_(.)
Hi!
Really sorry to bother, I’m just really confused by the moderation here! So the problem, to reiterate, is with the statement:
“New York City’s economy was so reliant on slavery that over 40 percent of its population was enslaved by 1700.”
That seems, like I said before, very high? And I am really confused because it is not supported by the source which is cited for it. In Appendix D, Schneider and Schneider, there is no mention of the population of NYC – the closest evaluation to that is an estimate of populations of the Colony of New York as a whole, and in 1700, they list 19,107, of which 2256 were black (there is no mention of numbers for enslaved people but of course, we can assume at this time it is the overwhelming majority of the black population).
If AmericanYawp is getting that 40% of NYC enslaved number somewhere else, could you provide the citation? I’m totally open to the idea that Yawp’s number is correct – with a popualtion of roughly 5000 in 1700, if all of NY slaves were concentrated in the city, that might make the 40% number plausible. But I think it might be that the number has been mixed up with the fact that in 1730 roughly 42% New Yorkers owned slaves. I would love to see the source being cited, it would be very interesting to me.
Thank you!
Among us was created before time
The colonist did not like the taxes on sugar that was presented before them. These taxes were on products that were popular so the government was able to get money back from being in debt.
American societies were less strict than that of Europe. They are less developed still finding new ways and are experiencing a newer life style than they would have felt. This would show that the government is not yet to an established point.
This war lasting for seven years would have costed money and time. This also went forth to be a big name in history as the British colonists had a young leader named George Washington.
The Natives killed people not even in war? Disease was a crucial key part in history that ended up weakening and killing most of the Native Americans.
The war had an effect on the laws of people after the fighting? This was also an expensive war and with expense comes more and more taxes.
21. World War I & Its Aftermath (40 comments)
This paragraph fails to note that Gavrilo Princip was a member of Black Hand. It also suggests that Austria-Hungary was aggressively seeking to annex Serbia, but ignores the expansionist “Greater Serbia” ideology of Black Hand, as well as the role of Austria-Hungary in supporting the Obrenovic dynasty over the then-ruling Karadjordic Dynasty.
This here says that Lodge’s opponents managed to block entry into the League of Nations. How can this be so if Lodge himself was an opponent?
Should it be: “Wilson’s opponents successfully blocked America’s entry into the League of Nations” not Lodge’s opponents but Wilson’s?
“Victor Huerta” should be “Victoriano Huerta”
It should be the “Austro-Hungarian Empire,” not the “Austrian-Hungarian Empire.”
should be: “Lodge’s supporters” not “Lodge’s opponents”
It says that Pres Wilson was the First to travel overseas while in office. This may be misleading, as Teddy Roosevelt traveled to Panama in 1909 during canal construction.
While he didn’t cross an ocean, “overseas” is commonly understood to mean outside the country, especially if it involves water travel.
consider replacing “overseas” with “to Europe” or “outside the western hemisphere” or “across an ocean”
“be” should be inserted between “a” and “fatal” in the following sentence: “Although much of the equipment still needed to make the transatlantic passage, the physical presence of the army proved to a fatal blow to German war plans.”
There needs to be a section in this or the next chapter on the Red Scare. It astounds me that there is no mention at all of Abrams v. United States (1919), and the great dissent of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
[The army and navy chose to appoint them instead, which left the status of professional medical women hovering somewhere between the enlisted and officer ranks.]
Appoint them to what? The sentence is unclear.
Lodge’s opponents successfully blocked America’s entry into the League of Nations,
I think you want to say “Lodge’s opposition”
I love American Yawp but this chapter is a little disappointing. The Introduction and Conclusion suggest a leap directly from WWI to 1929 and WWII. I think that it should reference the US emerging as a world power as a creditor nation and the immediate post-war prosperity of the US.. The chapter should mention resistance to US entry and the draft by Eugene Debs and others. What new countries emerged in Eastern Europe? What were final casualty figures in Europe (not just France)?
Thank you for all your work.
[and and]
Redundant and
Shouldn’t
Surgeon General of the Army be capitalized.
And the sentence needs to make clear these numbers are for American soldiers
Reports from the Surgeon General of the Army revealed that while 227,000 U.S. soldiers were hospitalized from wounds received in battle, almost half a million suffered from influenza.
[Zimmerman]
This last name is spelled incorrectly. It’s correct way is Zimmermann.
Yes, José Victoriano Huerta Márquez
Perhaps a word is missing from “But in the 1880s, as Americans embarked on empire…”
Reading about this chapter was very interesting but different in contrast to ww2, the chapter regarding ww2 talks about the mass genocide of jewish people enacted by the nazis, but in the chapter regarding ww1 it never talked about the genocide of nearly 1.5 armenian people by the ottoman empire, which needs to be talked about.
The word “the” is written twice in a row:
As part of the the armistice, Allied forces followed the retreating Germans and occupied territories in the Rhineland to prevent Germany from reigniting war.
At the end of the paragraph. one thousand National Guard members(?), soldiers(?). Definitely not units.
What about the draft in the Civil War? I don’t think “solely” is the best choice of words here. 🙂
I have two concerns with this paragraph.
1. The connection between the second and third sentence makes no sense if you don’t explain how the restrictions on Black soldiers were framed. Since you don’t make that clear, there’s no reason for the reader that restricting privileges of Black soldiers would be connected to soldiers being “tempted by European vices.”
2. My students won’t understand the reference to what I assume you mean by “the traditional recreations of soldiers at war.” (Do you mean soldiers forming romantic relationships with local women? Paying local women for sex? Sexually assaulting women? It’s truly unclear.) I recommend a more straightforward (and less retrograde) approach.
Decimated millions? I think the text should specify that World War I decimated the populations or caused a massive loss of life across the involved nations and their neighbors.
I feel it is significant enough to mention in this paragraph that the ultimatums given to Serbia from Austria were intentionally impossible to fulfill.
Fixed. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Thank you for pointing out the odd transition there. Fixed. Thanks!
Edited. Thanks!
Fixed in text in summer 2021. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Thank you. Fixed in text during earlier edits.
Thank you. Fixed in text during earlier edits.
Thank you. Fixed in text during earlier edits.
Kaiserschlact does not mean”Spring Offensive”. it means “emperors battle”.
L Woodrow
fr bro sold
Washington D.C. needs two periods after the C. One to show that the C is an abbreviation and another to mark the end of the sentence.
I agree with your statement, however the way schools have their history set up (at least in the united states) They focus on US involvement and how it affects the US. So i believe although important, the mass genocide of the armenian people is not influencial in US history
Bro really is he not him
WHAT?
05. The American Revolution (38 comments)
Good Morning,
The inclusion of the phrase “salutary neglect” in this paragraph or in paragraph #9 of the same chapter referencing British colonial policy would be helpful. The phrase can help students name the colonial policy more succinctly and provides a utilitarian short form for them to use in writing/referring to the time period.
Thank you all–the Yawp is everything good about academics!
Garrett
Just a style thing: “throughout the colonies” appears twice in quick succession and three times in this paragraph. 11 times in the chapter total.
This paragraph is confusing. The previous paragraph says, correctly, that the Tea Act exempted the EIC from having import duties applied to its Tea. So the the phrase “colonists would be paying the duty” needs clarification.
In other words, needs clarification that EIC did not have to pay import duties but purchasers of tea still had to pay standard duties on their purchases.
[in the colonies]
This seems redundant as the sentence begins with “Colonial”
“Colonial political culture in the colonies”
This is redundant, it should be “Political culture in the colonies” or “Colonial political culture”
This and the first sentence of Para 48 that the duty had to be paid when the ship was unloaded are confusing. Para 46 says the tea was without duties; para 48 said duites had to be paid.
There doesn’t seem to be any mention of the indigenous peoples who sided with the Americans during the conflict. This perpetuates the misinformed notion that Native Americans only aligned with the British, which effectively wipes them out of American history, as well as those peoples’ claims to helping shape American history. By including that Native Americans also sided with the Americans (which included members of the Oneida, Narragansett, Passamaquoddy, and Wappinger communities and tribes, among others) it presents students with a more complicated version of the past. The fact that the new nation did not honor its wartime relationships with those tribes, and the fact that some of those communities remained along the east coast and endured to this day adds further complexity to our understanding of the past and its legacy on the present. See Colin Calloway, The American Revolution in Indian Country, and Eric Grundset (ed), Forgotten Patriots: African American and American Indian Patriots in the Revolutionary War for more on this
“with almost fifteen million pounds of it *in* stored in warehouses” typo in this sentence. First “in” does not belong
In the second quoted phrase from Benjamin Rush, the first person should be eliminated and replaced with third person with verb agreement in order to maintain pronoun consistency within the clause.
Replace “emotions that I cannot describe” with “emotions that [he could not] describe”.
“The founding fathers instigated and fought a revolution to secure independence from Britain but they did not fight that revolution to create a democracy.” That was probably the primary reason they fought. To have a democracy. What other reason did they fight except to get free from Britains tyrannical rule and set up their own democracy? That statement is just nonsensical.
britain isnt real :/
Typo in caption: “as as”
Fixed. Thanks!
What did Benjamin Rush mean when he said, “Upon seeing the King’s throne in the House of Lords, he felt as if he walked on sacred ground, with emotions I cannot describe”?
Publication date is in the future:
Berkin, Carol. Revolutionary Mothers: Women in the Struggle for America’s Independence. New York: Knopf, 20056.
[legislative resistance by elites, economic resistance by merchants, and popular protest by common colonists.]
The America revolution did not occur, life is a fallacy.
“Age of Revolution” the time era where a mixture of social, cultural and economic occurred in Europe and some parts of America.
Britons? Are we talking about Britain’s or was there some form of different spelling?
The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was a document that was issued by King George III to claim British territory after they had won the seven years war. This was considered valuable land .
Every time I have read about the Stamp Act it has mentioned that it applied “even” to playing cards.
Could we either leave out the “even” or explain it in a bit more detail?
“The American Revolution was a global.”–Sentence fragment.
Ur right
-future Joe
This paragraph says: “The ladies of Edenton were not alone in their desire to support the war effort by what means they could. ” But here there is not yet war. This is just after the Boston Tea Party and before the Coercive Acts.
How did nonimportation and nonconsumption help forge colonial unity?
Why were the four acts referred to as the Intolerable Acts?
Why Howe wanted to capture the new nation’s capital.
What made the British believe that the South enjoy more popular support?
What was the goal of the Revolution?
Perhaps the first sentence can be part of the previous paragraph?
Perhaps explain what “polity” is? Many do not understand the meaning of the word.
To become an independent nation
What do you mean by this?
misleading. States Washington marched troops down in October, when the siege actually commenced on 28 September. Articles of Capitulation signed at the Moore house at Yorktown was 19 October 1781.
Possibly state by October, not in October.
Also, “war came to an official end on September 3, 1783, with the signing of the Treaty of Paris.”
I agree with Mr. Basulto on defining words. Perhaps you could make it to where a reader could hover the mouse over certain words and a definition would show up.
Thank you.
typo: the text reads “In New York City, the inhabitants raised a huge lead statue of King George III” and I believe the word is “razed” meaning “to tear down” or “to topple” rather than “raise” meaning to lift up.
Why would they topple a statue when it’s stated in the succeeding sentence that “there was no moment at which colonists felt more proud to be members of the free British Empire than 1766.”
They were happy that the Stamp Act was repealed–why would they be more angry at Britain?
07. The Early Republic (34 comments)
typos: James Peale’s name and “responsible” are spelled incorrectly
Should say: roles as wives and mothers, not as mothers.
Additionally: typos as listed above.
Shouldn’t the Republicans actually be called the “Democratic-Republicans,” since the actual Republican party wasn’t started until the 1850s to combat slavery?
“White supremacist” – presentism
“white supremacist” wasn’t a title/term used during that time period, should be changed to “white superficial beliefs/assumptions” or something of the sort
Replace with was
David, the verb should be the 3rd person plural “were.” It should agree with the subject “some,” which refers back to “changes” in the previous sentence. The verb should not agree with “victory.”
It sounds as if Lawrence is commanding his men to surrender, and the sentence must be re-read to be understood.
This is clearer: Yet the Americans did not give up. Lawrence commanded them, “Tell the men…
Did the authors mean to use the United Kingdom in this paragraph?
[As the decades passed, white Americans were forced to acknowledge that if the black population was indeed whitening, it resulted from interracial sex and not the environment.] I think it is immoral of this textbook to call it “interracial sex.” It was rape and sexual violence perpetuated on Black women.
Every time Federalist is mentioned, it should be replaced with Democrats, or Liberals. They’re basically the same.
No – “were” is correct, since the subject (“some”) is plural.
George Catlin’s surname is spelled wrong in the second sentence (Catlin instead of Caitlin).
Awkward first sentence. Tecumseh convinced people from the Northwest and Northeast probably.
The above errors persist two years on.
“Not soon thereafter, Tecumseh fell…” soon probably be “Soon thereafter…”
Wasn’t William Henry Harrison the territorial governor of INDIANA and not Illinois, as is stated in Yawp?
Vitiligo?
The read aloud version uses “Democratic-Republican” instead of “Republican”.
Rape between two different races is still interracial sex.
Shouldn’t this colon be a comma as the clause the precedes it is dependent?
I’m glad they were able to actually consider freeing people of color. The punishment seems cruel and unfair. I wonder what exactly made them want to limit these restrictions after so long.
Why did it fail in Haiti? Exactly what could have been a different outcome for this?
I never knew Haiti was so inspirational to African Americans. I think of Haiti as a poor country that literally had nothing so to learn that they were inspiring makes me feel happy that blacks had someone to look up to.
[“Bobalition”]
a term that defines as a term whites heard as a mispronunciation by African Americans.
So how did they go about this overtime? If he was originally black then was he white to them or did they have any limitations for him? The changing of the color of the skin reminds me of what Michael Jackson had happen to him. So even back then this was something that occurred during the time.
That is exactly it. The medical condition that I’m sure has occurred.
Women being able to teach their children the true value of independence was very important. I think it would be good for every mother to teach their child the importance of growing up and learning survival skills.
[Impressments, the practice of forcing American sailors to join the British Navy, was among the most important sources of conflict between the two nations.]
Many Americans were fond of the British army. If many Americans joined then why was it so hard to release them? What was so hard about the Royal Navy?
That is a huge drop in numbers. In just a matter of a year Jefferson putting many people into the deep depression must have really had a major impact. How did they overcome the depression? What was some ways or what was affected during the depression?
I read where it said in 1812 that US went into war with Great Britain for the first time…Is this correct? Or was the declaration itself just signed and they officially declared war.
Roads being built was the best decision ever created. This probably created many opportunities for Americans. How long did it take before they were to start and be done with this project?
Here’s to four years.
Haiti, Ayiti, means mountains. On January 1,1804, Haiti became an independent country.
This doesn’t mention the trail of tears. We need to be talking about this.
25. The Cold War (34 comments)
“Nuclear” is misspelled. In addition, the sentence might be better structured by writing as follows: “J. Robert Oppenheimer, director of the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory…
Soured should be soared – first sentence
Please ignore this. I’m studying for a final and forgot that “soured” is actually a word.
Paul Robeson was an American Actor and singer, not signer.
Same as above comment. Typo
Wernher von Braun should not be referred to as a “former top German rocket scientist”. Instead, he should be referred to as a “Nazi rocket scientist”. This reference is more conducive to maintenance of the truth.
The end of this paragraph mentions “containment” for the first time. What that means is never defined anywhere in the chapter.
the cold war grew out of failure to achieve a durable settlement.
The political landscape was altered drastically by Franklin Roosevelt’s sudden death in April 1945, just days before the inaugural meeting of the UN. Although Roosevelt was skeptical of Stalin, he always held out hope that the Soviets could be brought into the “Free World.” Truman, like Churchill, had no such illusions. He committed the United States to a hard-line, anti-Soviet approach. ((Harbutt, Yalta 1945).))
potsdam conference- discuss fate of soviet occuped poland.
*manhattan project- learn atomic bomb sucessfully tested. truman told stalin.
atlantic charter- churchill and roosevelt issue a joint declaration for post war peace. Established the creation of the united nations. (Soviet union, US, britain, frnace, china)
This plan also set in motion the p-lanning for a recognized globl economy. The societs rejected these ideas.
United States invested $13 billion toward reconstruction
Unless inflation adjusted historic sums are not that meaningful. For instance, the AIER cost-of-living calculator shows that $13 billion in 1950 would be the equivalent of $137 billion in 2019.
https://www.aier.org/cost-of-living-calculator/
[To avoid the postwar chaos of World War I, the Marshall Plan was designed to rebuild Western Europe, open markets, and win European support for capitalist democracies.]
The Marshall Plan was designed to avoid the postwar chaos of World War II, not World War I.
When including words from foreign languages; I believe the actual translation of the word should be included. In this case “détente” is translated by google drive as “relaxation”.
Should be World War II here, not World War I.
There is absolutely no such thing as “Fusion Explosives.” I suggest either dedicating a full paragraph to the distinctions between fission and fusion, or, the removal of this subject altogether rather than providing false information.
I think more clarification is needed for your total deaths number of 1.5 million. This may be too low. I was always taught that this number was likely closer to 3 million and have seen estimates as high as 5 million. I know how difficult this can be (and unfair in most cases). However, if you could add more clarification (based on your source listed – Elizabeth Stanley) on how the 1.5 million number was arrived this would be most appreciated. Thank you. Professor Andrew J. Klosterman, History 1620, Rhodes State College, Lima, OH.
Insert space between NAACP and “and the ACLU.”
Insert “pact” after “Hitler’s and Stalin’s 1939 nonaggression”
This chapter would be much improved if it addressed the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis. The latter represents a high point of the Cold War and was a central cause of detente.
Nuclear is misspelled. This was first noted on December 4, 2018 and still has not been corrected?
In “the cold was a global political and ideological struggle between…” the author forgot to add the commas. In a list of 3 or more concepts, there has to be 2 commas.
WWI is correct – though it is oddly phrased.
It is implying that the Marshall Plan was created as a way to ensure Europe would not see the same issues that had occurred after WWI.
WWII would only be correct if ‘to avoid’ was changed to ‘to fix/rebuild.’
This sentence is confusing and hard to read. The quotations make it difficult to decipher how the beginning and end of the sentence connect. A simple fix would be to remove the “as” in the phrase “as U.S. officials…” and insert a when at the beginning of the phrase “fighting erupted in Korea.”
The sentence “One of the most well-known Americans of the time, African American actor and signer Paul Robeson…” should read “…actor and singer…”
This conclusion (graphs 78 & 79) is not really effective, given that it discusses a phase of the Cold War that isn’t even adjacent to the time period discussed in the chapter. If you’re going to look forward, why not focus on what’s right around the corner with the Vietnam Era, which has important foreign policy and domestic dimensions, just as this chapter bounced the foreign and domestic develops off each other from the end of World War 2 to the late 1950s.
There have to be other spots later in Yawp for a broad assessment of the Cold War’s end.
Hello,
History teacher from Maine here. I think Senator Margaret Chase Smith and the Declaration of Conscience deserves mention somewhere within the story of Senator McCarthy. Especially in the context of a woman in politics speaking out.
Signing the affidavit would have indicated he was not communist
There appears to be no mention of the Suez Crisis in this chapter. Adding some commentary might be helpful.
Thank you for a great textbook!
Ted Curtis, Syracuse NY
Fixed. Thank you!
Fixed in summer 2021 in the main text. Thanks!
Fixed in summer 2021 in the main text. Thanks!
Question– Why isn’t the provisional People’s Republic of Korea (1945-1946) mentioned here? It would give context to the initial division, the outlawing of the PRK and military control of the north and south.
Could the author please reconsider the characterization of a “first Cold War” and a “second Cold War”? That’s going to confuse my students, and I’m not sure the evidence supports that interpretation of detente.
Second sentence needs to include an appositive around George Kennan’s name:
“…the chargé d’affaires of the U.S. embassy in Moscow, George Kennan, sent a famously lengthy telegram…”
09. Democracy in America (33 comments)
There is no conclusion for this chapter. All of the other chapters so far, have one.
This chapter absolutely needs a detailed recounting of Jackson’s Indian Removal policy, culminating in the trail of tears. It’s a huge whole in what is presented in the chapter.
The Trail of Tears is mentioned later in chapter 12, but I agree with Ryan that it would be far better to include that information here. Perhaps it could be briefly recapped in chapter 12 but presented in depth here?
I’d love to add a sentence either here or in paragraph 10 that connects to the image in terms of the rise of political parties and, well, partying and campaigning.
Is this the place to mention the spoils system/rotation in office? Postal clerks were generally the only source of hard currency, especially in the frontier so the democratization of gvt. work regardless of qualifications sets up the bank war.
Can I make a suggestion for an additional entry to the Recommended Reading section? Stephen Campbell has recently published a monograph on the Bank War with the University Press of Kansas. It is one of the few monographs to come out on this subject in the last forty years and it is also one of the most detailed. I do believe that reading this monograph closely will improve the section on the Bank War for this chapter. Thank you for your consideration.
The date range in the title of this primary source should read “1819-1820,” not 1920 as appears here and on the page with the document itself.
[ He defended the impulsive general, arguing that he had had been forced to act.]
Double “had”
Her first husband never committed suicide, an autopsy later revealed he died of pnemonia.
The members of the Boston and Lynn Female Antislavery Societies were hardly considered “respectable.” They were mobbed, ridiculed, and race-baited. New England clergymen disputed that “both men and women” should speak out against slavery, as did many abolitionists. In emphasizing the middle-class status of some abolitionist women, this paragraph misrepresents the movement as part mainstream “middle-class culture,” which was not at all the case in the 1830s.
AY chapter alludes to some of these issues and cites much of the relevant literature. This paragraph contradicts that information.
AY chapter 10, that is
I realize that the topic is Democracy in America, but a major section on the Jackson Administration is missing. I am referring to the section dealing with the Native Americans. I believe that the topic should be included in Chapter 9. Jackson’s interactions with the Native Americans does show his character of the times, and his conflict with John Marshall and the Supreme Court, his concepts for the executive branch and his dealing with judicial l branch.
The rest of the chapter is very well done and useful in class. The documents, especially the veto message is important.
The year is incorrect on the source as well as the document. It should read 1819-1820.
This is the most messed up and negative textbook I have ever read. It is full of opinions and not the professional technical writing expected of a textbook and tries to tell the reader how they should feel about certain subjects. It hardly covers any positive aspects of american history while filling the reader full of negativity as to the dark past of the US. We get it. The past had a rocky and not so great foundation.
JQA’s election and presidency needs more than a passing glance. At least, mention that he named Clay as S of State, which was essentially designating him as the perceived successor, hence the “corrupt bargain.” Also – Martin Van Buren and the Tariff of Abominations are directly linked to the Nullification Crisis. Why no discussion of how he used is position in the House to completely derail Adams and set-up Jackson?
Jackson was a transformative president, for better or for worse, but I think this is rather… much. And yet, not enough. The fact there is no discussion of his Indian Removal policy and his reaction to Cherokee v. Ga is disappointing.
My previous comment was supposed to be on Paras 32 and 33. 🙂
When the Missouri Compromise was engineered, largely by Clay, he was a member of the House of Representatives and speaker of the House. He was not a senator at the time, though he was a senator before and after his terms as representative and speaker.
I feel like the text should be more formal and specific when refering to the duel between Jackson and Dickinson in 1806. Saying simply “that backcountry Kentucky duel” seems more informal and takes a stance of the situation, which a historical resource arguably should not.
Is there anything constructive that you would like to add, Bob?
Dawg did you just plug your own book 😭
whats good raymond
Sometimes the truth hurts Bobby Boy.
The Whig Party only “elected” one more president– Zachary Taylor. He died and was replaced by VP Fillmore. In the context of discussing the limited success of the Whigs, this hairsplitting matters all the more.
This first sentence is factually wrong: “the Whig coalition drew strength from several earlier parties, including one that harnessed . . . The American Party was the recipient of the later Whig demise, not a party from which the Whigs “drew strength.”
Live long comrades and rid the world of there nazi Ukrainians.
I was wondering why there wasn’t a conclusion for this chapter
There is no mention of the Indian Removal Act or Trail of Tears, which is infamous during Jackson’s years as president. There should at least be a mention of it somewhere.
Yes, please. Include a conclusion for consistency’s sake.
Justin he lowkey did tho thats crazyyyyy
Stephen personally I would not take that …..
I’ve seen that comment on here before, yes he is.
Long live our people and eradicate war and bring about peace to us all. The efforts of Russia towards the motherland does not waver us; it empowers us to be free and independent once more.
06. A New Nation (32 comments)
The bibliography seems to have been pasted twice.
Americans goal was coming true: “that the United States would become a diverse but cohesive prosperous nation”
new nation was having difficulties and tried to resolve them by putting emphasis on “unity and cooperation”
Even the Constitution was controversial and tried to strengthen the government to help resist internal conflicts
farmers were in a great debt in western Massachusetts and was increased by weak local and national economies
farmers were afraid of getting shut down by their creditors so they fought for their property
soldiers helped fight as well
The farmers and soldiers were named the “Shaysites”.
They were led by a veteran named Daniel Shays
They resorted to tactics used by the patriots before the Revolution
governor, James Bowdoin believed that the Shaysites ere rebels who wanted to rule the government through mob violence.
Didn’t we learn that Abraham Lincoln made thanksgiving a national holiday??
I believe you need to expound more on the New Jersey plan to the students. After all, prior to the Great Compromise the delegates debated for two weeks over a bicameral (Virginia Plan) and a unicameral (New Jersey Plan). At least give the credit to the person that presented it to the Convention, William Paterson.
This would be a great place to discuss more of the Bill of Rights. All in all you have barely provided a sentence to what Rights the Bill protects. Especially in today’s political climate and the fact that a majority of High School students do not understand the Bill of Rights, namely the ninth and tenth amendments.
what was the illuminati scare?
The final statement, “this compromise also counted a slave as three fifths of a person for representation and tax purposes,” does not accurately represent the Constitution. This “compromise” counted three-fifths of a state’s enslaved population, not three-fifths of an individual.
Technical error – Unnecessary parentheses at the end of paragraph
On paragraph 20
Jewish Americans did not have rabbis yet in the early republic.
This needs to be reworded. The Constitution expressly says that the slave trade will end in 1808, but the paragraph claims it ended for those reasons. The way it is worded makes it seem like the writers of the Constitution had some prescient knowledge of the future, i.e. “These three things are going to happen in 1808, so we will allow the slave trade to continue until then.”
[impressment]
Shouldn’t this be “imprisonment?”
I believe your right they came about the 19th century.
Very thankful for these holidays and a time where most can spend it off work and with family.
[In 1786 and 1787, a few years after the Revolution ended, thousands of farmers in western Massachusetts were struggling under a heavy burden of debt.]
Shays Rebellion was the cause of all farmers debt crisis. This gave an opportunity to collect taxes and trades on individuals. Farmers of course were not happy of this.
So each state had to pay back debt? I wonder how much debt each state initially were in.
[The Virginia Plan, therefore, proposed that the United States should have a strong federal government. It was to have three branches—legislative, executive, and judicial—with power to act on any issues of national concern.]
I feel like U.S needed a strong federal government because this could help the national government regulate fair trades through the nation.
Women did not have rights to vote or have a say because they weren’t considered citizens. This would be a very hard time for me to live because I am indeed a women and I’m a human whose living just like any male. This was intentional and unfair, but I guess back then you really did not have a choice.
[ Leave a comment on paragraph 92 0 By 1800, therefore, President Adams had lost the confidence of many Americans]
Having to be disappointed in Americans shouldn’t really be their fault. Didn’t John Adams have many health problems as well..
I believe there were many conspiracies’ to the illuminiti scare that no one really knew what was true and what was not. This lead to fake stories being told nor having to trust others.
[ Many ortherners opposed it on moral grounds. ]
Missing an “n”
Many Northerners opposed it on moral grounds.
It’s unbelievable to me that American Yawp does not include a copy of the Constitution in the Primary Documents section. That the most important document in US History is not a part of this textbook is a shocking oversight.
This is incorrect. The Constitution didn’t count enslaved people as individuals in any way whatsoever; it did count 3/5 of the total population of enslaved toward apportionment. Stating it the way the text presently does actually makes it sounds less bad than it was. Additionally free Black persons are not included in this clause.
That last two sentences don’t seem to be correct either. They seem to conflate the situation post-1820 with what is happening in 1787-88. With no citation visible to me, I can’t really check the source of this claim.
The structure of this section is also confusing students. The first two paragraphs are about the Bill of Rights, then the section goes backward in time to talk about compromises made during the Convention, but many students think it is still talking about the Bill of Rights.
stop
just stop
no more yawp
nice
I can’t believe you said such a thing.
This is a historical resource, and you are making jokes. Unbelieveable.
27. The Sixties (30 comments)
George Wallace did not by any means embody conservative views, he was a typical, racist liberal democrat. This needs to be changed immediately. This skewing of history books to fit an agenda bullshit needs to stop. Write the history as it happened. Stop being assholes, thanks. The democrats are the true racists from the beginning. They always have been and will continue to be.
The most prominent pre-UFWA Latino rights group after WWII was the GI Forum led by Hector Garcia. They first broke into national prominence by their support for Felix Longoria, a WWII fatality whose family was denied waking rights in the local chapel in Three Rivers, Texas. This greatly expanded their reach as they organized Latino vets all over the country to fight for GI Bill and voting rights. They were successful in these fights and even got the first Latinos appointed to high office as a result of their political support of Kennedy and Johnson with the Viva Kennedy and Viva Johnson clubs.
They should have a paragraph of their own in the 1950s chapter, but at least a meniton in the line in front of MAPA and MALDF.
Paragraph 68 and 69 are in a smaller font size than the paragraphs that follow.
In the recommended reading list there are no books about the Vietnam War.
I think to point out that this was likely part of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of women’s suffrage. Women’s Strike for Equality– Aug. 26 is not a random day,
See comment above
Part of a nationwide protest to mark the 50th anniversary of women’s suffrage.
Women’s Strike for Equality.
Aug 26th is not a random day
caption to picture:
I am not sure it makes sense to refer to
represented different civil rights strategies
black activism? efforts for racial justice? The wording implies Malcolm X was part of the CRM.
I would Black Freedom Struggle, yes.
CRM was a specific movement — so no
With the introduction of Malcolm X already as “the late Malcolm X” it would be helpful to give birth and death dates immediately in parentheses after his name, or at least add something like “Prior to his assassination in 1965” in place of “prior to his death.”
If you are going to include a document by Goldwater (which I think you should), you need to mention the 1964 election in the text.
I know there is a passing mention in the previous chapter–but students aren’t going to find it.
You probably also need to describe Wallace’s victories in 1964 and 1968.
What about a document from Young Americans for Freedom?
Is there a reason not to refer to this wing as “liberal”?
Is there a reason not to refer to this wing as “liberal” and taking a page from the NAACP?
Is there a reason not to refer to this wing as “liberal” and taking a page from the NAACP?
I meant this for paragraph 70. You need to mention the creation of NOW in paragraph 70–otherwise we don’t know what it is in paragraph 73.
In this paragraph, (72), I think you need to introduce the term “radical feminist” AND refer to activism and groups–like Redstockings or Miss America protest or rape crisis and anti-domestic violence centers—otherwise they sound like all talk and no action
Hello,
I respectfully suggest that your characterization of the work of the PCSW, which was the brainchild of progressive Democrat Esther Peterson, not Eleanor Roosevelt–who was appointed its head because of her work on the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the UN CSW, as designed to “ameliorate the types of discrimination primarily experienced by middle class and elite white working women” is inaccurate and more reflective of the ideas and goals of the minority feminist group at the time–known as “equal rights feminists” whose most well-known organization was the National Woman’s Party. Most of those tapped to serve on the PCSW were progressive labor feminists and civic activists concerned with helping ordinary American working women and had long track records of support for the labor movement and Black civil rights. Prominent among them for example were historian, civic activist, and Howard University professor Caroline Ware, Pauli Murray of the NAACP, and Dorothy Height of the National Council of Negro Women. The work of Landon Storrs and Dorothy Sue Cobble among others is of note on this front, as is the collection of letters between Ware and Murray by Ann Firor Scott. Even Flora Davis, cited here, does not claim that the PCSW ignored the concerns of working-class women. I’d be happy to work on a rewrite of this paragraph to remedy this mischaracterization if my efforts would be welcome.
I’m considering adopting this resource in place of the traditional textbook I’ve been using but this paragraph gives me pause. Mostly I very much like what I’m seeing so far.
Jennifer Tomas
Associate Professor of History
Piedmont Virginia Community College
I don’t think the immigration laws of 1965 and subsequent changes are addressed at all in this chapter or anywhere else in late 20th century chapters. Please include at least a paragraph!
What exactly was the Bay of Pigs Invasion and why was it considered such an embarrassment for the Kennedy administration?
[Bay of Pigs invasion did much to legitimize the new regime and was a tremendous embarrassment for the Kennedy administration.]
[The tone of the modern U.S. civil rights movement changed ]
There was a new direction of the Civil Rights movement being led by activists and advocates of the movement. From the Greensboro sit-ins, Freedom rides, The Albany Movement to the Christianity Faith. That faith led to a call to action for many black Christians. Pushing the movement from a law bearing to a moral movement against evil.
[Violence served as a reminder of the strength of white resistance to the civil rights movement, particularly in the realm of education.]
The fear of seeing blacks educated was astounding. To keep someone from the desire to learn is inexcusable.
[King’s national reputation and featured powerful photographs and video footage of white police officers using fire hoses and attack dogs on young African American protesters. It also yielded an agreement to desegregate public accommodations in the city: activists in Birmingham scored a victory for civil rights and drew international praise for the nonviolent approach in the face of police-sanctioned violence and bombings.]
A showing of force and evil towards those without resistance shed a different light on what was going on and what peaceful marchers where up against and the was unprovoked hatred towards a group of people with reason or cause.
Some formatting inconsistencies with text size. The paragraph “American environmentalism…nuclear pollutants.” appears smaller that the the rest of the type. This issue appears only when visiting the webpage, and not when viewing the text through the feedback feature.
Septima Clark? Fannie Lou Hamer? Bernice Robinson? Ella Baker?
I understand the movement must be shortened for brevity but surely ONE female civil rights leader could be mentioned in something other than the supplementary reader.
It should be clarified that “Vietcong” is not the actual name of the National Liberation Front. The term “Vietcong” is seen as offensive by some, as it is often used derogatorily. In the Yawp, the official names of nearly all groups is used for them. This should not be any different for the National Liberation Front. Nonetheless, it may be helpful to note in the passage that the National Liberation Front is sometimes referred to as the Vietcong: “…South Vietnam stumbled before insurgent National Liberation Army ([known by some as]/[often referred to as] the Vietcong).
Somewhere in here, a discussion of the immigration reform would be helpful, given its impact on American identity and politics in the late 20th/early 21st C. There is also no mention of environmental reforms made by Johnson admin.
Fixed. Thanks!
con·serv·a·tive
/kənˈsərvədiv/
adjective
1.
averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.
Learn some vocabulary.
Learn to pronounce
Upon further reflection, I would like to withdraw my recommendation to include a mention of MECHA. I read the Wikipedia article that I provided about the organization. It is a bit more controversial than I originally thought. I heard about the group from friends of mine in college. I didn’t know the full story until I read the article.
No one needs a vocab lesson thanks. Just pointing out CRT
no
The statement that George Wallace was a conservative is false. He was a liberal. Please fact check your statements before publishing. Any internet or encyclopedia search for George Wallace yields the result “Democratic Party” (liberal). Please change this error, thank you.
While you are correct, definitions change, look at almost any word now verses its definition in 1963 and it will be different.
23. The Great Depression (29 comments)
The 1937 strike at GM in Flint, MI was not “the first instance of a ‘sit-down’ strike.” It’s debated which was the first sit-down strike in US labor history, but many cite a brewery workers strike in Cincinnati in 1884, or Akron, Ohio rubber workers strike in 1936. The 1937 sit-down at Flint was probably the most historically significant sit-down strike, but not the first use of the tactic.
Honestly, this needs to be two chapters – one on the Depression and a second one on the New Deal. Combining them doesn’t allow sufficient emphasis on either.
During the New Deal, the Immigration and Naturalization Service — under the jurisdiction of Frances Perkins’s Department of Labor — halted some of the Hoover administration’s most divisive practices…”
It would be more organized and easier to understand had the information been kept in chronological order as it is confusing that it swings back and forth to different years and it would be helpful to state years in parameters such as “Between the years 1929 thru 1940’s” The Great Depression ….etc at the intro of the chapters. Have a section on Key points of the chapter would be ideal as well.
The section on the New Deal is displaying as one lonnnngggggg paragraph in the static version. Some one needs to check the code and insert some<p>s. It is an an overwhelming amount of information with lots of acronyms that are confusing in and of themselves.
Fixed. Thanks!
On the sentence beginning “he spent the months,” in the online version there is an aside about the Twentieth Amendment. It reads “the twentieth amendments, ratified in 1933, would subsequently the inauguration from March 4 to January 20.” I believe the word move should be after subsequently.
Incorrect organization title–it was the International Labor Defense.
thats it? theres 2 mentionings of the supreme courts effect on fdrs plan on this page (one later), not nearly enough. dont half ass it.
The text in this chapter is displaying in different font sizes, and it includes in-text citations. The citations in themselves aren’t bad, but are a departure from your convention elsewhere in AY.
Just a comment on font size for this chapter. The font sizes are all over the place. Would be easier to read with standardized font sizes. Thank you.
Agreed.
It seems that there might be multiple versions of this chapter accidentally and simultaneously published. For example, there are two paragraphs in the “Lived Experience” section that repeat the same idea about women in the workforce. The font size changes throughout the chapter. Finally, the chapter as published doesn’t match up with the chapter as it appears on this feedback page.
The font changes sizes like 3 times throughout the page.
The introduction I’m seeing here to the left is different than the one in the regular text but, in any event, this sentence has a typo:
Soon they all were depleted. Unemployed workers and cash-strapped farmers could not defaulted on their debts, including their mortgages.
The name of the organization was the International Labor Defense, not Legal defense.
Some mentioning of how unpopular FDR’s court packing was within his own party, especially in the Democratic-dominated Congress, would serve as a refreshing reminder about how distinct checks and balances were in an earlier age, and how, despite the political power of one party, and the popularity of a president, democratic norms were abided.
Updated. Please let us know if you notice the problem again!
Updated. Please let us know if you notice the problem again!
Updated. Please let us know if you notice the problem again!
Fixed. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
Fixed. Thanks!
“Blacks faced discrimination everywhere…”
Isn’t this a generalization? We know that not every single person in the country was prejudiced against them. If so, there would never have been a resolution to the slave trade.
Maybe it was widespread, but not everywhere.
There is an issue with the formatting on the actual website where paragraphs 48 and 49 are combined. This results in an error: “Depression.Roosvelt” with no space between the two.
sounds like what will happen in california soon.
It was Black Thursday.
If only 2.5% of the population had brokerage accounts, why did it hit so hard?
26. The Affluent Society (27 comments)
fix “InIn” in the beginning of paragraph 67
At the beginning of the paragraph, there is an extra “In” at the beginning of the sentence.
There are two “In”s
I’m writing on behalf of an undergraduate class of students at Rice University, who suggest:
“We would suggest elaborating on the final phrase ‘in the hands of those who opposed it.’ It’s an incredibly nebulous phrase that fails to identify the full scope of massive resistance to desegregation, and leaves it to the reader to assume who the opponents of integration were. The photographs demonstrate resistance, but one way to incorporate it into the text would be to cite the Southern Manifesto. Several high profile political figures including all but three southern senators were a part of the aforementioned massive resistance, and they should be identified (for details on this and their names, see James Patterson, Grand Expectations, Page 398). This will improve the narrative by telling a more accurate picture of how Brown v Board was received by the country.”
In paragraph 67, there is an extra “In” at the beginning.
Recommended citation for this chapter is incorrect as it reads-
Recommended Citation: Edwin C. Breeden et al., “The Cold War,” James McKay, ed., in The American Yawp, eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2018).
[Boiling v. Sharpe ]
The case that is referred to is not Boiling v. Sharpe, it is Bolling v. Sharpe.
[ InIn the 1930s, the economic ravages of the international economic catastrophe knocked the legs out from under the intellectual justifications for keeping government out of the economy]
The inclusion of two “In”s at the beginning is a typo.
[InIn the 1930s, the economic ravages of the international economic catastrophe knocked the legs out from under the intellectual justifications for keeping government out of the economy.]
A suggestion I have is to include the word “the” between keeping and government.
I know you have to careful not pack too many names in, and I think it wise to include Joanne Robinson and the Women’s Political Council.
From wikipedia, quickly, the point that she “stayed up mimeographing 52,500 handbills calling for a boycott of the Montgomery bus system with the help of the chairman of the Alabama State College business department, John Cannon, and two students.”
Including this event allows for a discussion of “social media” of the 1950s, establishing women at the heart of organizing the movement, AND emphasized how many people were involved (I would include the estimate of the number of people who boycotted the buses and stress they were average people: maids, teachers, janitors).
Double “in” at the beginning of this paragraph
Link is broken
Browder v. Gayle was decided in June 1956–so the connection between the Court decision and the end of the boycott is a bit more complicated
The citation should read:
Recommended citation: Edwin C. Breeden et al., “The Affluent Society,” James McKay, ed., in The American Yawp, eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2018).
and not have “The Cold War”, as that is the previous chapter.
Great suggestion. We added Joanne Robinson’s work into the text.
Fixed. Thanks!
Updated. Thank you!
Updated. Thank you!
What’s the point of capitalizing black, but not white?
There should be a more clear link between Till’s murder and Rosa’s decision to resist. She attended a mass meeting about Emmett Till and four days later refused to give up her seat to a white patron. Parks was moved to fight this Jim Crow indignity because of the injustice of the Till murder, “Many years later, she told Emmett Till’s mother that she had thought of him at this moment.”*
*Theoharis. The Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks. Page (?)
“as well as the postwar economic boom led, to rising expectations for many African Americans.” is grammatically incorrect. The comma should be after the word “boom”, not after the word “led.
Belongs with ch. 27
there needs to be some information in the chapter for the relevance of this primary source to be clear
there needs to be some information in the chapter for the relevance of this primary source to be clear.
Context for this missing in the chapter
Can you guys talk more about the link between the freedom riders, the incident in 1961 and how this movement led segregation to an end in public spaces in 1964.
explaining the massive fire in Anniston.
the brutal beating by 200 or so white mobs.
in 1961
There is a distinct link between the three years other than “further assaults against Jim Crow”.
Explain the motivation from the Freedom Riders as a racial mixing on example to end all segregation by traveling on buses.
As the post-war economy boomed across the United States, a resultant culture began to expand further out of major cities and into recently constructed suburbia. Because the population was branching out, there became a more urgent need for efficient travel. Many states were inclined to produce highways due to the method used to pay for them: the federal government would pay for 95% while the state would only pay 10%. This incentive allowed highways to run through cities and the fact that it was cheap made them a popular mode of travel for those living in both cities and the suburbs.
However, the government’s (local, state, federal) political intentions were to benefit the increasing white middle-class while leaving out Black Americans and other minority groups. They were segregated from white neighborhoods and relocated to “slums” or “blights”. However, interstate highways were designed to sweep undesired communities. Policy makers were against the idea of building decent homes for Black communities as keeping Black families in poverty allowed the white population to prosper.
An example of this was the destruction of Sugar Hill in 1954, which was a “prosperous Black middle class area” in Los Angeles was completely destroyed by the Santa Monica Freeway that ran right through this community. The motives became blatant, it was to preserve the white American citizens and create a legalized and permanent Jim Crow society; where Black people are forever suppressed with little means of moving up the social ladder.
This plan was further enforced by the federal government in 1938 as United States Vice President, and consequently Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace expressed this system of segregation to President Roosevelt who supported the idea. Although Black Americans had designated areas in which to live, authorities were still dissatisfied with their proximity to their white neighbors. It was believed that “urban interstates would give them a good opportunity to get rid of the local ‘[n*gg*rtown]’” because the faster people could travel—and in greater amounts—the faster white areas could be rid of Black Americans. The government exercised racial cleansing by completely removing minorities from predominantly white areas; they were able to do this by limiting their resources to keep them impoverished and therefore unwelcome. This became known as “slum clearance”.
The effects of the urban renewal system had detrimental consequences that are still seen today through housing segregation, redlining, more funding in white, “safer” neighborhoods and less funding in “dangerous” communities mainly occupied by minorities.
8 Mile Road or M-102 is a highway that cuts through Detroit separating white neighborhoods from those considered “undesirable” which include Black and other minority districts.
Citation:
The Color of Law, Rothstein, 127-130
13. The Sectional Crisis (23 comments)
Last sentence doesn’t make specific reference to Haiti. Might be confusing for some…keep up the great work!
Please add John Brown’s first name and some short description of him to the caption beneath the painting of him.
[white men regardless of status would gain not only land and jobs but also the right to vote,]
“Regardless of status” should have commas around it, as it is an appositive.
This reference to antiquity — with no qualification — obfuscates qualitative differences between ancient slavery (based on frequently ephemeral war booty) and modern race-based chattel slavery. It is as if a discussion of the Nazi Holocaust began by noting that there has always been mass murder.
It ought to be made explicit that the balancing act specifically concerned the number of states in the Senate.
The clause, “pandering to appeals to white supremacy,” incorrectly conflates our modern idea of racial views with the past.
Many pro-slavery voters and abolitionists agreed that whites were inherently superior to other races. Therefore “pandering to white supremacy” does not add a distinction. I think this sentence is unnecessary and misleading by suggesting that abolitionists and republicans believed the races were, or should be, equal.
This sentence should be removed as it blurs the distinction between what the republicans advocated (anti-slavery) and modern views of racial equality. The sentence also does not add historical context or substance to the article.
“stole” on sentence 4 should be stolen
it is correct grammar
This and the next several paragraphs repeat far too much of what was already covered in chapter 9.
This misses most of the Democratic agenda, which was crucial in building the party and attracting supporters — limits on the federal government’s economic role, pushing for hard money, supporting immigration, etc.
“aided by gag rules” – by a gag rule first passed in the U.S. House in 1836
This paragraph and the next overlap — in fact repeat one sentence.
This and the preceding two paragraphs mis-state the process by which the Free Soil Party was formed. After the Democratic and Whig conventions, dissatisfied elements from both parties (Conscience whigs and Barnburner Democrats) joined to create a third ticket. They attracted some of the former Liberty Party supporters.
“Antislavery feelings continued to run deep, however, and their depth revealed that with a Democratic Party misstep, a coalition united against the Democrats might yet emerge and bring them to defeat. ”
This is a gratuitous and ex post facto type of statement.
This paragraph claims that “Douglas had a number of goals in mind” but only mentions the railroad. Beyond this he believed that citizens deserved statehood, rather than territorial status. He also believed that popular sovereignty had solved the conflict over the Mexican territory and thought it would do the same for the Nebraska territory. the result was a disaster for the Democrats, causing the birth of the Republican party and huge losses in the 1854 elections.
This is a very misleading description of a complex back-and-forth. “Kansas voted”? There were competing constitutions and legislatures. Then the federal government attempted to bribe Kansans to accept a slave constitution. This was a fundamental violation of democratic norms.
No – Buchanan didn’t talk with Taney; he had written earlier to Justice Catron.
The decision was not just that blacks couldn’t be citizens, it was that they were therefor property, and thus could not be prevented from being transported.
This is a very thin description of a vital and complex debate. Douglas “pandered” but he emphasized democracy and opportunities for whites. Moreover, he created the Freeport Doctrine as a salve to antislavery forces. To say that Lincoln was “on the defensive” is both inaccurate and completely neglects his bold assertion about a divided house and for the economic equality of all men. His arguments here made him a viable candidate for the presidency.
The important point is that Douglas’s arguments in the 1858 senatorial campaign made him unacceptable to southern Democrats.
“Declaration of Rights and Man and Citizen” is an incorrect translation of the French title of this declaration: Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen. As a French speaker, I know that this translates to “declaration of the rights of man and the citizen”.
Read aloud option gets confused by the font style and can’t read words like in this paragraph “offered”.
OMG shut up
No body cares also this chapter never mentions the allegations into Lincolns homosexuality.
28. The Unraveling (22 comments)
Repeated sentence
“Former one-term Georgia governor Jimmy Carter…”. This is true, but it implies that Carter lost his run for a second term. He was term-limited so he couldn’t run. I would strike the reference to one term.
Robert F. Kennedy was killed, not Robert F. Kennedy Jr., his son.
The paragraph ends with the word detente” with a closed quote sign. Just a typographical error.
Would be useful to mention the Equal Pay Act specifically.
The last 2 sentences read “Americans cringed at Nick Ut’s wrenching photograph of a naked Vietnamese child fleeing an American napalm attack. More and more American voices came out against the war.”
Surely the photograph in question should be included, at the very least, in the Primary Sources that accompany this chapter.
In regard to the photo “The Soiling of Old Glory,” Ted Landsmark was not a black teenager. He was a civil rights lawyer. His assailant was a white teenager. Consider: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/03/12/soiling-old-glory
In regard to the “Soiling of Old Glory,” please note that the victim, Ted Landsmark, was not a black teenager but an adult Civil Rights lawyer. His assailant was a white teenager.
Consider: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/03/12/soiling-old-glory
[biker gang]
outlaw motorcycle club
To my knowledge Ted Landmark was a civil rights lawyer, and 30 years old when the picture was captured. The protester could possibly have been in his teens.
Robert F. Kennedy was killed in June of 1968, not Robert F. Kennedy, his son.
Not Robert F. Kennedy, Jr* typo.
In the recommended reading list there are no books about the Vietnam War.
The final sentence in this paragraph implies that the Stones knew that Hunter had been murdered and that they played on anyway. There’s no need to make the situation worse than it was. They did not know that Hunter had been murdered. Even flipping the clauses would help some: “As the Stones played, Angels stomped Hunter’s body into the ground.”
Nixon visited China in 1972.
Merle Haggard’s “Okie from Muskogee” is likely satire and should be treated more like it is in this passage. Mentioning Haggard as confronting the counterculture through this song would not be fair. Haggard said that “We wrote it to be satirical, originally, but then people latched on to it and it really turned into this song that looked into the mindset of people so opposite of who and where we were.” The first line of the song says “we don’t smoke marijuana in Muskogee” and this is coming from Haggard, who was known to smoke marijuana. If Archie Bunker is accurately said to mock revolutionary middle-aged white men than Haggard’s satirical song should be treated in a similar tone.
This paragraph is a different size font than the rest of the page.
The end of the paragraph should be fact-checked. Wasn’t it a South Vietnamese napalm attack? I’m not an expert, so I’ll leave it to someone else to verify that, but if that was the case, the text should be clarified in some way.
A sentence about US v. Nixon would help bring in the Supreme Court’s role in the Watergate investigation. An additional sentence about the how the system of checks and balances, as well as that of the press, corralled the abuse of executive power would help highlight the significance of the event, especially as readers engage in the material having lived through two Trump impeachments.
You are right! Thank you for the correction, which we’ve applied to the text.
Kennedy was not assassinated in June, yet he was assassinated in November of 1963.
I agree with Mackowski’s comment.
Secondly, the article linked to as a source at the end of the paragraph has been deleted or moved. Clicking the link takes you to a 404 page
12. Manifest Destiny (18 comments)
Is this what’s now called Oregon State, or the Oregon Territory?
Verb tense should be changed in sentence #2 of this paragraph. It should read:
“This treaty ceded lands in Georgia for $5 million and, the signatories hoped, would limit future conflicts between the Cherokee and white settlers.
In paragraph 29, there is an extra word that should be removed. It says:
“Not every instance was of removal was as treacherous…”
The first “was” in that sentence should be removed.
In the sentence that begins “Not every instance…” in paragraph 29, the transition “while, on the other hand,” does not seem to fit well. This sentence might be better divided into two sentences, with some minor changes also made to the sentence that follows. Perhaps:
“Not every instance of removal was as treacherous or demographically disastrous as the Cherokee example. Furthermore, tribes responded in a variety of ways. Some tribes violently resisted removal. Ultimately, over sixty…”
The periodization with this is awkward. Manifest Destiny is best dealt with as a Western phenomenon. Indian Removal should be dealt with earlier under the Age of Jackson. Placing it here makes this chapter longer than it need be, and confuses the issues here.
Change “America” to “the U.S.” for political and cultural correctedness.
The purpose of manifest destiny was to move people out west. It was needed to further America.
Seizing the native Americans land was very wrong. President Jackson and the government forced them out.
I thought that ‘familial responsibilities were a great addition to the romantic vision of life they discussed We associate selfishness and greed with the westward expansion, and there were some terrible things that occurred like the driving out of the native Americans. Yet, this gives us insight and empathy into those moving west for a greater life.
o sullivan, a man with big balls; and larger breasts was quite fond of scat
The sentence, “On January 24, 1848, James W. Marshall…” would make more sense if it were placed after the first (1st) sentence of the previous paragraph.
“If the great draw of the West served as manifest destiny’s kindling, then the discovery of gold in California was the spark that set the fire ablaze. On On January 24, 1848, James W. Marshall, a contractor hired by John Sutter, discovered gold on Sutter’s sawmill land in the Sacramento Valley area of the California Territory. Most western settlers sought land ownership, but the lure of getting rich quick . . .”
I agree, but nobody ever said it was right (in the book). This is a history textbook. History is ugly, we just have to learn from our mistakes from the past.
It makes no sense to include Coeur D’Alene and Tombstone — which developed in 1883 and 1877 — in this section dealing quite clearly (and reasonably) with the pre-Civil War period.
I fully agree
yeah
First, I love this book. Thank you for your hard work.
Secondly – your use of the term “filibustering” here is a real puzzler. I cannot find an alternate definition (from the legislative use) to fit the way you use it in this paragraph. Please elaborate!
Actually Aidan Sexmachine, who participated in serious polygamy not affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints but had over 300 wives all straight 10s. He also had sexual intercourse with everyone’s mom. and sometimes their dad. and jonas.
29. The Triumph of the Right (18 comments)
I know talking about “liberalism” is alway going to be imperfect, but the phrase “economic liberalism” here is especially apt to be misconstrued. Instructors like myself take the time to peel back common (and historical) misuses of the term liberalism, and usages like this have the potential to undo some of that work.
This chapter should be titled “THE TRIUMPH OF THE CONSERVATIVE” or “THE TRIUMPH OF RIGHT-WING POLITICS” or something similar. The current title implies the correctness of those who triumphed, by labeling them merely “RIGHT.” I realize this is not your intent, but when writing for general audiences, it is important to consider how particular words and phrase might be misinterpreted.
Par. 20 line 9: “County” should be “country.”
This paragraph ends with a close quote which is not matched by an open quote, or part of a quotation. I recommend deleting the close quote.
Speaking to Detroit autoworkers in October 1980, Republican presidential candidate Ronald Reagan described what he saw as the American Dream under Democratic president Jimmy
This chapter should be called the Resurgence of Conservatives, Triumph is final and implies a judgement.
I do not see how this is a slim majority for Reagan, he wins overwhelmingly in the electoral college and wins the presidency by 10 percent. I think it is unfair to call this a slim majority and reeks of political posturing
Small nit-picky thing, but in the last sentence, “headwinds” seems confusing. The domestic and foreign policy catastrophes in question may have been headwinds to the Carter administration, but syntactically the “ship” they’re supposedly aiding here is the conservative movement, bringing it to shore. But headwinds would hinder, not help a ship reach the shore. Suggested revision: “After years of mobilization, the domestic and foreign policy storms of the Carter administration provided the tailwinds that brought the conservative movement to shore.”
I realize this may sound like nitpicking but the formatting of multiple AY chapters in the post-1877 section is inconsistent. Font sizes and spacing change over the course of the chapter, this one included. Sometimes it’s obvious that a paragraph has been cut and pasted in because it repeats content from a previous paragraph (in addition to having different formatting). The point is that this visual disruption makes the whole text seem less professional and less trustworthy. I love AY and want to support you in making it as excellent as possible — thanks for your attention!
Please clarify that sovereignty over the canal was returned to Panama in 1978 but control over operation remained in the US’ hands until Dec 31, 1999. Current emphasis enforces conservative bias that Carter “gave away” the canal.
The last two sentences are misleading. Black household income increased 84% from 1980 to 1990. White household income increased 68%. That’s a greater increase for African Americans; however, your second sentence makes it seem like the disparity increased rather than decreased.
Thank you. We have tried to fix this wherever it occurs. If you find any instances we missed and can identify them specifically, that would help. Thanks!
You’re absolutely right! Great catch. Fixed.
Thank you for the clarification!
Reagan left office on January 20th, 1989, not in 1988.
I respect your concern but if you had furthered you research you would see the statistic regarding African American household income growth is incorrect. It had increased no more then 50%.
[$21,423, 42 percent]
This wording is extremely confusing. It reads like the author was about to put a percentage number but then changed his mind and put a dollar figure instead. It also could look like it is just trying to be a dollar figure reporting that the average black family made millions in 1990. It may be better to say something like “By 1990, the median income for black families was $21,423. This was 42 percent below the median income for white households.” This puts clear separation between the percentage and dollar figures.
The sentence: “And so when communists with ties to Cuba overthrew the government of the Caribbean nation of Grenada in October 1983, Reagan dispatched the U.S. Marines to the island.” is incorrect. US Marines were a tiny portion of the invasion force. It was the 1st and 2nd battalions, 75th Rangers and 82nd Airborne who were the main effort, 90% of the ground troops. Army Soldiers not Marines were who Reagan dispatched to take over the island of Grenada.
08. The Market Revolution (17 comments)
[dozens of slates]
minor typo – should be “slaves”
Text Says Tauten, Maine (which I don’t think has ever existed). The referenced source clearly says Tauton, Ma.
Correct to “and a new, more-commercial”
The 5th sentence should read, “through institutions such as the House of Refuge in New York City…”
Which period? Perhaps provide a date or timespan, as that would help give context
‘They earned cash for what they had previously consumed; they purchased the goods they had previously made or went without.”
Should be.
They earned cash for what they had previously consumed; they purchased the goods they had previously made or gone without.
Delete “and.”
Change But to However,
Delete and
The initial vestiges of industrialization appeared in the United States in 1790, when Samuel Slater opened a British-style textile factory in Rhode Island.
While most historical accounts place the start of the full-scale American industrial revolution at either 1820 or 1870, factory labor and entrepreneurial innovation, such as the Slater Mill, were the driving forces of industrialization.
Second to last sentence, locus should probably be replaced with focus.
“Prostitutes and con men could look like regular honest Americans.”
Equating sex workers to con men is distasteful in our current social state. Sex work is still work and should be respected as such. Making sex workers the antonym of “regular honest Americans” is distasteful.
I would suggest just saying con men and leaving “prostitutes” out so you don’t disrespect sex work in order to get the point communicated.
Sex is good
Most sex workers have been trafficked and coerced. It is illegal in most states. There are several organizations that work to help men and women (and children) to escape this industry.
Agreed! That was poorly and inappropriately written.
“These textile mills, worked by free labor,” – “Free labor” can be misinterpreted as “unpaid labor.” Maybe “voluntary labor” or “labor of free people”?
Another option would be: “These textile mills were not operated by enslaved laborers; nevertheless, they depended on southern cotton.”
14. The Civil War (14 comments)
I don’t think this is a “photograph” like it says it is.
the south was right
You just need to insert the opening parentheses before “Peace Democrat” at the end of the paragraph 🙂
The characterization of Douglas as pro-slavery is misleading and confusing. While Douglas’ personal position on the slavery question remains up for debate (see Graham Peck’s Making an Antislavery Nation and Adam I.P. Smith’s The Stormy Present for contrasting perspectives) the fact that mattered at Charleston in 1860 was that he had taken a moderately anti-slavery stand over Lecompton– thus alienating Southern Democrats. The Douglas Democrats failed to adopt an explicitly pro-slavery platform at Charleston and stuck to popular sovereignty (with all of its ambiguity). For clarity in this paragraph, I would simply label Douglas as “a champion of popular sovereignty” rather than “a pro-slavery moderate.”
Why isn’t there information about Native Americans fighting as soldiers in the Civil War?
I love the addition of the “Cornerstone” speech and Mississippi’s letter of secession, but with all of the misunderstandings regarding the cause of the Civil War in modern America, the addition of the rest of the Southern statements on secession would help teachers that use this textbook more accurately portray the primary cause of the Civil War. Adding the other states’ memos regarding slavery and secession would strengthen the message that academic historians have no problem understanding and that high school and college textbooks should be underscoring to ensure that people that read this book have no doubt that the perceived threat to slavery was the cause of each Confederate state’s intent to leave the United States in 1860-’61.
This section is written clearly and well, but adding the other states’ declarations, even as footnotes, would benefit readers (and, thus, the rest of us) immensely from possibly never having to entertain an argument over the cause of slavery when each state made it obvious.
It should be They instead of her
This quote is wrong. It’s “Once let the black man get upon his person the brass letter U.S.”, not “Once let a black man get upon his person the brass letters U.S.”
A discussion of Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus would bring out a specific way Lincoln maintained unity in this critical geography of the Civil War. Habeas Corpus is also a good vocabulary word to bring in here.
The Surgeon General’s name is correctly spelled “Hammond” not Hammon.
Perhaps replace use of “fledging” with “fledgling?” (Unless implication is different from my understanding).
Fledgling: a person or organization that is immature, inexperienced, or underdeveloped.
That’s pretty badass
What does “elixirs” means here, and do they really attempted to make their own? Is there historical proves?
I think there should be more in-depth visuals about the true horrors of slavery. We need to talk more about how both enslaved men and women were raped or how Enslavers would eat black people because it was a “delicacy.” I think we need to stop whitewashing and downplaying the horrific acts that we Americans committed. The American School system needs to tell the whole truth.
General Comments (6 comments)
Some of the paragraphs the text size is smaller then others for not apparent reason.
I don’t know if there is way to fix that but, if possible please try.
It would be fantastic if there were instructor resources (quiz questions, etc.) available as well.
It would be useful to include in the primary sources for Chapter 6, the US Constitution, since so much of that chapter is dedicated to that document. It would also be nice to include a selection from The Federalist Papers so students can understand the framing of the debate over the Constitution. Given the polarized nature of the electorate today, perhaps Federalist 10 would serve the purpose.
It would be great if you could highlight the text and underline it, as if it were a real textbook. Having a toolbar that allows you to take notes like you do in a physical book would be utterly helpful.
Where are the page numbers? I am using the online text for class, and we are asked to site directly from the text. However, unless I am missing something, the online text does not have a convenient way to find the page numbers.
It would be wonderful to have text-to-speech function for the text and textual sources. Many of my students commute, are ESL, or have other accessibility issues. Also, they would learn pronunciations, as well.
00. Feedback Instructions (3 comments)
Capitalize “Black” the same way you guys capitalize ‘African- American”. “Black” is and can be used to identify an African- American, but being Black is now generally understood as the proper term for Black Americans who can’t trace their roots or, who were born in another country that isn’t Africa. In English, we capitalize proper nouns like Latinx. Asian, Indigenous American, and in reference to a culture or a person should be capitalized.
What does this paragraph have to do with the capitalization of terms describing nationality? Also, the gender-neutral term for “Latino/Latina” is “Latino,” not “Latinx.”
I love your site. I stumble upon it while researching marriage of women in the Americas as compared to Europe 500 years ago. It would be nice if you can define what Yawp means on the first page as people from all over the world is reading your manuscripts.
Comments on the Blog
Hello world! (1 comment)
Hi, this is a comment.
To get started with moderating, editing, and deleting comments, please visit the Comments screen in the dashboard.
Commenter avatars come from Gravatar.