Industrialization And Urbanization During The Civil War

Industrialization and urbanization that happened in America after the civil war, is a good manifestation that the country was moving along the right path. After the war, progress in terms of investments, industrialization and urbanization was inevitable. After the civil war in America, people from the south who had been displaced and the people who were free could now move to the west to work in the cattle drives, fight the Indians and also begin a new life as farmers. Social Darwinism philosophy was adopted, and everyone believed that the poor had the right to be rich. The paper will focus on the right path that the country followed in the feudalism period between 1865 and 1914 when the country became a feudal society based on the capital and not on the land. The class welfare was manifested in the county when the labor unions rose. Some of the labor unions that were developed include the American Federation of Labor in 1886, the international workers of 1905. There was also the development of the political parties that advocated for the minimum wages, reduced hours of working and the conditions of working that were very safe. They also initiated the factories that used machines instead of human labor and the hard labor done by women and children was suspended. During the same period, the federal government in America gave subsidies to the railroads through the provision of the free land. The courts became hostile to the laws on the social welfare such as the Hamer versusShow MoreRelatedHis 105 Assignment 21361 Words   |  6 Pagesï » ¿ Industrialization after the Civil War John E. Brown Strayer University HIS 105- Contemporary U. S. History Professor Anthony McCormack November 9, 2014 Industrialization after the Civil War When the Civil War was declared over, the United States became a better nation because of the Constitutional Amendments that were passed outlawing slavery and giving the government as well as the state the ability to serve and protect everyone. This paper will also show major aspects ofRead MoreAmericas Post-Civil War Growing Pains1122 Words   |  5 Pages| America’s Post-Civil War Growing Pains | Assignment 1 | Michelle Lepri | Professor Lisa Hawkins | 7/20/2012 | There were two major turning points during this period were the Reconstruction and Industrialization. The civil wars ended in 1865 and with the end of the civil war bought Reconstruction to the south from 1865 to 1877. The physical rebuilding of the southern region began quickly and progressed rapidly, but reconstructing southern society was much more difficult process, especiallyRead MoreThe During The Civil War875 Words   |  4 Pagesdecades that proceeded before the Civil War had taken place, Americans witnessed an abundance of trial, error, and triumph during their attempt to revise the American society. Some of the main focal points of the remaking of our society would have been the Market Revolution, Urbanization, Abolition, States Rights and Westward Expansion. Without these contributing factors, our society may not have excelled in the ways that it did prior to the Civil War. (The Pre-Civil War Era (1815–1850). SparkNotesRead MoreThe Progressive Era Essay1133 Words à ‚  |  5 Pagesby the end of the Civil war and first World war. This brought about the industrialization and massive boom in immigration experienced at this period. Urbanization became key in the history of America and it has its influence in the attractiveness of the nation. The progressive era was from 1870 to 1916 which entered the period of urbanization in the United States. In the 19th century, a lot of European immigrants came into the States and this aided the speedy industrialization, people moved awayRead MoreIndustrialization After the Civil War1789 Words   |  8 PagesAssignment 1.2: Industrialization after the Civil War Final Paper Belinda Scott History 105: Spring 2014 Prof. Michael Smith Industrialization after the Civil War After the Civil War the United States became a much more industrialized society. Between 1865 in 1920 industrialization and proved American life in many ways. However industrialization also created problems for American society. This paper willRead MoreThe American Of The United States1081 Words   |  5 PagesAlthough America was touted as a land of tolerance and prosperity, during the Civil War prejudices grew against immigrants. Heightened tensions between the North and the South caused further disunity. Many states began to start passing laws dealing with immigration. As the years passed, cities and skyscrapers popped up everywhere. The influx of workers led to lots of buildings and the urbanization rate became four times greater than during the 19th century. Immigrant desire to reinvent themselves causedRead MoreEssay about Transformation of Japan1203 Words   |  5 PagesTransformation of Japan During the time period between the 1850s and 1950s, Japan underwent massive changes politically, economically, and socially. Acknowledging the failure of isolation, Japan imitated the West in an attempt to modernize, however, still retaining its own identity. A reorganized and more centralized government allowed Japan to industrialize in half the time it took the nations of Western Europe. Industrialization provided Japan with the tools needed to transform itself fromRead MoreImpact Of The American Industrial Revolution On Modern America1273 Words   |  6 PagesModern America Introduction The Industrial Revolution started around 1750. It began in Britain and it spread throughout the World. Although full industrial development would only occur after 1815, the industrial revolution began in the United States during the 1790s and early 1800s. The Industrial Revolution was marked by three key developments specialization, mechanization, and distribution. Specialization meant the breaking down of the means of production into its component parts, allowing for moreRead More Political Change in Europe in the Modern Era Essay example1700 Words   |  7 PagesEuropean nations gained world dominance between the 15th and 19th centuries through imperialism and industrialization. European nations competed among themselves for international influence, and established by the early 20th century a very intricate balance of power, the disturbance of which ignited World War I in 1914. Over this same period, the power of monarchs within European nations declined as a larger portion of the populace demanded political rights, leading to the democratization of mostRead MoreReconstruction and Industrialization1446 Words   |  6 PagesAssignment 1: â€Å"America’s Post-Civil War Growing Pains† Reconstruction and Industrialization 1865-1900 Four years after the first shots were fired at Fort Sumter the Civil War ended with the Union’s Victory over the Confederacy. Though the war was over, there were still many problems that needed to be resolved in order to reunite the states as a nation. The time period in which steps were taken to rebuild the nation is known as reconstruction. Reconstruction lasted from 1865 until 1877. The

SA IBL TB8e Ch14 - 2815 Words

CHAPTER 14—NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE LAW TRUE/FALSE 1. The NAFTA Binational Panel found that the sale of U.S. twine in Canada at unfairly low prices caused past injury to Canadian twine producers. ANS: T PTS: 1 2. In 1994, the Extraordinary Challenge Committee found that the U.S. Department of Commerce was correct in implementing countervailing duties against Canadian lumber. ANS: F PTS: 1 3. Production sharing is intended to create U.S. jobs by encouraging the use of U.S.-made components when assembly of a product takes place in a foreign country. ANS: T PTS: 1 4. In Samsonite Corporation v. United States, it was found that the luggage handles were only assembled in Mexico and therefore not subject to duties. ANS: F PTS: 1†¦show more content†¦d. Samsonite luggage did not cause serious injury to the Mexican luggage industry. ANS: B PTS: 1 2. A free trade area is: a. Two countries that have a common external tariff. b. A geographic area between two countries where there are no tariffs. c. A group of two or more countries in which import duties and other trade barriers are reduced or eliminated. d. A geographic area between two countries where tariffs are reduced, but not necessarily eliminated. ANS: C PTS: 1 3. NAFTA was based on: a. The U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement. b. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. c. The Generalized System of Preferences. d. The North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation. e. None of the above. ANS: A PTS: 1 4. Harmonized tariff schedules break down product classifications into: a. 6 digits. b. 8 digits. c. 10 digits. d. 12 digits. ANS: C PTS: 1 5. Which of the following statements is untrue regarding trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico? a. Canada and the United States are each other s largest trading partners. b. Mexico underwent a serious financial crisis in 1994. c. Some key industries in Mexico are government-owned monopolies. d. Mexico has had a traditionally open market that encourages foreign investment. e. All of the above statements are correct. ANS: D PTS: 1 6. A customs union is: a. A group of customs laws intended to reduce tariffs and stimulate trade. b. A free trade area with a common external tariff. c. A

Obama Perfect Union Speech †Contemporary Racism Free Essays

Contemporary Racism President Obama’s speech â€Å"A More Perfect Union† was a response to many outbursts made about things that Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor, had said on issues of racism. The reverend made statements that Obama called dismissive when what the world needed most was unity to overcome the continual racism in the country. Quotes from the Reverend such as â€Å"In the  21st  century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. We will write a custom essay sample on Obama Perfect Union Speech – Contemporary Racism or any similar topic only for you Order Now White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the  woodwork  or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns† and â€Å"Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run! †¦We [in the U. S. ] believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God† caused an uproar in Washington. Obama used this opportunity to address race and the problems in the country relating to it. This speech relates to many of the topics we learned about in class regarding race and racism. Obama talks about his family’s background and how various people don’t like him in office for ridiculous reasons such as that he’s â€Å"too black† or â€Å"not black enough† to be the first black president. They even go as far as to say that he’s in office due to affirmative action. He goes on to talk about his white grandmother and the racist statements she would make, such as that when a black man passes her by on the street she fears him. President Obama’s speech relates to white privilege in the sense that the country has only ever had white presidents and therefore a stereotype has been formed that only the typical white collar, white male deserves to be in office. White people say things like that because they feel like power is being taken away from them and given to black people by having a black president in office. Obama even quotes about white privilege and the power of whites being taken away by saying, â€Å"Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race†¦Ã‚  when they hear an African-American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time. In his speech he also talks about institutional racism which goes all the way back to Brown vs. Board of Education which was the Supreme Court case that ruled separation of black and white students unconstitutional. Obama also talked about this in his speech saying, â€Å"Segregated schools were and are inferior schools; we still haven’t fixed them,  50 years after Brown v. Board of Education. And the inferior education they provided, then and now, he lps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today’s black and white students. He went on to say how this gives an inferior education to blacks and how this explains the gap in the income levels of white Americans vs. black Americans which in turn doesn’t give black men as many economic opportunities as white men. This not only relates to white privilege because they feel they are deserving of these jobs and educations but it also has a lot to do with institutional racism. By giving these economic opportunities to the better qualified person you are giving it to the one who has a better education. Through his speech, Obama illuminates the problem within our schools. Funding and quality of education go hand in hand, and since often times African Americans live in poor urban communities, schools struggle for funds to heighten the quality of their education. By talking about the dependence of schools on the income of the people living in the areas surrounding, Obama points out that privileged white kids are able to come out on top verses an African American child who grew up in an underfunded school. These white kids then get into more prestigious colleges, in turn landing more high paying jobs than the majority of their African American counterparts. Obama also goes on to talk about how people try to act like there is no racism anymore even though it is so blatantly out there. He quoted â€Å"Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism. He talks about how things like this widen the gap of racism and how we need to work to close the gap instead. He calls it a racial stalemate saying, â€Å"Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naive as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy — particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own. † Obama believes that only by exposing the true roo ts of racism can we move forward, slowly but with conviction. He encourages more debate and open discussion instead of hiding behind polite political facades. But I have asserted a firm conviction — a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people — that, working together, we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice if we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union†. Overall, the goal of President Obama’s speech was to highlight the most taboo of topics in our society: racism. Since the era of reconstruction, white people have tried hard to ignore skin color, but Barack Obama is trying to make a point of not ignoring the color of his skin, but rather using it to his advantage by pointing out the problems we have created. White supremacy is still very much a real idea, even in our modern 21st century society. Poor education makes finding a good job in tough economic times an almost impossible task for the African American community, simply because they never had the same opportunities as their white peers. Obama encourages Americans to forgive past grievances and instead create a â€Å" new normal† – one of racial equality and opportunity regardless of race. How to cite Obama Perfect Union Speech – Contemporary Racism, Essay examples

The Right to Die Analysis Essay Example For Students

The Right to Die Analysis Essay The Right to DieThe word Euthanasia originated from the Greek language: eu means good and thanatos means death. Euthanasia (Greek, good death) is the practice of killing a person or animal, in a painless or minimally painful way, for merciful reasons, usually to end their suffering. However, some people define euthanasia to include both voluntary and involuntary termination of life (Humphy 12). Like so many moral/ethical/religious terms, euthanasia has many meanings. Euthanasia, in the strict sense, involves actively causing death. This is, in some cases, legal like in the Netherlands, but in few other countries. Euthanasia, in a wider sense, includes assisting someone to commit suicide, in particular physician-assisted suicide (PAS). Allowing death e.g. by not providing life support or vital medication is not considered euthanasia if it is the patients wish (Robinson). It is sometimes called passive euthanasia in cases where the patient is unable to make decisions about treatment. Living Wills and Do Not Resuscitate orders are legal instruments that make a patients treatment decisions known ahead of time; allowing a patient to die based on such decisions is never considered euthanasia. Terminal sedation is a combination of medically inducing a deep sleep and stopping other treatment, with the exception of medication for symptom control (such as analgesia). It is considered to be euthanasia by some, but under current law and medical practice it is considered a form of palliative care (Humphry 14). Advocates of euthanasia generally insist that euthanasia should be voluntary, requiring informed consent, and that it should only be used in cases of terminal illness that cause unbearable suffering, or an eventual, complete loss of awareness. Its opponents challenge it on several ethical grounds, including a slippery slope argument that it is the first step towards compulsory euthanasia (Leon 22). Voluntary euthanasia is the truest and fullest form of euthanasia wherein the individual requests euthanasia either during illness or before, if complete incapacitation is expected (a coma would be an example). Euthanasia in these cases differs from suicide by existing only within the context of the amelioration of suffering in the process of death. Volition must be informed and free (i.e. not under duress from any third party) (Capek, Fox, and Kamakahi 33). Involuntary Euthanasia is what some describe as the killing of a person who has not explicitly requested aid in dying. It is often done when resuscitation is not expected, or after severe brain damage that renders a person incapable of making life decisions. Therefore any euthanasia is not voluntary, but also not involuntary. Famously notable as turning off life-support, this is most often done to patients who are in a Persistent Vegetative State and will probably never recover consciousness (Wickett, Humphy 41). Involuntary eut hanasia is where an individual may distinguish between life and death and may fully realize the difference between them. Any medical killing is involuntary. If, for example, a man knows he is going to experience severe agony, and does not consent to death, euthanasia imposed upon him is ethically and morally, if not legally, classed as murder. In Nazi Germany the term euthanasia (Euthanasie) referred to the systematic killing of disabled children and adults. This has tainted the word in German-speaking countries; the alternate term is Sterbehilfe, which means help to die. Any time that medical personnel determine on behalf of a sentient and responsible individual that his or her life is not worth living, the medical killing of such a person as it is considered to be done for the prevention of suffering is involuntary euthanasia. This is not to be confused with medical killing in cases of capital punishment or as part of genocide (Robinson). Proponents of euthanasia argue that only patients can determine when suffering makes life worse than death and that such persons can and should be allowed to make the decision. Some also argue that terminally ill patients are respected more by having their suffering end than by being kept alive against their will. Additionally, a utilitarian argument can be made about the harms to the whole of maintaining the individual beyond viability (Yount 42). They also believe that people should have control over their own bodies and that complete prohibition on assisted death excessively limits personal liberty. If a person is competent, they should have right to choose death (End of Life Choices). The second type of argument against euthanasia is that it is not prudent to advocate it; that is, eventually we all may be suffering, and if we think ahead, we may think it better if the doctors on whom we depend are not tempted to perform euthanasia. Euthanasia is inherently less complex than palli ative care, and training for euthanasia does not qualify a physician to estimate a patients response to palliation (Robinson). Like all medical procedures, euthanasia can fail, or bring additional suffering (Capek, Fox, and Kamakahi 52). Some claim that if euthanasia were allowed, doctors might press people into euthanasia to reduce medical costs. Many people believe that saving medical costs is a coercive argument that should disqualify a person from giving free consent (Robinson). Many doctors argue against euthanasia, as providing death is antithetical to their primary function and training. The Hippocratic oath that all doctors take states, I will not administer poison to anyone where asked, and Be of benefit, or at least do no harm.. If, some have argued, a doctor is trained both to cure and kill, then he or she is being told always to judge when to kill, and his or her best efforts at saving life will not be expended (Leon 28). Many religious people are said to object to eutha nasia. Christians believe that ones life is derived from God and it is Gods to take, and destroying it is an offense to God (Wickett and Humphry 56) Further, in most Western nations the prohibition on killing is considered a moral absolute that cannot be conditioned by ethical concerns (Yount 47). Recycling EssayCriticism of Dr. Kevorkian has also been heavy. Some critics categorically oppose the terminally ill (or those in constant pain) taking their own lives (Robinson). Beyond these criticisms, critics have stated that Dr. Kevorkian has primarily practiced as a pathologist, has relatively little experience with live patients, has had all his licenses to practice medicine revoked, and in the end is not equipped to evaluate whether a prospective client is clinically depressed and therefore, according to accepted medical (and legal) thought, incapable of deciding to end his or her life (Wickett and Humphry 98). Terri Schiavo is a severely brain damaged American woman whose husbands efforts to remove her feeding tube and forbid anyone from attempting to feed her by mouth have prompted a fierce debate over euthanasia, guardianship, and the rights of the disabled (Lipper). On March 18, 2005, her feeding tube was removed for the third time (Stacy). Michael Schiavo, Terri Schiavos husband, is her legal guardian. He contends that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state and that he is carrying out her wishes to not be kept alive in that state (Stacy). Terri Schiavos family contests both of Michaels claims. They say she is responsive and in no discomfort, that her condition does not meet the medical definition of vegetative, and that she would not wish to die. They also contend that Terri was a victim of domestic violence, both before and after her injury, and that Michael does not have her best interests at heart. They seek to revoke his legal guardianship of Terri, arguing, among other things, that his living with another woman since 1995, with whom he has two children, makes him legally estranged from her (Lipper). Although the courts that have heard this case have generally sided with Michael Schiavo, her family has vigorously appealed the courts decisions and sought to prevent her death (Lipper). The ACLU has joined the legal battle, siding with Michael Schiavo, but numerous disability rights organizations, religious organizations, the Florida legislature, the Vatican, and both houses of the United States Congress have joined the legal battle, siding with Terris family (Lipper). Republican congressmen Dennis Hastert, Tom DeLay, and Tom Davis opened a congressional inquiry of the House Government Reform Committee, to take place in Clearwater on March 25, and issued subpoenas for Terri, Michael, and several hospice workers. According to the lawmakers, harming Schiavo or preventing her from appearing at the hearings would be a violation of federal law, and thus they would be forced to keep her alive until the court date. The judge said he saw no reason to change his earlier permission allowing S chiavos husband to remove her feeding tube. Judge Greer defied the congressional subpoenas, and letting the order stand which gave Michael Schiavo permission to remove Terris feeding tube (Stacy). However, on March 19, 2005, congressional leaders announced that they were drafting a bill that would order the reinsertion of Schiavos feeding tube and allow a federal court to review the case. If passed, President Bush plans to sign it (Stacy). Works Cited Capek, Stella M., Elaine Fox, and Jeffrey J. Kamakahi. Come Lovely and Soothing Death: The Right to Die Movement in the United States. New York: Twayne, n.d. End of Life Choices: Compassion, Dignity, and Control. 2004. End-of-Life Choices/Compassion In Dying: Compassion Choices . . Euthanasia. Ed. Lisa Yount. San Diego: Greenhaven P, Inc., 2002. Humphry, Derek. Eugene: Hemlock Society, 1991. Lipper, Tamara. Between Life and Death: Behind the unprecedented showdown over one womans fate.. 2005. Newsweek. . Robinson, B.A.. Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide. 02 Sept. 2004. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. . Stacy, Mitch. Schiavo Kin Wants Feeding Tube Reinserted. 20 Mar. 2005. MSNBC Wire Services, The Associated Press. . The Ethics of Euthanasia. Ed. Daniel A. Leone. San Diego: Greenhaven P, Inc., 1999. Wickett, Ann, and Derek Humphry . The Right To Die: Understanding Euthanasia. New York: Harper and Row, 1986.