QUESTIONS:
1. After reading the article, why do you think specialty groups, including the women's movement to such an active roll in the development oof American societ?
2. What historical factors, drove the Progressive movement?
After 1900, Americans became fixated on reforming everything that could be reformed. This common strive for a better society was deemed progressivism and became popular with people of all different agendas.
Progressivism was characterized by interest in intellectual pursuits and efficiency. In the end, this broad effort was responsible for empowering women, reforming the government, renewing the fight for black rights, and producing presidents who reformed corporate business and social services.
Progressivism commonly used scientific investigation to gather information about things that required reform. This methodical approach was also applied to the workplace through scientific management. Even the media picked up on the popularity of progressivism with the new type of journalism: mudraking. Mudraking publications exposed problems and injustices in America.
Another important group of people to join in the progressive movement were American women. Seeing an opportunity to increase their value to society, they began heading charitable programs like settlement houses. Empowered by the impact they made, women began gravitating towards feminism, a movement focused on equal rights and freedoms for women.
Meanwhile, politicians like Robert M. La Follette started realizing how corrupt the government had become and began the struggle to reform the government and political machines. Progressive politicians wanted a more democratic government and, therefore, put importance on initiatives and recalls. However, progressives made little progress with municipal reforms.
Working-class Americans also began to take up the progressive cause. Workers tried to unionize and solve problems without government aid, but could not make much progress. Courts rarely favored unions and did not hesitate to put court orders in place to prevent workers from striking or boycotting. Furthermore, workers could not make much progress in accident liability or other types of compensationUnfortunately, black Americans felt the pain of social injustices as much as the working-class. As they began migrating to cities, racism between the white residents and the new black residents erupted once again. The
struggle for social rights was also renewed in the form of the Niagra Movement. This organization focused its efforts on encouraging black pride and achieving political and social equality.
The first progressive president in America was Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt was a devout Christian and an avid outdoorsman. More importantly, though, was that he consistently tried to control the power of corporate businesses. In his first attack, he established the Bureau of Corporations, a department of the Justice Department responsible for investigating business practices. This helped Roosevelt's cause, but the Supreme Court eventually pushed him back a step by deciding that any restraint on trade or monopolization of an industry would automatically violate the Sherman Act. Roosevelt persisted and began a program called the Square Deal. Through this program, the government started asserting power over corporate businesses for the first time since the Civil War.
Meanwhile, congress was occupied with the railroads. Congress passed the Hepburn Railway Act and gave power to the Interstate Commerce Commission power to set maximum shipping rates and reform bookkeeping practices. Congress also passed both the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act in order to improve the grotesque conditions in meatpacking plants and other food processing plants.
The next president of the United States was William Howard Taft, but the next president to benefit the progressive movement was really Woodrow Wilson, a democrat. The election was mostly between Roosevelt, who advocated a reform program called New Nationalism, and Wilson, who called his program New Freedom. Both aimed to limit the power of corporate businesses, but Wilson's plan was centered around reviving competition while Roosevelt's plan was all about government regulation.
Once he was actually in the White House, Wilson helped initiate the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. This act helped prevent the banking industry from collapsing under the pressure of financial panic by organizing twelve banks to act as reserves. Furthermore, the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 loosened the set definition of what qualified as illegal.
In the end, the Progressive Era made clear impacts on many aspects of American life. This may be because members of this movement came from all different agendas and backgrounds. Whatever the cause of progressive
success, its influence reached women in the form of feminism, the working-class through urban liberalism, blacks through the Niagara movement, and corporate businesses through progressive presidents-namely President Roosevelt. Without the progressive movement, America would never have overcome the problems brought by industrialization.
Diner, Steven J. A "Very Different Age: Americans of the Progressive Era" Kennedy, David M. ed., Progressivism: The Critical Issues Buenker, John D. Urban Liberalism and Progressive Reform
Monday, September 27, 2010
Monday, September 6, 2010
September 5: 1972 Olympics Israeli Athletes Killed - Point of interest
NO COMMENTS REQUIRED
September 5:
1972 : Israeli athletes killed at Munich Olympics
www.history.com
On this day in 1972, at the Summer Olympics in Munich, Germany, a group of Palestinian terrorists storms the Olympic Village apartment of the Israeli athletes, killing two and taking nine others hostage. The terrorists, known as Black September, demanded that Israel release over 230 Arab prisoners being held in Israeli jails and two German terrorists. In an ensuing shootout at the Munich airport, the nine Israeli hostages were killed along with five terrorists and one West German policeman. Olympic competition was suspended for 24 hours to hold memorial services for the slain athletes.
After being founded in 776 B.C. in ancient Greece, the first modern Olympics were held in Athens in 1896, with 13 countries and 311 athletes competing. The games were meant to foster peace and bring people together. Germany had hoped that the 1972 Olympics would be a celebration of peace, as it was the first time it had hosted the games since 1936, when Adolf Hitler, who used the games to promote his Aryan master race theory, was in power.
The Munich Olympics opened on August 26, 1972, with 195 events and 7,173 athletes representing 121 countries. On the morning of September 5, Palestinian terrorists in ski masks ambushed the Israeli team. After negotiations to free the nine Israelis broke down, the terrorists took the hostages to the Munich airport. Once there, German police opened fire from rooftops and killed three of the terrorists. A gun battle erupted and left the hostages, two more Palestinians and a policeman dead.
After a memorial service was held for the athletes at the main Olympic stadium, International Olympic Committee President Avery Brundage ordered that the games continue, to show that the terrorists hadn't won. Although the tragedy deeply marred the games, there were numerous moments of spectacular athletic achievement, including American swimmer Mark Spitz's seven gold medals and teenage Russian gymnast Olga Korbut's two dramatic gold-medal victories.
In the aftermath of the murders at the '72 Olympics, the Israeli government, headed by Golda Meir, hired a group of Mossad agents to track down and kill the Black September assassins. In 2005, Steven Spielberg made a movie, Munich, about these events.
September 5:
1972 : Israeli athletes killed at Munich Olympics
www.history.com
On this day in 1972, at the Summer Olympics in Munich, Germany, a group of Palestinian terrorists storms the Olympic Village apartment of the Israeli athletes, killing two and taking nine others hostage. The terrorists, known as Black September, demanded that Israel release over 230 Arab prisoners being held in Israeli jails and two German terrorists. In an ensuing shootout at the Munich airport, the nine Israeli hostages were killed along with five terrorists and one West German policeman. Olympic competition was suspended for 24 hours to hold memorial services for the slain athletes.
After being founded in 776 B.C. in ancient Greece, the first modern Olympics were held in Athens in 1896, with 13 countries and 311 athletes competing. The games were meant to foster peace and bring people together. Germany had hoped that the 1972 Olympics would be a celebration of peace, as it was the first time it had hosted the games since 1936, when Adolf Hitler, who used the games to promote his Aryan master race theory, was in power.
The Munich Olympics opened on August 26, 1972, with 195 events and 7,173 athletes representing 121 countries. On the morning of September 5, Palestinian terrorists in ski masks ambushed the Israeli team. After negotiations to free the nine Israelis broke down, the terrorists took the hostages to the Munich airport. Once there, German police opened fire from rooftops and killed three of the terrorists. A gun battle erupted and left the hostages, two more Palestinians and a policeman dead.
After a memorial service was held for the athletes at the main Olympic stadium, International Olympic Committee President Avery Brundage ordered that the games continue, to show that the terrorists hadn't won. Although the tragedy deeply marred the games, there were numerous moments of spectacular athletic achievement, including American swimmer Mark Spitz's seven gold medals and teenage Russian gymnast Olga Korbut's two dramatic gold-medal victories.
In the aftermath of the murders at the '72 Olympics, the Israeli government, headed by Golda Meir, hired a group of Mossad agents to track down and kill the Black September assassins. In 2005, Steven Spielberg made a movie, Munich, about these events.
Vietnam - Lessons Learned
After reading the below article, answer the following questions:
1. Do you concur with the lessons learned?
2. What role did domestic politics play in current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Remember to comment on 2 other students blogs.
"The Vietnam War in Hindsight"
Defense, Southeast Asia, National Security, Foreign Policy
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2000/0427southeastasia_haass.aspx?p=1
Richard N. Haass, Vice President and Director
April 27, 2000 —
Twenty-five years after the ignominious American withdrawal from what was then South Vietnam, this much is clear: the United States lost the war, but won the peace. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine how things could have turned out much better if we had won the war. The United States remains the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific region. U.S. alliances with such critical states as Japan, South Korea and Australia are robust; U.S. relations with China are extensive if not always warm. Even U.S. relations with Vietnam are now proper and improving. The region is mostly democratic, wealthy and at peace. And despite gloomy predictions to the contrary, "dominos" did not fall to Communism after we lost in Vietnam.
Also worth noting is that some 15 years after the flag came down over the American Embassy in Saigon and the helicopters flew away from its roof, the Cold War ended. In this case, though, the United States and the West won the war. This outcome resulted not just from Soviet shortcomings—exacerbated by the Soviet "Vietnam" in Afghanistan—but from American perseverance. The U.S. failure in Vietnam did not trigger the wholesale retreat from responsibility into isolationism that many feared would result.
Still, the wrong war
None of this changes the reality that the Vietnam War was the wrong war—an unnecessary war. This in no way cheapens or in any way detracts from the sacrifice by so many Americans. Rather, the judgment is a strategic one: The American commitment to Vietnam exaggerated its importance. What happened on the ground in that country could not alter the basic shape of the strategic competition between the United States and the Soviet Union. It was a distraction, one that wasted resources of every kind. The notion that the war fundamentally affected U.S. interests everywhere proved mistaken.
Moreover, the United States misread the threat. Washington was slow to see the growing divide between Moscow and Peking. Communism was not monolithic. Nationalism counted for more. This was true as well in Vietnam, where the Communists in both the North and the South were more nationalists than instruments of the Soviet Union or anyone else.
Why did we get so involved then? More than anything else, it was domestic politics, and the concern of John F. Kennedy—and to an even greater extent Lyndon Johnson—that the American people would not forgive the politicians or the party that "lost" Vietnam. Both remembered the price paid by Democrats charged by Sen. Joe McCarthy (R-WI) and others with "losing" China.
The irony, of course, is that Johnson paid an enormous price for prosecuting the war as he did. His attempt to build the Great Society went unfinished. He himself did not stand for re-election. And Richard Nixon was elected, ushering in more than two decades of Republican domination of the White House interrupted only by the fallout of Watergate.
Learning lessons
The lessons from that war are still applicable today: not permitting domestic politics to determine foreign policy; asking hard questions about history and culture before the United States commits its prestige and its men and women in uniform; not underestimating the power of local forces in global politics.
The Vietnam War was not simply the wrong war; it was also fought in the wrong way. Military force should only be used decisively, not gradually. Civilian officials should set basic policy but allow the professional military to run wars without micromanagement. Quantitative measures—how many bombs are dropped, how many enemy troops killed—may be irrelevant to the course of the battle and should not be taken as proof of progress. Airpower alone wins few campaigns. High technology is no panacea and cannot in and of itself defeat a committed adversary. What is worrisome about this cataloguing of lessons is how many of them have been violated in such faraway places as Somalia and Kosovo.
The good news, though, is that the American people seem ahead of their leaders in not forgetting Vietnam's lessons or repeating its mistakes. It remains possible for the United States to commit itself and to fight high-cost military interventions so long as American people believe the stakes justify them. It is also possible to sustain commitments where the stakes are low so long as the costs of intervening are kept modest. What the American people will not stand for, however, are interventions where U.S. interests are modest, but the costs in human and financial terms are high. This principle, as much as anything else, is what Vietnam has to teach us—and what we would only forget at great peril to ourselves.
1. Do you concur with the lessons learned?
2. What role did domestic politics play in current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Remember to comment on 2 other students blogs.
"The Vietnam War in Hindsight"
Defense, Southeast Asia, National Security, Foreign Policy
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2000/0427southeastasia_haass.aspx?p=1
Richard N. Haass, Vice President and Director
April 27, 2000 —
Twenty-five years after the ignominious American withdrawal from what was then South Vietnam, this much is clear: the United States lost the war, but won the peace. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine how things could have turned out much better if we had won the war. The United States remains the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific region. U.S. alliances with such critical states as Japan, South Korea and Australia are robust; U.S. relations with China are extensive if not always warm. Even U.S. relations with Vietnam are now proper and improving. The region is mostly democratic, wealthy and at peace. And despite gloomy predictions to the contrary, "dominos" did not fall to Communism after we lost in Vietnam.
Also worth noting is that some 15 years after the flag came down over the American Embassy in Saigon and the helicopters flew away from its roof, the Cold War ended. In this case, though, the United States and the West won the war. This outcome resulted not just from Soviet shortcomings—exacerbated by the Soviet "Vietnam" in Afghanistan—but from American perseverance. The U.S. failure in Vietnam did not trigger the wholesale retreat from responsibility into isolationism that many feared would result.
Still, the wrong war
None of this changes the reality that the Vietnam War was the wrong war—an unnecessary war. This in no way cheapens or in any way detracts from the sacrifice by so many Americans. Rather, the judgment is a strategic one: The American commitment to Vietnam exaggerated its importance. What happened on the ground in that country could not alter the basic shape of the strategic competition between the United States and the Soviet Union. It was a distraction, one that wasted resources of every kind. The notion that the war fundamentally affected U.S. interests everywhere proved mistaken.
Moreover, the United States misread the threat. Washington was slow to see the growing divide between Moscow and Peking. Communism was not monolithic. Nationalism counted for more. This was true as well in Vietnam, where the Communists in both the North and the South were more nationalists than instruments of the Soviet Union or anyone else.
Why did we get so involved then? More than anything else, it was domestic politics, and the concern of John F. Kennedy—and to an even greater extent Lyndon Johnson—that the American people would not forgive the politicians or the party that "lost" Vietnam. Both remembered the price paid by Democrats charged by Sen. Joe McCarthy (R-WI) and others with "losing" China.
The irony, of course, is that Johnson paid an enormous price for prosecuting the war as he did. His attempt to build the Great Society went unfinished. He himself did not stand for re-election. And Richard Nixon was elected, ushering in more than two decades of Republican domination of the White House interrupted only by the fallout of Watergate.
Learning lessons
The lessons from that war are still applicable today: not permitting domestic politics to determine foreign policy; asking hard questions about history and culture before the United States commits its prestige and its men and women in uniform; not underestimating the power of local forces in global politics.
The Vietnam War was not simply the wrong war; it was also fought in the wrong way. Military force should only be used decisively, not gradually. Civilian officials should set basic policy but allow the professional military to run wars without micromanagement. Quantitative measures—how many bombs are dropped, how many enemy troops killed—may be irrelevant to the course of the battle and should not be taken as proof of progress. Airpower alone wins few campaigns. High technology is no panacea and cannot in and of itself defeat a committed adversary. What is worrisome about this cataloguing of lessons is how many of them have been violated in such faraway places as Somalia and Kosovo.
The good news, though, is that the American people seem ahead of their leaders in not forgetting Vietnam's lessons or repeating its mistakes. It remains possible for the United States to commit itself and to fight high-cost military interventions so long as American people believe the stakes justify them. It is also possible to sustain commitments where the stakes are low so long as the costs of intervening are kept modest. What the American people will not stand for, however, are interventions where U.S. interests are modest, but the costs in human and financial terms are high. This principle, as much as anything else, is what Vietnam has to teach us—and what we would only forget at great peril to ourselves.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Feminism - Why the movement in the 60s?
Chisholm, Shirley. "Equal Rights for Women."
Pittsburgh: Know, Inc. Originally presented in the House of Representatives, May 21, 1969.
E Q U A L R I G H T S F O R W O M E N
HON. SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
of New York
In the House of Representatives, May 21, 1969
Mrs. CHISHOLM. Mr.Speaker, when a young woman graduates from college and starts looking for a job, she is likely to have a frustrating and even demeaning experience ahead of her. If she walks into an office for an interview, the first question she will be asked is, "Do you type?''
There is a calculated system of prejudice that lies unspoken behind that question. Why is it acceptable for women to be secretaries, librarians, and teachers, but totally unacceptable for them to be managers, administrators, doctors, lawyers, and Members of Congress.
The unspoken assumption is that women are different. They do not have executive ability orderly minds, stability, leadership skills, and they are too emotional.
It has been observed before, that society for a long time, discriminated against another minority, the blacks, on the same basis - that they were different and inferior. The happy little homemaker and the contented "old darkey" on the plantation were both produced by prejudice.
As a black person, I am no stranger to race prejudice. But the truth is that in the political world I have been far oftener discriminated against because I am a woman than because I am black.
Prejudice against blacks is becoming unacceptable although it will take years to eliminate it. But it is doomed because, slowly, white America is beginning to admit that it exists. Prejudice against women is still acceptable. There is very little understanding yet of the immorality involved in double pay scales and the classification of most of the better jobs as "for men only."
More than half of the population of the United States is female. But women occupy only 2 percent of the managerial positions. They have not even reached the level of tokenism yet No women sit on the AFL-CIO council or Supreme Court There have been only two women who have held Cabinet rank, and at present there are none. Only two women now hold ambassadorial rank in the diplomatic corps. In Congress, we are down to one Senator and 10 Representatives.
Considering that there are about 3 1/2 million more women in the United States than men, this situation is outrageous.
It is true that part of the problem has been that women have not been aggressive in demanding their rights. This was also true of the black population for many years. They submitted to oppression and even cooperated with it. Women have done the same thing. But now there is an awareness of this situation particularly among the younger segment of the population.
As in the field of equal rights for blacks, Spanish-Americans, the Indians, and other groups, laws will not change such deep-seated problems overnight But they can be used to provide protection for those who are most abused, and to begin the process of evolutionary change by compelling the insensitive majority to reexamine it's unconscious attitudes.
It is for this reason that I wish to introduce today a proposal that has been before every Congress for the last 40 years and that sooner or later must become part of the basic law of the land -- the equal rights amendment.
Let me note and try to refute two of the commonest arguments that are offered against this amendment. One is that women are already protected under the law and do not need legislation. Existing laws are not adequate to secure equal rights for women. Sufficient proof of this is the concentration of women in lower paying, menial, unrewarding jobs and their incredible scarcity in the upper level jobs. If women are already equal, why is it such an event whenever one happens to be elected to Congress?
It is obvious that discrimination exists. Women do not have the opportunities that men do. And women that do not conform to the system, who try to break with the accepted patterns, are stigmatized as ''odd'' and "unfeminine." The fact is that a woman who aspires to be chairman of the board, or a Member of the House, does so for exactly the same reasons as any man. Basically, these are that she thinks she can do the job and she wants to try.
A second argument often heard against the equal rights amendment is that is would eliminate legislation that many States and the Federal Government have enacted giving special protection to women and that it would throw the marriage and divorce laws into chaos.
As for the marriage laws, they are due for a sweeping reform, and an excellent beginning would be to wipe the existing ones off the books. Regarding special protection for working women, I cannot understand why it should be needed. Women need no protection that men do not need. What we need are laws to protect working people, to guarantee them fair pay, safe working conditions, protection against sickness and layoffs, and provision for dignified, comfortable retirement. Men and women need these things equally. That one sex needs protection more than the other is a male supremacist myth as ridiculous and unworthy of respect as the white supremacist myths that society is trying to cure itself of at this time.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensions of Remarks, E4165-6
Pittsburgh: Know, Inc. Originally presented in the House of Representatives, May 21, 1969.
E Q U A L R I G H T S F O R W O M E N
HON. SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
of New York
In the House of Representatives, May 21, 1969
Mrs. CHISHOLM. Mr.Speaker, when a young woman graduates from college and starts looking for a job, she is likely to have a frustrating and even demeaning experience ahead of her. If she walks into an office for an interview, the first question she will be asked is, "Do you type?''
There is a calculated system of prejudice that lies unspoken behind that question. Why is it acceptable for women to be secretaries, librarians, and teachers, but totally unacceptable for them to be managers, administrators, doctors, lawyers, and Members of Congress.
The unspoken assumption is that women are different. They do not have executive ability orderly minds, stability, leadership skills, and they are too emotional.
It has been observed before, that society for a long time, discriminated against another minority, the blacks, on the same basis - that they were different and inferior. The happy little homemaker and the contented "old darkey" on the plantation were both produced by prejudice.
As a black person, I am no stranger to race prejudice. But the truth is that in the political world I have been far oftener discriminated against because I am a woman than because I am black.
Prejudice against blacks is becoming unacceptable although it will take years to eliminate it. But it is doomed because, slowly, white America is beginning to admit that it exists. Prejudice against women is still acceptable. There is very little understanding yet of the immorality involved in double pay scales and the classification of most of the better jobs as "for men only."
More than half of the population of the United States is female. But women occupy only 2 percent of the managerial positions. They have not even reached the level of tokenism yet No women sit on the AFL-CIO council or Supreme Court There have been only two women who have held Cabinet rank, and at present there are none. Only two women now hold ambassadorial rank in the diplomatic corps. In Congress, we are down to one Senator and 10 Representatives.
Considering that there are about 3 1/2 million more women in the United States than men, this situation is outrageous.
It is true that part of the problem has been that women have not been aggressive in demanding their rights. This was also true of the black population for many years. They submitted to oppression and even cooperated with it. Women have done the same thing. But now there is an awareness of this situation particularly among the younger segment of the population.
As in the field of equal rights for blacks, Spanish-Americans, the Indians, and other groups, laws will not change such deep-seated problems overnight But they can be used to provide protection for those who are most abused, and to begin the process of evolutionary change by compelling the insensitive majority to reexamine it's unconscious attitudes.
It is for this reason that I wish to introduce today a proposal that has been before every Congress for the last 40 years and that sooner or later must become part of the basic law of the land -- the equal rights amendment.
Let me note and try to refute two of the commonest arguments that are offered against this amendment. One is that women are already protected under the law and do not need legislation. Existing laws are not adequate to secure equal rights for women. Sufficient proof of this is the concentration of women in lower paying, menial, unrewarding jobs and their incredible scarcity in the upper level jobs. If women are already equal, why is it such an event whenever one happens to be elected to Congress?
It is obvious that discrimination exists. Women do not have the opportunities that men do. And women that do not conform to the system, who try to break with the accepted patterns, are stigmatized as ''odd'' and "unfeminine." The fact is that a woman who aspires to be chairman of the board, or a Member of the House, does so for exactly the same reasons as any man. Basically, these are that she thinks she can do the job and she wants to try.
A second argument often heard against the equal rights amendment is that is would eliminate legislation that many States and the Federal Government have enacted giving special protection to women and that it would throw the marriage and divorce laws into chaos.
As for the marriage laws, they are due for a sweeping reform, and an excellent beginning would be to wipe the existing ones off the books. Regarding special protection for working women, I cannot understand why it should be needed. Women need no protection that men do not need. What we need are laws to protect working people, to guarantee them fair pay, safe working conditions, protection against sickness and layoffs, and provision for dignified, comfortable retirement. Men and women need these things equally. That one sex needs protection more than the other is a male supremacist myth as ridiculous and unworthy of respect as the white supremacist myths that society is trying to cure itself of at this time.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensions of Remarks, E4165-6
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Civil Rights Movement Video
Watch the video at this link reference the Civil Righs movement - www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVqsJizN4gI After watching the video, what are the root causes of the 1960s civil rights movement? What were the arguments for and against?
Recommended Readings
Recommended Readings
Felicia Kornbluh, The Battle for Welfare Rights: Politics and Poverty in Modern America
Peter B. Levy, ed., America in the Sixties--Right, Left, and Center
Dana Spiotta, Eat the Document
Philip Caputo, A Rumor of War
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring
Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique
Todd Gitlin, The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage
Malcolm Margolin, The Ohlone Way
Ann Moody, Coming of Age in Mississippi
Don Pitcher, Berkeley Inside/Out
Howell Raines, My Soul is Rested
W.J. Rorabaugh, Berkeley at War: The 1960s
Wallace Terry, Bloods
G.B. Trudeau, A Few Bugs in the System
Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle
Tom Wolfe, The Right Stuff
Fursenko, Aleksandr and Timothy Naftali. “One Hell of a Gamble:” Khrushchev, Castro, and Kennedy, 1958-1964
Gosse, Van. Where the Boys Are: Cuba, Cold War America, and the Making of a New Left
Laurence, John. The Cat from Hue: A Vietnam War Story
Williams, Kieran. The Prague Spring and Its Aftermath: Czechoslovak Politics, 1968-70
Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative
Maurice Isserman and Michael Kazin, America Divided: The Civil War of the 1960s
Felicia Kornbluh, The Battle for Welfare Rights: Politics and Poverty in Modern America
Peter B. Levy, ed., America in the Sixties--Right, Left, and Center
Dana Spiotta, Eat the Document
Philip Caputo, A Rumor of War
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring
Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique
Todd Gitlin, The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage
Malcolm Margolin, The Ohlone Way
Ann Moody, Coming of Age in Mississippi
Don Pitcher, Berkeley Inside/Out
Howell Raines, My Soul is Rested
W.J. Rorabaugh, Berkeley at War: The 1960s
Wallace Terry, Bloods
G.B. Trudeau, A Few Bugs in the System
Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle
Tom Wolfe, The Right Stuff
Fursenko, Aleksandr and Timothy Naftali. “One Hell of a Gamble:” Khrushchev, Castro, and Kennedy, 1958-1964
Gosse, Van. Where the Boys Are: Cuba, Cold War America, and the Making of a New Left
Laurence, John. The Cat from Hue: A Vietnam War Story
Williams, Kieran. The Prague Spring and Its Aftermath: Czechoslovak Politics, 1968-70
Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative
Maurice Isserman and Michael Kazin, America Divided: The Civil War of the 1960s
1960s Class Syllabus
History 314: The 1960s
Fall 2010
Class Times: Tuesday and Thursday 6PM to 9:15PM
Classroom: Thayer Hall, West Point N.Y.
Course Outline:
Course Description: The course will deal, in substantive detail, with the 1960s. In order to understand the immediate and underlying causes of the period, the course will involve discussions of the two decades leading up to it, and its long term effects. We will look at this period in two ways: a watershed in modern U.S. history, and as a period of history that continues to cause worldwide debate within political, scholarly and social circles.
Course Objectives: At the conclusion of the course, the student will be able to recognize that various philosophical, historical, religious, and political traditions within the decade that have shaped modern society. In addition, they should be able to analyze the influence of these traditions on democratic principles. Specifically:
• Have a comprehensive knowledge of events that occurred in the 1960s.
• Through the use of lectures, readings and research understand the major historical importance of the 1960s and how it has affected the development of America.
• Understand the background and root causes that set the conditions for the 1960s and the different perspectives on those causes.
• Have a fully developed understanding of the period, and the role it played in the development of the United States.
Required text: All texts and readings will be provided throughout the course.
Grades: 1,000 points total
• Class participation and online discussions: 20%
• Paper requirement: book review or battle analysis with associated discussion: 30%
• Public Debates (2): 20%
• Group Presentation: 15%
• Autobiography interview and presentation: 15%
Academic Integrity: Academic integrity, a commitment to honesty, fairness, respect, and responsibility, is the foundation of the learning process. All members of the Saint Thomas Aquinas College community are held to the highest standards of academic honesty. While we recognize the participatory nature of education, we take academic integrity very seriously, and the College policy on academic dishonesty details consequences that can include dismissal from the College. That policy can be found in both the Student Handbook and the College Catalog.
As a student in this class, you must demonstrate your commitment to academic integrity by submitting work which originates in your own imagination, analytical faculties, or your own knowledge, which you have done yourself, and which represents your very best efforts. When appropriate, your work should be supplemented and supported by other sources; however, you must always insure that these sources are properly cited using the recommended documentation system.
Accommodations: Students needing accommodations for a documented disability should notify the instructor before the end of the first week of classes.
Attendance: More than two unexcused absences from class will result in a lower grade (one half of a letter grade). Excused absences are determined at the discretion of the instructor. Extended absences will require a note from the appropriate administrative office.
Course Schedule
WEEK TOPICS
10 AUG Why and how should we study the 1960s? USMA library orientation
12 AUG Civil Rights, Decolonization, and the Cold War: The Early 1960s
17 AUG Vietnam I: The early years to Tet
19 AUG The Civil Rights Movement (Public Debate 1)
24 AUG Autobiography and Interview (research period)
26 AUG Autobiography interview presentation
31 AUG The Women’s Rights Movement (online discussion)
2 SEP International Relations: Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia and the Arab Israeli Wars (Public Debate 2)
7 SEP Vietnam II: After Tet (online discussion)
9 SEP Group Presentations (one domestic and one international)
14 SEP Long term effects of the 1960s (online discussion)
16 SEP Current events discussion – Comparisons of Vietnam to Afghanistan/Class close out
Assignment Due Dates
19 AUG: Public Debate 1 – Civil Rights
26 AUG: Autobiography interview paper and presentation
2 SEP: Public Debate 2 – US support of Israel
9 SEP: Group presentation
16 SEP: Paper
Graded Products
Public Debates: Open discussion based on designated topics, which you will be assigned a side. Specifically:
• Demonstate an ability to refute opposition’s points or support that of his/her side.
• Displays public citizenship in respect to the 1960s period.
• Presents cogent and clearly stated positions in class.
• Paper’s conclusion reflects the arguments and positions taken.
• Thought are unified, complete, and flow in a logical sequence, both written and oral.
• Historical information is accurate and proper use of supporting facts.
• Creatively takes on the persona of the time.
The public debate consists of two parts:
1. Position paper that lays out your argument or position. 1 to 2 pages – 50%.
2. Open forum debate in classroom – 50%.
Book Review (5 to 8 pages): Each student will read and report on a book. The book must be selected only after consultation with the instructor. The book will be analyzed in one paper 3 to 5 pages in length. The student should address the following:
• Include information about each author such as place of birth, education, major works published, and overall background. No more than 2 to 3 paragraphs.
• Discuss the scope and content of each book. What are the major themes and thesis of the book?
• Assess and compare the main sources used by the author in his/her research. Do they rely of primary or secondary sources? Check the endnotes or bibliographies for this information.
• Evaluate the book. Did you like it? Why? Consider writing style, organization, effective use of sources, and content in your evaluation.
• What did you learn about the topic or topics covered?
• Look up one professional review of the book. Do you degree or disagree with the review?
• Your review needs to focus on a description of the contents and scope of the book and on your in depth evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the books.
• PROOFREAD!
• One of the best strategies for writing good reviews is reading a lot of good reviews. In preparing your review, consider how professional historians approach the same assignment. Check out:
o Recent issues of the Journal of American History or the American Historical Review. These are general academic history journals oriented toward audiences in many different fields. Each issue contains a large number of short books reviews, on the order of 500-1000 words, or approximately 2-4 double-spaced pages.
o Reviews in American History. This is a journal devoted entirely to longish book reviews and review essays, which consider more than one title. You can find it on the shelf in Knight Library and also on the Internet through Project MUSE: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/reviews_in_american_history/
o Reviews about books in a particular area of interest to you. One easy way to locate these is by using the database called "America: History and Life." You can access it through the UO Library website. Look Under "Articles, Databases, and Indexes."
o Reviews by historians and/or about historical titles in major review outlets, including the New York Times Book Review, the New York Review of Books, and the Times Literary Supplement. Like reviews in publications geared to professional historians, these reviews are written for an intelligent reading audience. They are, however, less likely than those reviews to address historiographical (i.e. interpretive) themes directly.
o Internet history reviews are not constrained by the space limitations of conventional publications, and therefore vary in length from quite short to interminable. Check out:
o H-NET Reviews: http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews
Battle Analysis (5 to 8 pages): Choose a battle that occurred in the 1960s in consultation with the instructor. If you keep your paper simple and follow the guide you will have no problem. You will lead a discussion of your battle during the appropriate time during class. The paper should consist of:
• Introduction/Define the Subject (this should take no more than one half page - about two paragraphs).
o Intro
o Date and Location (brief location of battle, near a certain city and/or country)
o Principal Antagonists (the basic players, not a detailed analysis)
o Available Resources (primary and secondary)
• Review Strategic Setting (no more than one and a half pages)
o Causes of conflict (Immediate causes)
o Compare antagonists (key players)
o Military systems (strength, logistics, intelligence, C3)
o Previous performance
o Logistical situation
o Morale, Health and Welfare
• Review Tactical Situation (no more than one page)
o Area of Operations
o Mission (who has the advantage?)
o Equipment (who has the advantage?)
o Terrain (describe, who has advantage?)
o Troops available (advantage?)
o Time (advantage?)
• Describe the Action (what happened - general flow, not minutia – 2 to 3 pages)
o Disposition of Forces
o Initial Movements
o Major Phases of the Battle
o Key Events
o Outcome
• Assess Significance (one page)
o Short-term effects
o Long-term effects
Group Presentation: The students will be split into two groups of 3 to 5, pending class size. Each group will then, in conjunction with the instructor, choose a topic of interest that they will present to the class. One group will present on the anti-war movement, and the other group will present on the Vietnam War from 1968 to 1975.
Presentation requirements:
• Appropriate use of technology.
• Each student must participate.
• Presentation will be a minimum of 30, but no longer than 90 minutes.
Autobiography-Interview Essay and presentation (4 to 5 pages): Interview one individual who was in the U.S. (and at least a teenager) during the decade of the 1960s concerning the Vietnam War, Space Race, the Civil Rights, or a combination of the above drawing out their personal experience (and their second-hand experience through the media) of events they found personally significant or culturally dramatic. A parent, a teacher, a 50- or 60-something friend or acquaintance, a grandparent would all be suitable choices. You may find it useful to take some time to frame your questions before you call or meet with them. Then construct an essay drawing together your insights from this interview with your studies within the course. Be sure to focus on the nature and uses of personal narrative in understanding historic events and cultural processes.
Fall 2010
Class Times: Tuesday and Thursday 6PM to 9:15PM
Classroom: Thayer Hall, West Point N.Y.
Course Outline:
Course Description: The course will deal, in substantive detail, with the 1960s. In order to understand the immediate and underlying causes of the period, the course will involve discussions of the two decades leading up to it, and its long term effects. We will look at this period in two ways: a watershed in modern U.S. history, and as a period of history that continues to cause worldwide debate within political, scholarly and social circles.
Course Objectives: At the conclusion of the course, the student will be able to recognize that various philosophical, historical, religious, and political traditions within the decade that have shaped modern society. In addition, they should be able to analyze the influence of these traditions on democratic principles. Specifically:
• Have a comprehensive knowledge of events that occurred in the 1960s.
• Through the use of lectures, readings and research understand the major historical importance of the 1960s and how it has affected the development of America.
• Understand the background and root causes that set the conditions for the 1960s and the different perspectives on those causes.
• Have a fully developed understanding of the period, and the role it played in the development of the United States.
Required text: All texts and readings will be provided throughout the course.
Grades: 1,000 points total
• Class participation and online discussions: 20%
• Paper requirement: book review or battle analysis with associated discussion: 30%
• Public Debates (2): 20%
• Group Presentation: 15%
• Autobiography interview and presentation: 15%
Academic Integrity: Academic integrity, a commitment to honesty, fairness, respect, and responsibility, is the foundation of the learning process. All members of the Saint Thomas Aquinas College community are held to the highest standards of academic honesty. While we recognize the participatory nature of education, we take academic integrity very seriously, and the College policy on academic dishonesty details consequences that can include dismissal from the College. That policy can be found in both the Student Handbook and the College Catalog.
As a student in this class, you must demonstrate your commitment to academic integrity by submitting work which originates in your own imagination, analytical faculties, or your own knowledge, which you have done yourself, and which represents your very best efforts. When appropriate, your work should be supplemented and supported by other sources; however, you must always insure that these sources are properly cited using the recommended documentation system.
Accommodations: Students needing accommodations for a documented disability should notify the instructor before the end of the first week of classes.
Attendance: More than two unexcused absences from class will result in a lower grade (one half of a letter grade). Excused absences are determined at the discretion of the instructor. Extended absences will require a note from the appropriate administrative office.
Course Schedule
WEEK TOPICS
10 AUG Why and how should we study the 1960s? USMA library orientation
12 AUG Civil Rights, Decolonization, and the Cold War: The Early 1960s
17 AUG Vietnam I: The early years to Tet
19 AUG The Civil Rights Movement (Public Debate 1)
24 AUG Autobiography and Interview (research period)
26 AUG Autobiography interview presentation
31 AUG The Women’s Rights Movement (online discussion)
2 SEP International Relations: Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia and the Arab Israeli Wars (Public Debate 2)
7 SEP Vietnam II: After Tet (online discussion)
9 SEP Group Presentations (one domestic and one international)
14 SEP Long term effects of the 1960s (online discussion)
16 SEP Current events discussion – Comparisons of Vietnam to Afghanistan/Class close out
Assignment Due Dates
19 AUG: Public Debate 1 – Civil Rights
26 AUG: Autobiography interview paper and presentation
2 SEP: Public Debate 2 – US support of Israel
9 SEP: Group presentation
16 SEP: Paper
Graded Products
Public Debates: Open discussion based on designated topics, which you will be assigned a side. Specifically:
• Demonstate an ability to refute opposition’s points or support that of his/her side.
• Displays public citizenship in respect to the 1960s period.
• Presents cogent and clearly stated positions in class.
• Paper’s conclusion reflects the arguments and positions taken.
• Thought are unified, complete, and flow in a logical sequence, both written and oral.
• Historical information is accurate and proper use of supporting facts.
• Creatively takes on the persona of the time.
The public debate consists of two parts:
1. Position paper that lays out your argument or position. 1 to 2 pages – 50%.
2. Open forum debate in classroom – 50%.
Book Review (5 to 8 pages): Each student will read and report on a book. The book must be selected only after consultation with the instructor. The book will be analyzed in one paper 3 to 5 pages in length. The student should address the following:
• Include information about each author such as place of birth, education, major works published, and overall background. No more than 2 to 3 paragraphs.
• Discuss the scope and content of each book. What are the major themes and thesis of the book?
• Assess and compare the main sources used by the author in his/her research. Do they rely of primary or secondary sources? Check the endnotes or bibliographies for this information.
• Evaluate the book. Did you like it? Why? Consider writing style, organization, effective use of sources, and content in your evaluation.
• What did you learn about the topic or topics covered?
• Look up one professional review of the book. Do you degree or disagree with the review?
• Your review needs to focus on a description of the contents and scope of the book and on your in depth evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the books.
• PROOFREAD!
• One of the best strategies for writing good reviews is reading a lot of good reviews. In preparing your review, consider how professional historians approach the same assignment. Check out:
o Recent issues of the Journal of American History or the American Historical Review. These are general academic history journals oriented toward audiences in many different fields. Each issue contains a large number of short books reviews, on the order of 500-1000 words, or approximately 2-4 double-spaced pages.
o Reviews in American History. This is a journal devoted entirely to longish book reviews and review essays, which consider more than one title. You can find it on the shelf in Knight Library and also on the Internet through Project MUSE: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/reviews_in_american_history/
o Reviews about books in a particular area of interest to you. One easy way to locate these is by using the database called "America: History and Life." You can access it through the UO Library website. Look Under "Articles, Databases, and Indexes."
o Reviews by historians and/or about historical titles in major review outlets, including the New York Times Book Review, the New York Review of Books, and the Times Literary Supplement. Like reviews in publications geared to professional historians, these reviews are written for an intelligent reading audience. They are, however, less likely than those reviews to address historiographical (i.e. interpretive) themes directly.
o Internet history reviews are not constrained by the space limitations of conventional publications, and therefore vary in length from quite short to interminable. Check out:
o H-NET Reviews: http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews
Battle Analysis (5 to 8 pages): Choose a battle that occurred in the 1960s in consultation with the instructor. If you keep your paper simple and follow the guide you will have no problem. You will lead a discussion of your battle during the appropriate time during class. The paper should consist of:
• Introduction/Define the Subject (this should take no more than one half page - about two paragraphs).
o Intro
o Date and Location (brief location of battle, near a certain city and/or country)
o Principal Antagonists (the basic players, not a detailed analysis)
o Available Resources (primary and secondary)
• Review Strategic Setting (no more than one and a half pages)
o Causes of conflict (Immediate causes)
o Compare antagonists (key players)
o Military systems (strength, logistics, intelligence, C3)
o Previous performance
o Logistical situation
o Morale, Health and Welfare
• Review Tactical Situation (no more than one page)
o Area of Operations
o Mission (who has the advantage?)
o Equipment (who has the advantage?)
o Terrain (describe, who has advantage?)
o Troops available (advantage?)
o Time (advantage?)
• Describe the Action (what happened - general flow, not minutia – 2 to 3 pages)
o Disposition of Forces
o Initial Movements
o Major Phases of the Battle
o Key Events
o Outcome
• Assess Significance (one page)
o Short-term effects
o Long-term effects
Group Presentation: The students will be split into two groups of 3 to 5, pending class size. Each group will then, in conjunction with the instructor, choose a topic of interest that they will present to the class. One group will present on the anti-war movement, and the other group will present on the Vietnam War from 1968 to 1975.
Presentation requirements:
• Appropriate use of technology.
• Each student must participate.
• Presentation will be a minimum of 30, but no longer than 90 minutes.
Autobiography-Interview Essay and presentation (4 to 5 pages): Interview one individual who was in the U.S. (and at least a teenager) during the decade of the 1960s concerning the Vietnam War, Space Race, the Civil Rights, or a combination of the above drawing out their personal experience (and their second-hand experience through the media) of events they found personally significant or culturally dramatic. A parent, a teacher, a 50- or 60-something friend or acquaintance, a grandparent would all be suitable choices. You may find it useful to take some time to frame your questions before you call or meet with them. Then construct an essay drawing together your insights from this interview with your studies within the course. Be sure to focus on the nature and uses of personal narrative in understanding historic events and cultural processes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)