U.S. History II: Problems Problem 1: Chief Joseph https://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/six/ jospeak.htm The first white men of your people who came to our country were named Lewis and Clark. They brought many things which our people had never seen. They talked straight and our people gave them a great feast as proof that their hearts were friendly. They made presents to our chiefs and our people made presents to them. We had a great many horses of which we gave them what they needed, and they gave us guns and tobacco in return. All the Nez Perce made friends with Lewis and Clark and agreed to let them pass through their country and never to make war on white men. This promise the Nez Perce have never broken... For a short time we lived quietly. But this could not last. White men had found gold in the mountains around the land of the Winding Water. They stole a great many horses from us and we could not get them back because we were Indians. The white men told lies for each other. They drove off a great many of our cattle. Some white men branded our young cattle so they could claim them. We had no friends who would plead our cause before the law councils. It seemed to me that some of the white men in Wallowa were doing these things on purpose to get up a war. They knew we were not stong enough to fight them. I labored hard to avoid trouble and bloodshed. We gave up some of our country to the white men, thinking that then we could have peace. We were mistaken. The white men would not let us alone. We could have avenged our wrongs many times, but we did not. Whenever the Government has asked for help against other Indians we have never
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
U.S. History II: Problems
Problem 1: Chief Josephhttps://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/six/jospeak.htm
The first white men of your people who came to our country were named Lewis and Clark. They brought many things which our people had never seen. They talked straight and our people gave them a great feast as proof that their hearts were friendly. They made presents to our chiefs and our people made presents to them. We had a great many horses of which we gave them what they needed, and they gave us guns and tobacco in return. All the Nez Perce made friends with Lewis and Clark and agreed to let them pass through their country and never to make war on white men. This promise the Nez Perce have never broken...
For a short time we lived quietly. But this could not last. White men had found gold in the mountains around the land of the Winding Water. They stole a great many horses from us and we could not get them back because we were Indians. The white men told lies for each other. They drove off a great many of our cattle. Some white men branded our young cattle so they could claim them. We had no friends who would plead our cause before the law councils. It seemed to me that some of the white men in Wallowa were doing these things on purpose to get up a war. They knew we were not stong enough to fight them. I labored hard to avoid trouble and bloodshed. We gave up some of our country to the white men, thinking that then we could have peace. We were mistaken. The white men would not let us alone. We could have avenged our wrongs many times, but we did not. Whenever the Government has asked for help against other Indians we have never refused. When the white men were few and we were strong we could have killed them off, but the Nez Perce wishes to live at peace.
On account of the treaty made by the other bands of the Nez Perce the white man claimed my lands. We were troubled with white men crowding over the line. Some of them were good men, and we lived on peaceful terms with them, but they were not all good. Nearly every year the agent came over from Lapwai and ordered us to the reservation. We always replied that we were satisfied to live in Wallowa. We were careful to refuse the presents or annuities which he offered.
Through all the years since the white man came to Wallowa we have been threatened and taunted by them and the treaty Nez Perce. They have given us no rest. We have had a few good friends among the white men, and they have always advised my people to bear these taunts without fighting. Our young men are quick tempered and I have had
great trouble in keeping them from doing rash things. I have carried a heavy load on my back ever since I was a boy. I learned then that we were but few while the white men were many, and that we could not hold our own with them. We were like deer. They were like grizzly bears. We had a small country. Their country was large. We were contented to let things remain as the Great Spirit Chief made them. They were not; and would change the mountains and rivers if they did not suit them.
At his surrender in the Bear Paw Mountains, 1877
Tell General Howard that I know his heart. What he told me before I have in my heart. I am tired of fighting. Our chiefs are killed. Looking Glass is dead, Tu-hul-hil-sote is dead. the old men are all dead. It is the young men who now say yes or no. He who led the young men [Joseph's brother Alikut] is dead. It is cold and we have no blankets. The little children are freezing to death. My people -- some of them have run away to the hills and have no blankets and no food. No one knows where they are -- perhaps freezing to death. I want to have time to look for my children and see how many of them I can find. Maybe I shall find them among the dead. Hear me, my chiefs, my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more against the white man.
1. What is the main point of this speech?2. Who is the intended audience?
Problem 2: Boss Tweed“The Root of Tammany Power,” by Thomas Nast, 1871.https://etc.usf.edu/clipart/67400/67414/67414_ball_box.htm
“Boss Tweed Holds the Reins of Democratic Party,” by Thomas Nast, 1871.https://etc.usf.edu/clipart/67400/67425/67425_twee_dem.htm
1. Describe each of the two political cartoons.2. What was the message in each political cartoon and how do you know? Use
details from the cartoon to prove you are right.
Problem 3: The JungleThe Jungle, by Upton Sinclair, 1905.https://www.gutenberg.org/files/140/140-h/140-h.htm
The Killing Floor
It was all so very businesslike that one watched it fascinated. It wasporkmaking by machinery, porkmaking by applied mathematics. And yetsomehow the most matter-of-fact person could not help thinking of thehogs; they were so innocent, they came so very trustingly; and they wereso very human in their protests--and so perfectly within their rights!They had done nothing to deserve it; and it was adding insult to injury,as the thing was done here, swinging them up in this cold-blooded,impersonal way, without a pretense of apology, without the homage ofa tear. Now and then a visitor wept, to be sure; but this slaughteringmachine ran on, visitors or no visitors. It was like some horrible crimecommitted in a dungeon, all unseen and unheeded, buried out of sight andof memory.
One could not stand and watch very long without becoming philosophical,without beginning to deal in symbols and similes, and to hear the hogsqueal of the universe. Was it permitted to believe that there wasnowhere upon the earth, or above the earth, a heaven for hogs, wherethey were requited for all this suffering? Each one of these hogs was aseparate creature. Some were white hogs, some were black; some were brown,some were spotted; some were old, some young; some were long and lean,some were monstrous. And each of them had an individuality of his own,a will of his own, a hope and a heart's desire; each was full of self confidence, of self-importance, and a sense of dignity. And trusting andstrong in faith he had gone about his business, the while a black shadowhung over him and a horrid Fate waited in his pathway. Now suddenlyit had swooped upon him, and had seized him by the leg. Relentless,remorseless, it was; all his protests, his screams, were nothing to it--it did its cruel will with him, as if his wishes, his feelings, had simplyno existence at all; it cut his throat and watched him gasp out his life.And now was one to believe that there was nowhere a god of hogs, to whomthis hog personality was precious, to whom these hog squeals and agonieshad a meaning? Who would take this hog into his arms and comfort him,reward him for his work well done, and show him the meaning of hissacrifice? Perhaps some glimpse of all this was in the thoughts of our
humble-minded Jurgis, as he turned to go on with the rest of the party,and muttered: "Dieve--but I'm glad I'm not a hog!"
The carcass hog was scooped out of the vat by machinery, and then itfell to the second floor, passing on the way through a wonderful machinewith numerous scrapers, which adjusted themselves to the size and shapeof the animal, and sent it out at the other end with nearly all of itsbristles removed. It was then again strung up by machinery, and sentupon another trolley ride; this time passing between two lines of men,who sat upon a raised platform, each doing a certain single thing tothe carcass as it came to him. One scraped the outside of a leg;another scraped the inside of the same leg. One with a swift stroke cutthe throat; another with two swift strokes severed the head, which fellto the floor and vanished through a hole. Another made a slit downthe body; a second opened the body wider; a third with a saw cut thebreastbone; a fourth loosened the entrails; a fifth pulled them out--and they also slid through a hole in the floor. There were men to scrapeeach side and men to scrape the back; there were men to clean the carcassinside, to trim it and wash it. Looking down this room, one saw, creepingslowly, a line of dangling hogs a hundred yards in length; and for everyyard there was a man, working as if a demon were after him. At the end ofthis hog's progress every inch of the carcass had been gone over severaltimes; and then it was rolled into the chilling room, where it stayed fortwenty-four hours, and where a stranger might lose himself in a forest offreezing hogs.
Before the carcass was admitted here, however, it had to pass a governmentinspector, who sat in the doorway and felt of the glands in the neck fortuberculosis. This government inspector did not have the manner of a manwho was worked to death; he was apparently not haunted by a fear that thehog might get by him before he had finished his testing. If you were asociable person, he was quite willing to enter into conversation with you,and to explain to you the deadly nature of the ptomaines which are found intubercular pork; and while he was talking with you you could hardly be soungrateful as to notice that a dozen carcasses were passing him untouched.This inspector wore a blue uniform, with brass buttons, and he gave anatmosphere of authority to the scene, and, as it were, put the stamp ofofficial approval upon the things which were done in Durham's.Jurgis went down the line with the rest of the visitors, staringopenmouthed, lost in wonder. He had dressed hogs himself in the forestof Lithuania; but he had never expected to live to see one hog dressed
by several hundred men. It was like a wonderful poem to him, and he tookit all in guilelessly--even to the conspicuous signs demanding immaculatecleanliness of the employees. Jurgis was vexed when the cynical Jokubastranslated these signs with sarcastic comments, offering to take them tothe secret rooms where the spoiled meats went to be doctored.
1. What were the issues Upton Sinclair had in the meatpacking industry?2. What were Sinclair’s issues with the way city life had evolved by the early 1900s?
Problem 4: New NationalismPresident Teddy Roosevelt's New Nationalism Speech, Osawatomie, Kansas, August 31, 1910. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/12/06/archives-president-teddy-roosevelts-new-nationalism-speech
...In every wise struggle for human betterment one of the main objects, and often the only object, has been to achieve in large measure equality of opportunity. In the struggle for this great end, nations rise from barbarism to civilization, and through it people press forward from one stage of enlightenment to the next. One of the chief factors in progress is the destruction of special privilege. The essence of any struggle for healthy liberty has always been, and must always be, to take from some one man or class of men the right to enjoy power, or wealth, or position, or immunity, which has not been earned by service to his or their fellows. That is what you fought for in the Civil War, and that is what we strive for now.
At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress. In our day it appears as the struggle of freemen to gain and hold the right of self-government as against the special interests, who twist the methods of free government into machinery for defeating the popular will. At every stage, and under all circumstances, the essence of the struggle is to equalize opportunity, destroy privilege, and give to the life and citizenship of every individual the highest possible value both to himself and to the commonwealth. That is nothing new. All I ask in civil life is what you fought for in the Civil War. I ask that civil life be carried on according to the spirit in which the army was carried on. You never get perfect justice, but the effort in handling the army was to bring to the front the men who could do the job. Nobody grudged promotion to Grant, or Sherman, or Thomas, or Sheridan, because they earned it. The only complaint was when a man got promotion which he did not earn.
Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens, when we achieve it, will have two great results. First, every man will have a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies; to reach the highest point to which his capacities, unassisted by special privilege of his own and unhampered by the special privilege of others, can carry him, and to get for himself and his family substantially what he has earned. Second, equality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which he is capable. No man who carries the burden of the special privileges of another can give to the commonwealth that service to which it is fairly entitled.
I stand for the square deal. But when I say that I am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service. One word of warning, which, I think, is hardly necessary in Kansas. When I say I want a square deal for the poor man, I do not mean that I want a square deal for the man who remains poor because he has not got the energy to work for himself. If a man who has had a chance will not make good, then he has got to quit. And you men of the Grand Army, you want justice for the brave man who fought, and punishment for the coward who shirked his work. Is that not so?
Now, this means that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Exactly as the special interests of cotton and slavery threatened our political integrity before the Civil War, so now the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics. That is one of our tasks to-day. Every special interest is entitled to justice--full, fair, and complete--and, now, mind you, if there were any attempt by mob-violence to plunder and work harm to the special interest, whatever it may be, that I most dislike, and the wealthy man, whomsoever he may be, for whom I have the greatest contempt, I would fight for him, and you would if you were worth your salt. He should have justice. For every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office. The Constitution guarantees protection to property, and we must make that promise good. But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation...
1. What is Theodore Roosevelt’s main criticism of American politics?2. What does Roosevelt mean by “Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens”?3. What does Roosevelt mean by “I stand for the square deal”?
Problem 5: Teller & Platt AmendmentsThe Teller Amendment, 1898. https://investigatinghistory.ashp.cuny.edu/files/1898TellerAmendment.pdfThe Platt Amendment, 1903.https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=55&page=transcript
The Teller Amendment, 1898.
Whereas the abhorrent conditions which have existed for more thanthree years in the Island of Cuba, so near our own borders, haveshocked the moral sense of the people of the United States, have beena disgrace to Christian civilization, culminating, as they have, in thedestruction of a United States battleship, with two hundred and sixty six of its officers and crew, while on a friendly visit in the harbor ofHavana, and can not longer be endured, as has been set forth by thePresident of the United States in his message to Congress of Aprileleventh, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, upon which the action ofCongress was invited: Therefore,
Resolved, First. That the people of the Island of Cuba are, of rightought to be, free and independent.
Second. That it is the duty of the United States to demand, and theGovernment of the United States does hereby demand, that theGovernment of Spain at once relinquish its authority and governmentin the Island of Cuba and withdraw its land and naval forces from Cubaand Cuban waters.
Third. That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is,directed and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of theUnited States, and to call into the actual service of the United Statesthe militia of the several States, to such extent as may be necessaryto carry these resolutions into effect.
Fourth. That the United States hereby disclaims any disposition orintention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over saidIsland except for the pacification thereof, and asserts itsdetermination, when that is accomplished, to leave the governmentand control of the Island to its people.
The Platt Amendment, 1903.
..."I. That the government of Cuba shall never enter into any treaty or other compact with any foreign power or powers which will impair or tend to impair the independence of Cuba, nor in any manner authorize or permit any foreign power or powers to obtain by colonization or for military or naval purposes or otherwise, lodgement in or control over any portion of said island."
"II. That said government shall not assume or contract any public debt, to pay the interest upon which, and to make reasonable sinking fund provision for the ultimate discharge of which, the ordinary revenues of the island, after defraying the current expenses of government shall be inadequate."
"III. That the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene for the preservation of Cuban independence, the maintenance of a government adequate for the protection of life, property, and individual liberty, and for discharging the obligations with respect to Cuba imposed by the treaty of Paris on the United States, now to be assumed and undertaken by the government of Cuba."
"IV. That all Acts of the United States in Cuba during its military occupancy thereof are ratified and validated, and all lawful rights acquired thereunder shall be maintained and protected."
"V. That the government of Cuba will execute, and as far as necessary extend, the plans already devised or other plans to be mutually agreed upon, for the sanitation of the cities of the island, to the end that a recurrence of epidemic and infectious diseases may be prevented, thereby assuring protection to the people and commerce of Cuba, as well as to the commerce of the southern ports of the United States and the people residing therein."...
"VII. That to enable the United States to maintain the independence of Cuba, and to protect the people thereof, as well as for its own defense, the government of Cuba will sell or lease to the United States lands necessary for coaling or naval stations at certain specified points to be agreed upon with the President of the United States."
1. Explain the conflict that exists between the Teller and Platt Amendments.2. Why do you suppose the U.S. changed its policy? What did it have to gain?
Problem 6: American Foreign Policyhttps://d2ct263enury6r.cloudfront.net/wouBLIcpm0NuFZGv7L9NujPkMuQTlwXtQEeM5GtY3f1gcuez.pdf
The Open Door Notes, John Hay, U.S. Secretary of State, 1899.“Earnestly desirous to remove any cause of irritation and to insure at the same time to the commerce of all nations in China... [the United States urges all nations claiming a sphere of influence in China to declare] that [all nations] shall enjoy perfect equality of treatment for their commerce and navigation within such spheres.... We adhere to the policy... of peace with the Chinese nation, of furtherance of lawful commerce, and of protection of lives and property of our citizens by all means.... The policy of the Government of the United States is to seek a solution which may bring about permanent safety and peace to China, preserve Chinese territorial and administrative entity, protect all rights guaranteed to friendly powers by treaty and international law, and safeguard for the world the principle of equal and impartial trade with all parts of the Chinese Empire.”
The Roosevelt Corollary, President Theodore Roosevelt, December 6, 1904.“It is not true that the United States feels any land hunger or entertains any projects as regards the other nations of the Western Hemisphere save such as are for their welfare. All that this country desires is to see the neighboring countries stable, orderly, and prosperous... If a nation shows that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and decency in social and political matters, if it keeps order and pays its obligations, it need fear no interference from the United States. Chronic wrongdoing, [however,]... may... ultimately require intervention by some civilized nation, and in the Western Hemisphere the adherence of the United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the United States, however reluctantly..., to the exercise of an international police power…”
President Theodore Roosevelt Quote"I have always been fond of the West African proverb: 'Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.'"
Dollar Diplomacy, President William Howard Taft, December 3, 1912."The tremendous growth of the export trade of the United States has already made that trade a very real factor in the industrial and commercial prosperity of the country. With the development of our industries, the foreign commerce of the United States must rapidly become a still more essential factor in its economic welfare... The diplomacy of the present administration has sought to respond to modern ideas of commercial intercourse. This policy has been characterized as substituting dollars for bullets. It is
one that appeals alike to idealistic humanitarian sentiments, to the dictates of sound policy and strategy, and to legitimate commercial aims. It is an effort frankly directed to the increase of American trade upon the axiomatic principle that the government of the United States shall extend all proper support to every legitimate and beneficial American enterprise abroad."
Moral Diplomacy, President Woodrow Wilson, 1913."These States lying to the south of us, which have always been our neighbors, will now be drawn closer to us by innumerable ties, and I hope, chief of all, by the tie of a common understanding of each other. Interest does not tie nations together; it sometimes separates them. But sympathy and understanding does unite them[.] ...We must prove ourselves their friends and champions upon the terms of equality and honor... We must show ourselves friends by comprehending their interest, whether it squares with our own interest or not. It is a very perilous thing to determine the foreign policy of a nation in the terms of material interest. It not only is unfair to those with whom you are dealing, but it is degrading as regards your own actions."
1. What is the main point of Secretary of State John Hay’s Open Door Policy?2. What is the main point of President Theodore Roosevelt’s Big Stick Policy and
Roosevelt Corollary?3. What is the main point of President William Howard Taft’s Dollar Diplomacy?4. What is the main point of President Woodrow Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy?5. Which of the policies do you think the U.S. should have followed in the early-
1900s?
Problem 7: Zimmerman TelegramZimmerman Telegram, Decoded & Transcribed, 1917. https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=60#
FROM 2nd from London # 5747.
"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal or alliance on the following basis: make war together, make peace together, generous financial support and an understanding on our part that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. The settlement in detail is left to you. You will inform the President of the above most secretly as soon as the outbreak of war with the United States of America is certain and add the suggestion that he should, on his own initiative, invite Japan to immediate adherence and at the same time mediate between Japan and ourselves. Please call the President's attention to the fact that the ruthless employment of our submarines now offers the prospect of compelling England in a few months to make peace." Signed, ZIMMERMANN.
1. Who are the parties to the telegram and what would each gain in the proposed deal?
2. Was the U.S. justified in waging war against Germany after intercepting and decoding the Zimmerman Note? Explain.
Problem 8: Heart of Humanityhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCEes64D3_w
1. How does political propaganda play upon its viewers’ emotions and fears?2. Is propaganda like this effective in spreading hatred against a particular group
and swaying people’s political opinions?3. How would you expect German-Americans to respond? How would you expect
non-German-Americans to respond to those of German ancestry?
Problem 9: Fourteen PointsWoodrow Wilson, “Fourteen Points Speech,” January 8, 1918.http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/wilson14.asp
I. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.
II. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.
III. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.
IV. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.
V. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
VI. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing...
VII. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.
VIII. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has
unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.
IX. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.
X. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity to autonomous development.
XI. Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.
XII. The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.
XIII. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.
XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.
1. What were Wilson’s thoughts on self-determination and the League of Nations?2. Which three of Wilson’s Fourteen Points were the most significant and why?
Problem 10: Scope’s TrialTennessee’s An Act Prohibiting the Teaching of the Evolution Theory (TheButler Act), March 13, 1925 http://moses.law.umn.edu/darrow/documents/Butler%20Act%20Tenn.pdf
“If Monkeys Could Speak,” The Chicago Defender (African American Newspaper), Editorial, May 1925.http://moses.law.umn.edu/darrow/documents/Chicago_Defender_Scopes_trial_May_23_1925_cropped_opt.pdf
House Bill No. 185 By Mr. Butler
AN ACT prohibiting the teach of the Evolution Theory in all the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of Tennessee, which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, and to provide penalties for the violation thereof.
SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, That it shall be unlawful for any teacher in any of the Universitis [sic], Normals and all other public schools of the State which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals.
SECTION 2. Be it further enacted, That any teacher found guilty of the violation of this Act, Shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be fined not less than One Hundred ($100.00) Dollars nor more than Five Hundred ($500.00) Dollars for each offense.
SECTION 3. Be it further enacted, That this Act take effect from and after its passage, the public welfare requiring it.
Passed March 13, 1925W. F. Barry, Speaker of the House of RepresentativesL. D. Hill, Speaker of the Senate
Approved March 21, 1925Austin Peay, Governor
Chicago Defender Editorial
In Tennessee a schoolteacher is being tried for teaching evolution to his pupils. If convicted a prison term awaits him; he will be branded as an ordinary felon and thrown into a cell with robbers, gunment, thugs, rapists, and murderers. He will wear a striped suit, learn the lock-step and spend a few years reducing rocks to a more serviceable size.
That is the South’s way. Anything which conflicts with the South’s idea of her own importance; anything which tends to break down her doctrine of white superiority, she fights. If truths are introduced and these truths do not conform to what southern grandfathers believed, then it must be suppressed.
The Tennessee legislators who passed the law making it a crime to teach Darwinism in that state probably have never read the text themselves and all they know about the subject is that the entire human race is supposed to have started from a common origin. Therein lies their difficulty. Admit that premise and they will have to admit that there is no fundamental difference between themselves and the race they pretend to despise. Such admission would, of course, play havoc with the existing standards of living in the South.
And so, encouraged by America’s champion long distance presidential “white hope,” William Jennings Bryan, Tennessee blazes the trail making ignorance compulsory. Florida, Mr. Bryan’s adopted home, follows by a close margin.
There never was a surer “back to the monkey” sign than in Tennessee’s present trend. It is too bad the monkeys cannot speak and show the South just how ridiculous she is becoming in her efforts to convince the world that she is “superior.”
1. What was the penalty for a teacher convicted of teaching Darwin’s Theory of Evolution in a Tennessee public school in 1925 after House Bill 185 became law? What did the editorial claim the penalty was?
2. What was the main point of the Editorial article? How does it tie the teaching of evolution to racism?
3. What are the strengths and weaknesses in the Editorial’s point?
Problem 11: ProhibitionCarey Orr, “Bullet Proof,” Chicago Daily Tribune, April 29, 1926.
1. Describe the political cartoon.2. Is Prohibition working? What is the main point? Explain how you know.
Problem 12: Langston HughesPoems: “Mother to Son,” “Dreams,” & “Life is Fine” (1920s)
“Mother to Son”Well, son, I’ll tell you:Life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.It’s had tacks in it,And splinters,And boards torn up,And places with no carpet on the floor—Bare.But all the timeI’se been a-climbin’ on,And reachin’ landin’s,And turnin’ corners,And sometimes goin’ in the darkWhere there ain’t been no light.So boy, don’t you turn back.Don’t you set down on the steps’Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.Don’t you fall now—For I’se still goin’, honey,I’se still climbin’,And life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.
“Dreams”Hold fast to dreamsFor if dreams dieLife is a broken-winged birdThat cannot fly. Hold fast to dreamsFor when dreams goLife is a barren fieldFrozen with snow.
“Life is Fine”
I went down to the river,I set down on the bank.I tried to think but couldn't,So I jumped in and sank.
I came up once and hollered!I came up twice and cried!If that water hadn't a-been so coldI might've sunk and died.
But it was Cold in that water! It was cold!
I took the elevatorSixteen floors above the ground.I thought about my babyAnd thought I would jump down.
I stood there and I hollered!I stood there and I cried!If it hadn't a-been so highI might've jumped and died.
But it was High up there! It was high!
So since I'm still here livin',I guess I will live on.I could've died for love—But for livin' I was born
Though you may hear me holler,And you may see me cry—I'll be dogged, sweet baby,If you gonna see me die.
Life is fine! Fine as wine! Life is fine!
1. For each of the three poems- explain the main point and message.
Problem 13: Great DepressionNewspaper Headlines, 1929.https://clickamericana.com/topics/money-work/great-depression-newspaper-headlines-stock-market-crash-1929
1. Looking at the newspaper headlines on the stock market crash, how might these have impacted Americans in 1929?
2. While some of the headlines show optimism, how might the others have exacerbated the stock market crash and led to the banking crisis and a worsening of the Great Depression?
3. Thinking of today, has the press or news even unintentionally made a bad situation worse by its reporting? Explain.
Problem 14: HooverEdward Angly, Oh Yeah! Compiled from Newspapers and Public Records by Edward Angly (New York: Viking Press, 1931), 8–11, 14–17. http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5063
November, 1929“Any lack of confidence in the economic future or the basic strength of business in the United States is foolish.”—Herbert Hoover
January 21, 1930“Definite signs that business and industry have turned the corner from the temporary period of emergency that followed deflation of the speculative market were seen today by President Hoover. The President said the reports to the Cabinet showed that the tide of employment had changed in the right direction.”—News dispatch from Washington
March 8, 1930“President Hoover predicted today that the worst effect of the crash upon unemployment will have been passed during the next sixty days.”—Washington dispatch
May 1, 1930“While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed the worst and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover. There is one certainty of the future of a people of the resources, intelligence and character of the people of the United States—that is, prosperity.”—Herbert Hoover, Address at annual dinner of the Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.
October 2, 1930“During the past year you have carried the credit system of the nation safely through a most difficult crisis. In this success you have demonstrated not alone the soundness of the credit system, but also the capacity of the bankers in emergency.”—Herbert Hoover, Address at Convention of American Bankers Association, Cleveland
October 20, 1930“President Hoover today designated Robert P. Lamont, Secretary of Commerce, as chairman of the President’s special committee on unemployment.”—Washington dispatch
October 21, 1930“President Hoover has summoned Colonel Arthur Woods to help place 2,500,000 persons back to work this winter.”—Washington dispatch
December 1930“Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement.”—Herbert Hoover, Message to Congress
June 15, 1931“I am able to propose an American plan to you. . . . We plan more leisure for men and women and better opportunities for its enjoyment. We plan not only to provide for all the new generation, but we shall, by scientific research and invention, lift the standard of living and security of diffusion of wealth, a decrease in poverty and a great reduction in crime. And this Plan Will be Carried Out if We Just Keep on Giving the American People a Chance.”—Herbert Hoover, Address to Indiana Republican Editorial Association, Indianapolis
October 18, 1931“The depression has been deepened by events from abroad which are beyond the control either of our citizens or our government.”—Herbert Hoover, Radio address at Fortress Monroe, Virginia
1. Was Herbert Hoover optimistic, out of touch, lying, playing politics, or actively trying to improve the economy through his statements? Explain.
2. When have American Presidents and/or politicians, prior to Hoover or since Hoover, given information to the American public that has not been 100% truthful? Explain the circumstances and motivations in those cases.
Problem 15: Dust BowlCaroline A. Henderson, “Letters From the Dust Bowl,” The Atlantic, May 1936 Issue.https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1936/05/letters-from-the-dust-bowl/308897/
Editor’s Note: For 28 years, Mrs. Caroline A. Henderson and her husband have been farming in Oklahoma. For the past five years, her household has been one of many that have fought as best they might the devastating effects, first of the unprecedented drought, and then of the resulting dust storms. Her letters, written to a friend in Maryland, open a vivid and pathetic chapter of American agriculture.
EVA, OklahomaJune 30, 1935
...[In] Early in May, with no more grass or even weeds on our 640 acres...we decided, like most of our neighbors, to ship our cattle to grass in the central part of the state...We farmers here in the United States might as well recognize that we are a minority group, and that the prevailing interest of the nation as a whole is no longer agricultural. Hay for the horses and the heifers remaining here cost us $3 per ton, brought by truck from eastern Oklahoma.
...Contrary to many published reports, a good many people had left this country either temporarily or permanently...And they were not merely 'drifters,' as is frequently alleged…[O]n a sixty mile trip yesterday to procure tract repairs we saw many pitiful reminder of broken hopes and apparently wasted effort. Little abandoned homes where people had drilled deep wells for the precious water, had set trees and vines built reservoirs, and fenced in gardens —with everything now walled in half buried by banks of drifted soil, told a painful story of loss and disappointment. I grieved especially over one lonely plum thicket buried to the tips of the twigs, and a garden with a fence closely built of boards...
It might give you some notion of our great 'open spaces' if I tell you that on the sixty-mile trip, going by a state road over which our mail comes from the railroad, and coming back by Federal highway, we encountered one car, and no other vehicles of any sort. And this was on Saturday, the farmers' marketing day!
...One great contributing cause of the terrible dust storms of the last two years has been the pitiful bareness of the fields resulting from the long drought. I am not wise enough to forecast the result. We have had two most welcome rains in June —three quarters of an
inch and one-half inch. Normally these should have been of the utmost benefit, though they by no means guarantee an abundant feed crop from our now sprouting seeds as many editorial writers have decreed, and they do nothing toward restoring subsoil moisture. Actually the helpful effects of the rains have been for us and for other people largely destroyed by the drifting soil from abandoned, unworked lands around us. It fills the air and our eyes and noses and throats, and, worst of all, our furrows, where tender shoots are coming to the surface only to be buried by the smothering silt from the fields of rugged individualists who persist in their right to do nothing.
A fairly promising piece of barley has been destroyed for us by the mere' less drift from the same field whose sands have practically buried the little mulberry hedge which has long sheltered our buildings from the north west winds. Large spaces in our pastures are entirely bare in spite of the rains. Most of the green color, where there is any grazing, is due to the pestilent Russian thistles rather than to grass. Our little locust grove which we cherished for so many years has become a small pile of fence posts. With trees and vines and flowers all around you, you can't imagine how I miss that little green shaded spot in the midst of the desert glare.
Naturally you will wonder why we stay where conditions are so extremely disheartening. Why not pick up and leave as so many others have done? It is a fair question, but a hard one to answer.
Recently I talked with a young university graduate of very superior attainments. He took the ground that such a sentiment could and should be disregarded. He may be right...We can't hold out indefinitely without some return from the land, some source of income, however small. But I think I can never go willingly or without pain that as yet seems unendurable...The newer methods of farming suggest possibilities of better control of moisture in the future. Our entire equipment is adapted to the type of farming suitable for this country and would have to be replaced at great expense with the tools needed in some other locality. We have spent so much in trying to keep our land from blowing away that it looks foolish to walk off and leave it, when somewhat more favorable conditions seem now to 'cast their shadows before.' I scarcely need to tell you that there is no use in thinking of either renting or selling farm property here at present. It is just a place to stand on —if we can keep the taxes paid —and work and hope for a better day. We could realize nothing whatever from all our years of struggle with which to make a fresh start.
We long for the garden and little chickens, the trees and birds and wild flowers of the years gone by. Perhaps if we do our part these good things may return some day, for others if not for ourselves...A great reddish-brown dust cloud is rising now from the
southeast, so we must get out and do our night work before it arrives. Our thoughts go with you.
1. Discuss the problems noted in the letter concerning life in Oklahoma during the Dust Bowl.
2. What seems to be the underlying problem and what have most people in the community done in response to the Dust Bowl? What possible solutions did the author note?
Problem 16: Bonus Armyhttps://spartacus-educational.com/EXUSA05.htm
Time Magazine (8th August, 1932)When war came in 1917 William Hushka, 22-year-old Lithuanian, sold his St. Louis butcher shop, gave the proceeds to his wife, joined the Army. He was sent to Camp Funston, Kansas where he was naturalized. Honorably discharged in 1919, he drifted to Chicago, worked as a butcher, seemed unable to hold a steady job. His wife divorced him, kept his small daughter.
Long jobless, in June he joined a band of veterans marching to Washington to fuse with the Bonus Expeditionary Force. "I might as well starve there as here", he told his brother. He took part in the demonstration at the Capital the day Congress adjourned without voting immediate cashing of the bonus.
Last week William Hushka's Bonus for $528 suddenly became payable in full when a police bullet drilled him dead in the worst public disorder the capital has known in years.
Malcolm Cowley, The New Republic (17th August, 1932)
A few weeks later there was more talk of revolution when the Bonus Expeditionary Force descended on Washington. The BEF was a tattered army consisting of veterans from every state in the Union; most of them were old-stock Americans from smaller industrial cities where relief had broken down. All unemployed in 1932, all living on the edge of hunger, they remembered that the government had made them a promise for the future. It was embodied in a law that Congress had passed some years before, providing "adjusted compensation certificates" for those who had served in the Great War; the certificates were to be redeemed in dollars, but not until 1945. Now the veterans were hitchhiking and stealing rides on freight cars to Washington, for the sole purpose, they declared, of petitioning Congress for immediate payment of the soldiers' bonus. They arrived by hundreds or thousands every day in June. Ten thousand were camped on marshy ground across the Anacostia River, and ten thousand others occupied a number of half-demolished buildings between the Capitol and the White House. They organized themselves by states and companies and chose a commander named Walter W. Waters, an ex-sergeant from Portland. Oregon, who promptly acquired an aide-de-camp and a pair of highly polished leather puttees. Meanwhile the veterans were listening to speakers of all political complexions, as the Russian soldiers had done in 1917. Many radicals and some conservatives thought that the Bonus Army was creating a revolutionary situation of an almost classical type.
Herbert Hoover, statement (29th July, 1932)A challenge to the authority of the United States Government has been met, swiftly and firmly. After months of patient indulgence, the Government met overt lawlessness as it always must be met if the cherished processes of self-government are to be preserved. We cannot tolerate the abuse of Constitutional rights by those who would destroy all government, no matter who they may be. Government cannot be coerced by mob rule.
The Department of Justice is pressing its investigation into the violence which forced the call for Army detachments, and it is my sincere hope that those agitators who inspired yesterday's attack upon the Federal authority may be brought speedily to trial in the civil courts. There can be no safe harbor in the United States of America for violence.
Order and civil tranquility are the first requisites in the great task of economic reconstruction to which our whole people now are devoting their heroic and noble energies. This national effort must not be retarded in even the slightest degree by organized lawlessness. The first obligation of my office is to uphold and defend the Constitution and the authority of the law. This I propose always to do.
1. How does the author of the Time Magazine article encourage the reader to feel sorry for William Hushka?
2. Find evidence in the New Republic article that shows the author supported the Bonus Marchers.
3. Given that 1932 was a Presidential Election year, do you think that President Hoover's handling of the Bonus Army won or lost him votes.? Explain the reasons for your decision.
Problem 17: New Deal: WPAWorks Progress Administration renamed Works Project Administration in 1939https://www.loc.gov/collections/federal-writers-project/articles-and-essays/industrial-lore/
Chris Thornsten, Iron WorkerBirth: 51 years ago, on board a fishing boat moored to a dock in New OrleansEthnicity: ScandinavianEducation: No formal educationOccupation: Iron WorkerLocation: Union Hall, 84th Street, New York CityDate: January 31, 1938, 1 PM to 3 PMInterviewer: Arnold ManoffInterview Excerpt: "Is your job dangerous?"
"You ain't an Iron worker unless you get killed...Men hurt on all jobs. Take the Washington Bridge, the Triboro Bridge. Plenty of men hurt on those jobs. Two men killed on the Hotel New Yorker. I drove rivets all the way on that job. When I got hurt I was squeezed between a crane and a collar bone broke and all the ribs in my body and three vertebrae. I was laid up for four years."
Mr. Garavelli, StonecutterSam Alexander, a stone masonAge: In his fiftiesEthnicity: ItalianOccupation: StonecutterLocation: Barre, VermontInterviewer: John LynchInterview Excerpt: "Is the dust bad in the stone sheds?"
"It was tough for everybody in the early days. Lots of stonecutters die from the silica. Now they've got new and better equipment; they've all got to use the suctions. It helps a lot; but it ain't perfect. Men still die. You bet your life my kid don't go to work in no stoneshed. Silica, that's what kills them. Everybody who stays in granite, it gets...I don't get so much of it myself. Maybe I'm smart. I don't make so much money, but I don't get so much silica. In my end of the shed there ain't so much dust. I can laugh at the damn granite because it can't touch me. That's me. I ain't got no money, but I ain't got no silica either. My end of the shed don't get so much dust. It's like a knife, you know, that silica. Like a knife in your chest."
Alice Caudle, Mill WorkerOccupation: Mill WorkerLocation: Concord, North CarolinaDate: September 2, 1938Interviewer: Muriel L. WolffInterview Excerpt: "Do you like working in a mill?"
"Law, I reckon I was born to work in a mill. I started when I was ten year old and I aim to keep right on jest as long as I'm able. I'd a-heap rather do it than housework...Yessir, when I started down here to plant No. 1, I was so little I had to stand on a box to reach my work. I was a spinner at first, then I learned to spool. When they put in them new winding machines, I asked them to learn me how to work em and they did. If I'd a-been a man no telling how far I'd-a gone."
1. Was the WPA a good public project during the Great Depression? Explain the positives and negatives of the project.
2. Have the interviews of workers, former slaves, and others proved valuable after the end of the Great Depression and what is the lasting legacy of the WPA?
Problem 18: Somewhere Over the RainbowJudy Garland, “Somewhere Over the Rainbow,” 1939 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSZxmZmBfnU
1. Think of specific scenes from the Wizard of Oz and Judy Garland’s song, “Somewhere Over the Rainbow.” How might the song and movie be about the Great Depression? Give at least three examples from the movie and/or song and explain each.
Problem 19: Four FreedomsFranklin D. Roosevelt, Four Freedoms Speech, January 6, 1941.http://www.speeches-usa.com/Transcripts/franklin_roosevelt-four.html
In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
● The first is freedom of speech and expression -- everywhere in the world.● The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way --
everywhere in the world.● The third is freedom from want -- which, translated into world terms, means
economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants -- everywhere in the world.
● The fourth is freedom from fear -- which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor-- anywhere in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.To that new order we oppose the greater conception -- the moral order. A good society is able to face schemes of world domination and foreign revolutions alike without fear.
Since the beginning of our American history, we have been engaged in change -- in a perpetual peaceful revolution -- a revolution which goes on steadily, quietly adjusting itself to changing conditions -- without the concentration camp or the quick-lime in the ditch. The world order which we seek is the cooperation of free countries, working together in a friendly, civilized society.
This nation has placed its destiny in the hands and heads and hearts of its millions of free men and women; and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere. Our support goes to those who struggle to gain those rights or keep them. Our strength is our unity of purpose. To that high concept there can be no end save victory.
1. Give examples of the world issues that occurred by 1941 that threatened each of the four freedoms.
2. Which of the four freedoms is most significant and why? Explain your answer.Problem 20: Day of Infamy
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Speech to the Congress, December 8, 1941.http://time.com/4593483/pearl-harbor-franklin-roosevelt-infamy-speech-attack/
“Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives:
Yesterday, December 7th, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.
Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.
Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.And this morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.
No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph—so help us God.
I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.”
1. What did F.D.R. mean when he said that December 7, 1941 would be a “day that would live on in infamy”?
2. How would you have responded if you heard FDR’s speech live in 1941 after Pearl Harbor?
Problem 21: Rosie the Riveterhttp://www.artchive.com/artchive/r/rockwell/rockwell_rosie.jpghttp://archive.ccm.edu/rosie/images/WeCanDoItPoster%5B1%5D.jpg
1. Describe the two versions of Rosie the Riveter. What did Rosie symbolize and represent?
2. Is one more favorable than the other? Explain.
Problem 22: War Bondshttps://guides.library.illinoisstate.edu/c.php?g=30457&p=191169
1. Describe two of the war bond images above.2. How did each appeal to emotions in order to persuade the viewer to buy bonds?3. How did each appeal to American patriotism? Be specific.
Problem 23: Atomic BombHarry S. Truman’s Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, NPS Article.https://www.nps.gov/articles/trumanatomicbomb.htm
By August, 1945, Japan had lost World War II. Japan and the United States both knew it. How long would it be, however, before Japan surrendered? Japan was split between surrender or fighting to the end. They chose to fight.
In mid-July, President Harry S Truman was notified of the successful test of the atomic bomb, what he called “the most terrible bomb in the history of the world.” Thousands of hours of research and development as well as billions of dollars had contributed to its production. This was no theoretical research project. It was created to destroy and kill on a massive scale. As president, it was Harry Truman’s decision if the weapon would be used with the goal to end the war. “It is an awful responsibility that has come to us,” the president wrote. President Truman had four options.
Option 1: Conventional Bombing of the Japanese Home IslandsWhile the United States began conventional bombing of Japan as early as 1942, the mission did not begin in earnest until mid-1944. Between April 1944 and August, 1945, an estimated 333,000 Japanese people were killed and 473,000 more wounded in air raids. A single firebombing attack on Tokyo in March 1945 killed more than 80,000 people. Truman later remarked, “Despite their heavy losses at Okinawa and the firebombing of Tokyo, the Japanese refused to surrender. The saturation bombing of Japan took much fiercer tolls and wrought far and away more havoc than the atomic bomb. Far and away. The firebombing of Tokyo was one of the most terrible things that ever happened, and they didn't surrender after that although Tokyo was almost completely destroyed.” In August 1945, it was clear that conventional bombing was not effective.
Option 2: Ground Invasion of the Japanese Home IslandsThe United States could launch a traditional ground invasion of the Japanese home islands. However, experience showed that the Japanese did not easily surrender. They had been willing to make great sacrifices to defend the smallest islands. They were likely to fight even more fiercely if the United States invaded their homeland. During the battle at Iwo Jima in 1945, 6,200 US soldiers died. Later that year, on Okinawa, 13,000 soldiers and sailors were killed. Casualties on Okinawa were 35 percent; one out of three US participants was wounded or killed. Truman was afraid that an invasion of Japan would look like "Okinawa from one end of Japan to the other." Casualty predictions varied, but all were high. The price of invasion would be millions of American dead and wounded.
Estimates did not include Japanese casualties. Truman and his military advisers assumed that a ground invasion would “be opposed not only by the available organized military forces of the Empire, but also by a fanatically hostile population." Documents discovered after the war indicated that they were right. Despite knowing the cause was hopeless, Japan planned a resistance so ferocious, resulting in costs so appalling, that they hoped that the United States would simply call for a cease fire where each nation would agree to stop fighting and each nation would retain the territory they occupied at the time. Almost one-quarter million Japanese casualties were expected in the invasion. Truman wrote, “My object is to save as many American lives as possible but I also have a human feeling for the women and children of Japan.” In August 1945, it appeared inevitable that Japanese civilians would have to suffer more death and casualties before surrender. A ground invasion would result in excessive American casualties as well.
Option 3: Demonstration of the Atomic Bomb on an Unpopulated AreaAnother option was to demonstrate the power of the atomic bomb to frighten the Japanese into surrendering. An island target was considered, but it raised several concerns. First, who would Japan select to evaluate the demonstration and advise the government? A single scientist? A committee of politicians? How much time would elapse before Japan communicated its decision—and how would that time be used? To prepare for more fighting? Would a nation surrender based on the opinion of a single person or small group? Second, what if the bomb turned out to be a dud? This was a new weapon, not clearly understood. The world would be watching the demonstration of a new weapon so frightening that an enemy would surrender without a fight. What if this “super weapon” didn’t work? Would that encourage Japan to fight harder? Third, there were only two bombs in existence at the time. More were in production, but, dud or not, was it worth it to expend 50% of the country’s atomic arsenal in a demonstration?
In May 1945, Truman had formed the Interim Committee, a committee to advise the president about matters pertaining to the use of nuclear energy and weapons. The Committee’s first priority was to advise on the use of the atomic bomb. After prolonged debate, the president received the Committee’s historic conclusion: “We can propose no technical demonstration likely to bring an end to the war. We can see no acceptable alternative to direct military use.”
Option 4: Use of the Atomic Bomb on a Populated AreaTruman and his advisors concluded that only bombing a city would make an adequate impression. Any advance warning to evacuate a city would endanger the bomber crews; the Japanese would be forewarned and attempt to shoot them down. The target
cities were carefully chosen. First, it had to be a city that had suffered little damage from conventional bombing so it couldn’t be argued that the damage came from anything other than the atomic bomb. Second, it must be a city primarily devoted to military production. This was complicated, however, because in Japan, workers’ homes were intermingled with factories so that it was impossible to find a target that was exclusively military. Finally, Truman stipulated it should not be a city of traditional cultural significance to Japan, such as Kyoto. Truman did not seek to destroy Japanese culture or people; the goal was to destroy Japan’s ability to make war.
So, on the morning of August 6, 1945, the American B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay, dropped the world’s first atom bomb over the city of Hiroshima.
1. List the pros and cons for each of the four options Truman had.2. Which option would you have chosen and why? Explain.
Problem 24: HolocaustThe Auschwitz Album- Visual Evidence of the Process Leading to the Mass Murder at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Yad Vashem.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATQp8rFXRkg
1. Describe the process used by the Nazis in transporting and processing Jews at Auschwitz.
2. Aside from the killing itself, what was the most disturbing aspect of the process described? Explain.
Problem 25: AuschwitzThe Unbearable Lightness of Being a Nazi, 2008.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUvcmGbtHWA
1. Are those who worked at Auschwitz but did not take place in the actual act of extermination as guilty as those who directly participated?
2. How could human beings act happy and normal when mass killing was taking place just steps away?
3. Reflect on the photographs you just saw.
Problem 26: Human RightsUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, United Nations, Paris, December 10, 1948.https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
Article 1.All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5.No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6.Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 17. (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18.Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 20.(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
1. What are the three most important rights guaranteed by the UDHR and why?2. If there is a conflict between the rights listed above and a religion or culture- how
should that be handled? In other words, could the right be withheld even though it is in the UDHR?
3. If you had to give up three of the articles above, which three would you choose and why?
Problem 27: Iron CurtainWinston Churchill, The Sinews of Peace, Fulton Missouri, March 5, 1946.https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1946-1963-elder-statesman/the-sinews-of-peace/
A shadow has fallen upon the scenes so lately lighted by the Allied victory. Nobody knows what Soviet Russia and its Communist international organisation intends to do in the immediate future, or what are the limits, if any, to their expansive and proselytising tendencies. I have a strong admiration and regard for the valiant Russian people and for my wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin...We welcome Russia to her rightful place among the leading nations of the world. We welcome her flag upon the seas. Above all, we welcome constant, frequent and growing contacts between the Russian people and our own people on both sides of the Atlantic. It is my duty however, for I am sure you would wish me to state the facts as I see them to you, to place before you certain facts about the present position in Europe.
From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia, all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and, in many cases, increasing measure of control from Moscow. Athens alone-Greece with its immortal glories-is free to decide its future at an election under British, American and French observation. The Russian-dominated Polish Government has been encouraged to make enormous and wrongful inroads upon Germany, and mass expulsions of millions of Germans on a scale grievous and undreamed-of are now taking place. The Communist parties, which were very small in all these Eastern States of Europe, have been raised to pre-eminence and power far beyond their numbers and are seeking everywhere to obtain totalitarian control. Police governments are prevailing in nearly every case, and so far, except in Czechoslovakia, there is no true democracy...
The safety of the world requires a new unity in Europe, from which no nation should be permanently outcast. It is from the quarrels of the strong parent races in Europe that the world wars we have witnessed, or which occurred in former times, have sprung. Twice in our own lifetime we have seen the United States, against their wishes and their traditions, against arguments, the force of which it is impossible not to comprehend, drawn by irresistible forces, into these wars in time to secure the victory of the good cause, but only after frightful slaughter and devastation had occurred. Twice the United States has had to send several millions of its young men across the Atlantic to find the
war; but now war can find any nation, wherever it may dwell between dusk and dawn. Surely we should work with conscious purpose for a grand pacification of Europe, within the structure of the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. That I feel is an open cause of policy of very great importance.
In front of the iron curtain which lies across Europe are other causes for anxiety. In Italy the Communist Party is seriously hampered by having to Support the Communist-trained Marshal Tito’s claims to former Italian territory at the head of the Adriatic. Nevertheless the future of Italy hangs in the balance. Again one cannot imagine a regenerated Europe without a strong France. All my public life I have worked for a Strong France and I never lost faith in her destiny, even in the darkest hours. I will not lose faith now. However, in a great number of countries, far from the Russian frontiers and throughout the world, Communist fifth columns are established and work in complete unity and absolute obedience to the directions they receive from the Communist centre. Except in the British Commonwealth and in the United States where Communism is in its infancy, the Communist parties or fifth columns constitute a growing challenge and peril to Christian civilisation…
I do not believe that Soviet Russia desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here to-day while time remains, is the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries...If the Western Democracies stand together in strict adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter, their influence for furthering those principles will be immense and no one is likely to molest them. If however they become divided or falter in their duty and if these all-important years are allowed to slip away then indeed catastrophe may overwhelm us all.
1. How does Churchill describe the nations behind the “iron curtain”?2. What is the challenge Western nations face according to Churchill?3. What is the solution according to Churchill?
Problem 28: Truman DoctrineHarry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine, March 12, 1947 delivered before a Joint Session of Congress.https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/harrystrumantrumandoctrine.html
I am fully aware of the broad implications involved if the United States extends assistance to Greece and Turkey, and I shall discuss these implications with you at this time. One of the primary objectives of the foreign policy of the United States is the creation of conditions in which we and other nations will be able to work out a way of life free from coercion. This was a fundamental issue in the war with Germany and Japan. Our victory was won over countries which sought to impose their will, and their way of life, upon other nations.
To ensure the peaceful development of nations, free from coercion, the United States has taken a leading part in establishing the United Nations. The United Nations is designed to make possible lasting freedom and independence for all its members. We shall not realize our objectives, however, unless we are willing to help free peoples to maintain their free institutions and their national integrity against aggressive movements that seek to impose upon them totalitarian regimes. This is no more than a frank recognition that totalitarian regimes imposed upon free peoples, by direct or indirect aggression, undermine the foundations of international peace, and hence the security of the United States.
The peoples of a number of countries of the world have recently had totalitarian regimes forced upon them against their will. The Government of the United States has made frequent protests against coercion and intimidation in violation of the Yalta agreement in Poland, Rumania, and Bulgaria. I must also state that in a number of other countries there have been similar developments.
At the present moment in world history nearly every nation must choose between alternative ways of life. The choice is too often not a free one. One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from political oppression. The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a controlled press and radio, fixed elections, and the suppression of personal freedoms.
I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.
I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way.
I believe that our help should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and orderly political processes.
The world is not static, and the status quo is not sacred. But we cannot allow changes in the status quo in violation of the Charter of the United Nations by such methods as coercion, or by such subterfuges as political infiltration. In helping free and independent nations to maintain their freedom, the United States will be giving effect to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
It is necessary only to glance at a map to realize that the survival and integrity of the Greek nation are of grave importance in a much wider situation. If Greece should fall under the control of an armed minority, the effect upon its neighbor, Turkey, would be immediate and serious. Confusion and disorder might well spread throughout the entire Middle East. Moreover, the disappearance of Greece as an independent state would have a profound effect upon those countries in Europe whose peoples are struggling against great difficulties to maintain their freedoms and their independence while they repair the damages of war.
It would be an unspeakable tragedy if these countries, which have struggled so long against overwhelming odds, should lose that victory for which they sacrificed so much. Collapse of free institutions and loss of independence would be disastrous not only for them but for the world. Discouragement and possibly failure would quickly be the lot of neighboring peoples striving to maintain their freedom and independence.
Should we fail to aid Greece and Turkey in this fateful hour, the effect will be far reaching to the West as well as to the East.
1. According to Truman, what role should the U.S. play in international affairs when it comes to Communist Movements?
2. Why does Truman believe there should be such an American duty?3. What is the danger to the U.S. in following the Truman Doctrine? Explain.
Problem 29: Eisenhower DoctrineDwight D. Eisenhower, The Eisenhower Doctrine, January 5, 1957 delivered before a Joint Session of Congress.https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/january-5-1957-eisenhower-doctrine
...There are worldwide hopes which we can reasonably entertain, and there are worldwide responsibilities which we must carry to make certain that freedom—including our own—may be secure. There is, however, a special situation in the Middle East which I feel I should, even now, lay before you.
…[We must] remind ourselves that our basic national objective in international affairs remains peace—a world peace based on justice. Such a peace must include all areas, all peoples of the world if it is to be enduring. There is no nation, great or small, with which we would refuse to negotiate, in mutual good faith, with patience and in the determination to secure a better understanding between us. Out of such understandings must, and eventually will, grow confidence and trust, indispensable ingredients to a program of peace and to plans for lifting from us all the burdens of expensive armaments. To promote these objectives, our government works tirelessly, day by day, month by month, year by year. But until a degree of success crowns our efforts that will assure to all nations peaceful existence, we must, in the interests of peace itself, remain vigilant, alert and strong.
The Middle East has abruptly reached a new and critical stage in its long and important history...since the First World War there has been a steady evolution toward self-government and independence. This development the United States has welcomed and has encouraged. Our country supports without reservation the full sovereignty and independence of each and every nation of the Middle East….The evolution to independence has in the main been a peaceful process...Just recently there have been hostilities involving Western European nations that once exercised much influence in the area. Also the relatively large attack by Israel in October has intensified the basic differences between that nation and its Arab neighbors. All this instability has been heightened and, at times, manipulated by International Communism.
Russia's rulers have long sought to dominate the Middle East. That was true of the Czars and it is true of the Bolsheviks. The reasons are not hard to find. They do not affect Russia's security, for no one plans to use the Middle East as a base for aggression against Russia. Never for a moment has the United States entertained such a thought. The Soviet Union has nothing whatsoever to fear from the United States in
the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world, so long as its rulers do not themselves first resort to aggression. That statement I make solemnly and emphatically.
Russia does not appreciably use or depend upon the Suez Canal...Indeed, the Soviet Union is a substantial exporter of petroleum products...The reason for Russia's interest in the Middle East is solely that of power politics. Considering her announced purpose of Communizing the world, it is easy to understand her hope of dominating the Middle East…
If the nations of that area should lose their independence, if they were dominated by alien forces hostile to freedom, that would be both a tragedy for the area and for many other free nations whose economic life would be subject to near strangulation. Western Europe would be endangered just as though there had been no Marshall Plan, no North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The free nations of Asia and Africa, too, would be placed in serious jeopardy. And the countries of the Middle East would lose the markets upon which their economies depend. All this would have the most adverse, if not disastrous, effect upon our own nation's economic life and political prospects...
[A] greater responsibility now devolves upon the United States. We have shown, so that none can doubt, our dedication to the principle that force shall not be used internationally for any aggressive purpose and that the integrity and independence of the nations of the Middle East should be inviolate...There is general recognition in the Middle East, as elsewhere, that the United States does not seek either political or economic domination over any other people. Our desire is a world environment of freedom, not servitude. On the other hand many, if not all, of the nations of the Middle East are aware of the danger that stems from International Communism and welcome closer cooperation with the United States to realize for themselves the United Nations goals of independence, economic well-being and spiritual growth…[therefore] the United States must make more evident its willingness to support the independence of the freedom-loving nations of the area…
1. According to Eisenhower, what role should the U.S. play in international affairs when it comes to Communist Movements?
2. Why does Eisenhower believe there should be such an American duty?3. What is the danger to the U.S. in following the Eisenhower Doctrine? Explain.
Problem 30: McCarthyJoseph McCarthy, Enemies from Within Speech at Ohio County Women’s Republican Meeting in Wheeling, West Virginia, February 9, 1950.http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6456
Five years after a world war has been won, men’s hearts should anticipate a long peace—and men’s minds should be free from the heavy weight that comes with war. But this is not such a period—for this is not a period of peace. This is a time of “the cold war.” This is a time when all the world is split into two vast, increasingly hostile armed camps—a time of a great armament race...
The one encouraging thing is that the “mad moment” has not yet arrived for the firing of the gun or the exploding of the bomb which will set civilization about the final task of destroying itself. There is still a hope for peace if we finally decide that no longer can we safely blind our eyes and close our ears to those facts which are shaping up more and more clearly . . . and that is that we are now engaged in a show-down fight . . . not the usual war between nations for land areas or other material gains, but a war between two diametrically opposed ideologies...
Today we are engaged in a final, all-out battle between communistic atheism and Christianity. The modern champions of communism have selected this as the time, and ladies and gentlemen, the chips are down—they are truly down...
The reason why we find ourselves in a position of impotency is not because our only powerful potential enemy has sent men to invade our shores . . . but rather because of the traitorous actions of those who have been treated so well by this Nation. It has not been the less fortunate, or members of minority groups who have been traitorous to this Nation, but rather those who have had all the benefits that the wealthiest Nation on earth has had to offer . . . the finest homes, the finest college education and the finest jobs in government we can give.
This is glaringly true in the State Department. There the bright young men who are born with silver spoons in their mouths are the ones who have been most traitorous. . . .
I have here in my hand a list of 205 . . . a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department. . . .
As you know, very recently the Secretary of State proclaimed his loyalty to a man guilty of what has always been considered as the most abominable of all crimes—being a traitor to the people who gave him a position of great trust—high treason. . . .
He has lighted the spark which is resulting in a moral uprising and will end only when the whole sorry mess of twisted, warped thinkers are swept from the national scene so that we may have a new birth of honesty and decency in government.
1. According to Senator McCarthy, what is the challenge facing the nation?2. Why do you suppose McCarthy would choose to announce such a significant
accusation at a very minor speaking event- the Republican Women’s Meeting in a town in West Virginia? Hypothesize as to the possible motivations?
Problem 31: Rebel Without A Causehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqGDruqXV5g
1. Describe the family scene at the beginning of the clip. How is the Fifties family portrayed?
2. Describe the group of teenagers that pull up in the car. What are they doing, how are they acting, and in what ways do their actions conflict with the expectations of the Fifties?
3. After this three minute clip- predict the conflict and challenges facing Jim (the main character). In the end, what path will he take?
Problem 32: Brown v. Board of EducationBrown v. Board of Education, Supreme Court, 1954.https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/history-brown-v-board-education-re-enactmenthttps://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/re-enactment-script-brown-v-board-education-re
The case that came to be known as Brown v. Board of Education was actually the name given to five separate cases that were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the issue of segregation in public schools. These cases were Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Briggs v. Elliot, Davis v. Board of Education of Prince Edward County (VA.), Bolling v. Sharpe, and Gebhart v. Ethel. While the facts of each case are different, the main issue in each was the constitutionality of state-sponsored segregation in public schools. Once again, Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund handled these cases.
Although it acknowledged some of the plaintiffs'/plaintiffs claims, a three-judge panel at the U.S. District Court that heard the cases ruled in favor of the school boards. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
When the cases came before the Supreme Court in 1952, the Court consolidated all five cases under the name of Brown v. Board of Education. Marshall personally argued the case before the Court. Although he raised a variety of legal issues on appeal, the most common one was that separate school systems for blacks and whites were inherently unequal, and thus violate the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, relying on sociological tests, such as the one performed by social scientist Kenneth Clark, and other data, he also argued that segregated school systems had a tendency to make black children feel inferior to white children, and thus such a system should not be legally permissible.
Meeting to decide the case, the Justices of the Supreme Court realized that they were deeply divided over the issues raised. While most wanted to reverse Plessy and declare segregation in public schools to be unconstitutional, they had various reasons for doing so. Unable to come to a solution by June 1953 (the end of the Court's 1952-1953 term), the Court decided to rehear the case in December 1953. During the intervening months, however, Chief Justice Fred Vinson died and was replaced by Gov. Earl Warren of California. After the case was reheard in 1953, Chief Justice Warren was able to do something that his predecessor had not—i.e. bring all of the Justices to agree to support a unanimous decision declaring segregation in public schools unconstitutional. On May 14, 1954, he delivered the opinion of the Court, stating that "We conclude that in the
field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. . ."
Expecting opposition to its ruling, especially in the southern states, the Supreme Court did not immediately try to give direction for the implementation of its ruling. Rather, it asked the attorney generals of all states with laws permitting segregation in their public schools to submit plans for how to proceed with desegregation. After still more hearings before the Court concerning the matter of desegregation, on May 31, 1955, the Justices handed down a plan for how it was to proceed; desegregation was to proceed with "all deliberate speed." Although it would be many years before all segregated school systems were to be desegregated, Brown and Brown II (as the Courts plan for how to desegregate schools came to be called) were responsible for getting the process underway.
1) Student Greeter: You may wonder what difference landmark Supreme Court decisions make in our lives – today. You might be surprised to find out that students our age have brought cases to the Supreme Court. Did you know that one of the most famous cases in American history – Brown v. Board of Education – started with an elementary school girl? Linda Brown was one of the many brave students in the 1950s and 1960s who challenged what was happening around them. She has something to say to us that matters even today.
2) Linda Brown: Hi, I'm Linda Brown. Even though there was an elementary school close to my house, my sister and I had to go to an all-Black school much farther away. We had to get up really early and walk, then take a bus, to the Monroe School in Topeka, Kansas.
We weren't allowed to go to the Sumner School that was closer to us because it was for white children only. Even though some schools in my community were open to everybody, a Kansas law allowed the Board of Education of Topeka to establish segregated elementary schools like the all-white Sumner School in my neighborhood and the all-black Monroe School that I had to attend.
With the help of our lawyer Thurgood Marshall, my family and I sued the Board of Education. Children in other states had the same problem as we did, so when we took our case to the Supreme Court of the United States, the Court combined our cases.
The Court struck down the laws allowing segregated schools. The Justices said that separate is not equal. They ruled that laws segregating students by race were unconstitutional. Today we'll hear from the people whose courage, intelligence, and determination changed history for all of us, starting with Mr. Homer Plessy.
3) Homer Plessy: My name is Homer Plessy. I was arrested for not giving up my seat to a white man on a train in New Orleans. I decided to challenge my arrest in court. My lawyer argued that separating blacks from whites on the train violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
My case made it all of the way to this court. The Court ruled against me in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. The Court said that the states could legally segregate the races, as long as each race was treated "equally." This came to be known as "separate but equal." You can imagine how disappointed I was because for many years courts used my case as an example of supporting segregation.
4) Charles Hamilton Houston: My name is Charles Hamilton Houston. I was a professor and civil rights lawyer. I saw how segregation between African Americans and whites led to unequal conditions. I made up my mind to establish a record of court victories that showed that separate institutions are NOT equal. This argument was taken up by several of my law students, including Thurgood Marshall and Oliver Hill.
5) Oliver Hill: My name is Oliver Hill and I was a lawyer. I went to court and won equal pay for black teachers and equal transportation rights for black students. I also won a case that showed the run-down and unequal conditions of schools attended by black students. It was one of the five cases included in the Brown v. Board of Education case, which later outlawed segregation in public schools.
6) Constance Baker Motley: My name is Constance Baker Motley. When I was a girl, I wasn't allowed to go to a public skating rink or to the beach because of my race. So I decided to become a civil rights attorney. I worked with Thurgood Marshall on Brown v. Board of Education. Some people called me a lion for civil rights. In 1966 – about the time some of your parents were born – I became the first African American woman to become a federal judge.
7) Dr. Kenneth B. Clark: My name is Dr. Kenneth B. Clark. My wife Dr. Mamie Clark and I were psychologists who worked together on what were known as the "doll experiments." They were used by Thurgood Marshall to show that racial segregation sets the stage for African Americans to lose out on equal opportunities.
8) Dr. Mamie Clark: I am Dr. Mamie Clark. Our work started with my master's degree paper. In our experiments, we had African American children look at a set of white dolls and black dolls. They had to tell us which dolls they liked and wanted to play with. Most African American children chose the white dolls. They described them as better than the
black dolls. These experiments showed the terrible impact that racism has – even on children.
9) Thurgood Marshall: My name is Thurgood Marshall. The first time I saw the Constitution was when I was forced to read it as a punishment for a prank at school. Reading the Constitution was supposed to teach me not to pull pranks. Instead, it inspired me to become a lawyer and fight against discrimination. I went to the Howard University School of Law. After graduation, I worked for the NAACP and successfully argued many cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Brown v. Board of Education was actually five school cases under one name, which showed that separate schools were not equal. Eventually, I became the first African American Justice to serve on the Supreme Court. Today you are going to hear a summary of my argument to the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education.
10) Thurgood Marshall Closing Argument Reader: I got the feeling when I heard the discussion in this court yesterday that when you put a white child in a school with a whole lot of colored children, the white child would fall apart, or something. Everybody knows that is not true.
Those same kids in Virginia and South Carolina—and I have seen them do it—they play in the streets together, they play on their farms together, they go down the road together, but they separate to go to school, they come out of school and play ball together. But they have to be separated in school.
There must be some magic to it. You can have them voting together, you can have them live in the same neighborhoods. You can have them going to the same state university and the same college, but if they go to elementary and high school together, the world will fall apart.
11) Chief Justice Earl Warren: My name is Earl Warren. I was the Chief Justice of the United States at the time that the case of Brown v. Board of Education was argued. After hearing the case, all nine of us decided that segregation was not legal. Here is a section of the Court's decision, in the words of some eighth graders.
12) Chief Justice Earl Warren: Opinion Reader: Education is the key to good citizenship. In school, children learn cultural values, prepare for careers, and to be successful in life. It is doubtful that any child can succeed in life if denied education. Education is a right that must be made available to all on equal terms. Separate schools are unequal.
1. Reflect upon the importance of the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
Problem 33: MLK: Fun TownMartin Luther King, Jr., Explains Racism to Daughter Speech, 1966.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBTSW0ulOps
1. What made MLK’s speech so convincing? Explain.
2. Was the Fun Town example effective? Explain.
3. What was MLK’s suggested response to segregation?
Problem 34: JFK: Moral IssuePresident John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Civil Rights Address, June 11, 1963.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS4Qw4lIckg
1. What made MLK’s speech so convincing? Explain.
2. Was the Fun Town example effective? Explain.
3. What was MLK’s suggested response to segregation?
Problem 35: MLK: I Have a DreamMartin Luther King, Jr., Speech, March on Washington August 28, 1963.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP4iY1TtS3s
1. What made MLK’s speech so convincing? Explain.
2. Was the phrase “I have a dream” effective? Explain.
3. What was MLK’s suggested response?
Problem 36: Space RaceJohn F. Kennedy, Rice Stadium Moon Speech, September 12, 1961.https://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/ricetalk.htm
...Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships, as well as high reward. So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a little longer to rest, to wait. But...the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was conquered by those who moved forward--and so will space.
William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth Bay Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with answerable courage.
If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in the race for space.
Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it--we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding.
Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring nation.
We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean
will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours...We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard...
To be sure, we are behind, and will be behind for some time in manned flight. But we do not intend to stay behind, and in this decade, we shall make up and move ahead...But if I were to say, my fellow citizens, that we shall send to the moon, 240,000 miles away from the control station in Houston, a giant rocket more than 300 feet tall, the length of this football field, made of new metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented, capable of standing heat and stresses several times more than have ever been experienced, fitted together with a precision better than the finest watch, carrying all the equipment needed for propulsion, guidance, control, communications, food and survival, on an untried mission, to an unknown celestial body, and then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun--almost as hot as it is here today--and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out--then we must be bold.
Many years ago the great British explorer George Mallory, who was to die on Mount Everest, was asked why did he want to climb it. He said, "Because it is there."
Well, space is there, and we're going to climb it, and the moon and the planets are there, and new hopes for knowledge and peace are there. And, therefore, as we set sail we ask God's blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked. Thank you.
1. Besides the obvious space race- what does JFK say about Americans in his speech?
2. How does he relate space to the Cold War?3. Is there anything we can learn from his message? In other words, what is the
moral of the speech?
Problem 37: Great SocietyLyndon B. Johnson, Great Society Speech at the Commencement Ceremony of the University of Michigan, May 22, 1964. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/great-society-speech/
...Your imagination, your initiative, and your indignation will determine whether we build a society where progress is the servant of our needs, or a society where old values and new visions are buried under unbridled growth. For in your time we have the opportunity to move not only toward the rich society and the powerful society, but upward to the Great Society. The Great Society rests on abundance and liberty for all. It demands an end to poverty and racial injustice, to which we are totally committed in our time. But that is just the beginning.
The Great Society is a place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind and to enlarge his talents. It is a place where leisure is a welcome chance to build and reflect, not a feared cause of boredom and restlessness. It is a place where the city of man serves not only the needs of the body and the demands of commerce but the desire for beauty and the hunger for community.
It is a place where man can renew contact with nature. It is a place which honors creation for its own sake and for what it adds to the understanding of the race. It is a place where men are more concerned with the quality of their goals than the quantity of their goods.
But most of all, the Great Society is not a safe harbor, a resting place, a final objective, a finished work. It is a challenge constantly renewed, beckoning us toward a destiny where the meaning of our lives matches the marvelous products of our labor.
So I want to talk to you today about three places where we begin to build the Great Society — in our cities, in our countryside, and in our classrooms.
...The catalog of ills is long: there is the decay of the centers and the despoiling of the suburbs. There is not enough housing for our people or transportation for our traffic. Open land is vanishing and old landmarks are violated.
Worst of all expansion is eroding the precious and time honored values of community with neighbors and communion with nature.
The loss of these values breeds loneliness and boredom and indifference.
Our society will never be great until our cities are great. Today the frontier of imagination and innovation is inside those cities and not beyond their borders. New experiments are already going on…[We must] make the American city a place where future generations will come, not only to live but to live the good life.
A second place where we begin to build the Great Society is in our countryside. We have always prided ourselves on being not only America the strong and America the free, but America the beautiful. Today that beauty is in danger. The water we drink, the food we eat, the very air that we breathe, are threatened with pollution. Our parks are overcrowded, our seashores overburdened. Green fields and dense forests are disappearing...
A third place to build the Great Society is in the classrooms of America. There your children’s lives will be shaped. Our society will not be great until every young mind is set free to scan the farthest reaches of thought and imagination…In many places, classrooms are overcrowded and curricula are outdated. Most of our qualified teachers are underpaid, and many of our paid teachers are unqualified. So we must give every child a place to sit and a teacher to learn from. Poverty must not be a bar to learning, and learning must offer an escape from poverty.
But more classrooms and more teachers are not enough. We must seek an educational system which grows in excellence as it grows in size. This means better training for our teachers. It means preparing youth to enjoy their hours of leisure as well as their hours of labor. It means exploring new techniques of teaching, to find new ways to stimulate the love of learning and the capacity for creation.
These are three of the central issues of the Great Society. While our Government has many programs directed at those issues, I do not pretend that we have the full answer to those problems.But I do promise this: We are going to assemble the best thought and the broadest knowledge from all over the world to find those answers for America. I intend to establish working groups to prepare a series of White House conferences and meetings — on the cities, on natural beauty, on the quality of education, and on other emerging challenges. And from these meetings and from this inspiration and from these studies we will begin to set our course toward the Great Society…
1. What does LBJ say are the problems with the cities?2. What does LBJ say are the problems with the countryside?3. What does LBJ say are the problems with the schools?
Problem 38: Gulf of Tonkin ResolutionTonkin Gulf Resolution, Joint Resolution of Eighty-Eighth Congress, January 7, 1964.https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=98&page=transcript
Whereas naval units of the Communist regime in Vietnam, in violation of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of international law, have deliberately and repeatedly attacked United States naval vessels lawfully present in international waters, and have thereby created a serious threat to international peace; and
Whereas these attackers are part of deliberate and systematic campaign of aggression that the Communist regime in North Vietnam has been waging against its neighbors and the nations joined with them in the collective defense of their freedom; and
Whereas the United States is assisting the people of southeast Asia...that these people should be left in peace to work out their destinies in their own way: Now, therefore be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress approves and supports the determination of the President, as Commander in Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.
Section 2. The United States regards as vital to its national interest and to world peace the maintenance of international peace and security in southeast Asia. Consonant with the Constitution of the United States and the Charter of the United Nations and in accordance with its obligations under the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, the United States is, therefore, prepared, as the President determines, to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force, to assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of its freedom.
Section 3. This resolution shall expire when the President shall determine that the peace and security of the area is reasonably assured by international conditions created by action of the United Nations or otherwise, except that it may be terminated earlier by concurrent resolution of the Congress.
1. What gave rise to the resolution of Congress?2. What powers are given to the President in the resolution?3. What are the dangers of giving these powers to a President?
Problem 39: Antiwar Movement
Bill McClanahan, “Stop Bombing in Vietnam,” 1971.https://hti.osu.edu/opper/lesson-plans/anti-vietnam-conflict-war-protest/images/but-its-okay-over-here
Jack Knox, “Echoes of the Enemy,” Nashville Banner.https://hti.osu.edu/opper/lesson-plans/anti-vietnam-conflict-war-protest/images/echoes-of-the-enemy
1. What does the political cartoon suggest? Explain.
2. Describe this political cartoon.3. Which groups protested the Vietnam War and what were their political beliefs?
Problem 40: My Lai MassacreRonald Ridenhour, Letter Exposing the My Lai Massacre, April, 1968.http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/active_learning/explorations/vietnam/ridenhour_letter.cfm
One village area was particularly troublesome and seemed to be infested with booby traps and enemy soldiers. It was located about six miles northeast of Quang Nh,ai city at approximate coordinates B.S. 728795. It was a notorious area and the men of Task Force Barker had a special name for it: they called it “Pinkville.” One morning in the latter part of March, Task Force Barker moved out from its firebase headed for “Pinkville.” Its mission: destroy the trouble spot and all of its inhabitants.
When “Butch” told me this I didn’t quite believe that what he was telling me was true, but he assured me that it was and went on to describe what had happened. The other two companies that made up the task force cordoned off the village so that “Charlie” Company could move through to destroy the structures and kill the inhabitants. Any villagers who ran from Charlie Company were stopped by the encircling companies. I asked “Butch” several times if all the people were killed. He said that he thought they were men, women and children. He recalled seeing a small boy, about three or four years old, standing by the trail with a gunshot wound in one arm. The boy was clutching his wounded arm with his other hand, while blood trickled between his fingers. He was staring around himself in shock and disbelief at what he saw. “He just stood there with big eyes staring around like he didn’t understand; he didn’t believe what was happening. Then the captain’s RTO (radio operator) put a burst of 16 (M-16 rifle) fire into him.” It was so bad, Gruver said, that one of the men in his squad shot himself in the foot in order to be medivaced out of the area so that he would not have to participate in the slaughter. Although he had not seen it, Gruver had been told by people he considered trustworthy that one of the company’s officers, 2nd Lieutenant Kally (this spelling may be incorrect) had rounded up several groups of villagers (each group consisting of a minimum of 20 persons of both sexes and all ages). According to the story, Kally then machine-gunned each group. Gruver estimated that the population of the village had been 300 to 400 people and that very few, if any, escaped. After hearing this account I couldn’t quite accept it. Somehow I just couldn’t believe that not only had so many young American men participated in such an act of barbarism, but that their officers had ordered it.
1. Why did the author write this letter? What did he hope to accomplish by it?2. Do you think Lt. Calley had any possible defenses for what he did? Explain.
Problem 41: HippiesAmerican Experience, “Summer of Love.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2ZExRNT0GU
1. What were the problems that bothered the hippies? Why were they “disillusioned”?
2. What lessons can we learn from the hippie movement whether or not you agree with their message?
Problem 42: Love CanalEckardt C. Beck, The Love Canal Tragedy, EPA Journal, January 1979.https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/love-canal-tragedy.html
Quite simply, Love Canal is one of the most appalling environmental tragedies in American history...In 1953, the Hooker Chemical Company, then the owners and operators of the property, covered the canal with earth and sold it to the city for one dollar. It was a bad buy. In the late '50s, about 100 homes and a school were built at the site. Perhaps it wasn't William T. Love's model city, but it was a solid, working-class community. For a while.
On the first day of August, 1978, the lead paragraph of a front-page story in the New York Times read: NIAGARA FALLS, N.Y.--Twenty five years after the Hooker Chemical Company stopped using the Love Canal here as an industrial dump, 82 different compounds, 11 of them suspected carcinogens, have been percolating upward through the soil, their drum containers rotting and leaching their contents into the backyards and basements of 100 homes and a public school built on the banks of the canal...
I visited the canal area at that time. Corroding waste-disposal drums could be seen breaking up through the grounds of backyards. Trees and gardens were turning black and dying. One entire swimming pool had been popped up from its foundation, afloat now on a small sea of chemicals. Puddles of noxious substances were pointed out to me by the residents. Some of these puddles were in their yards, some were in their basements, others yet were on the school grounds. Everywhere the air had a faint, choking smell. Children returned from play with burns on their hands and faces.
And then there were the birth defects. The New York State Health Department is continuing an investigation into a disturbingly high rate of miscarriages, along with five birth-defect cases detected thus far in the area...A large percentage of people in Love Canal are also being closely observed because of detected high white-blood-cell counts, a possible precursor of leukemia...
"We knew they put chemicals into the canal and filled it over," said one woman, a long-time resident of the Canal area., "but we had no idea the chemicals would invade our homes. We're worried sick about the grandchildren and their children." Two of this woman's four grandchildren have birth defects. The children were born and raised in the Love Canal community. A granddaughter was born deaf with a cleft palate, an extra row of teeth, and slight retardation. A grandson was born with an eye defect.
Of the chemicals which comprise the brew seeping through the ground and into homes at Love Canal, one of the most prevalent is benzene -- a known human carcinogen, and one detected in high concentrations. But the residents characterize things more simply...
On August 7, New York Governor Hugh Carey announced to the residents of the Canal that the State Government would purchase the homes affected by chemicals. On that same day, President Carter approved emergency financial aid for the Love Canal area... State figures show more than 200 purchase offers for homes have been made, totaling nearly $7 million.
A plan is being set in motion now to implement technical procedures designed to meet the seemingly impossible job of detoxifying the Canal area. The plan calls for a trench system to drain chemicals from the Canal. It is a difficult procedure, and we are keeping our fingers crossed that it will yield some degree of success.
We suspect that there are hundreds of such chemical dumpsites across this Nation. Unlike Love Canal, few are situated so close to human settlements. But without a doubt, many of these old dumpsites are time bombs with burning fuses -- their contents slowly leaching out. And the next victim could be a water supply, or a sensitive wetland. The presence of various types of toxic substances in our environment has become increasingly widespread...
Through the national environmental program it administers, the Environmental Protection Agency is attempting to draw a chain of Congressional acts around the toxics problem. The Clean Air and Water Acts, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Pesticide Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act -- each is an essential link.
It is within our power to exercise intelligent and effective controls designed to significantly cut such environmental risks. A tragedy, unfortunately, has now called upon us to decide on the overall level of commitment we desire for defusing future Love Canals. And it is not forgotten that no one has paid more dearly already than the residents of Love Canal.
1. What occurred at Love Canal? Was it the result of lack of scientific understanding, negligence, or something else?
2. What role should the government play in protecting the environment? Explain.
Problem 43: Mao ZedongNixon In China, Richard Nixon Foundation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lnz7Ze71Pc0
1. Why did Nixon want to visit China?2. How did Nixon’s trip to China change history? Explain.
Problem 44: Leonid BrezhnevRussia Brezhnev Profile.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYrCkjV-52s
1. What type of leader was Brezhnev? Was he a strong Communist or in favor of detente?
2. Was the signing of the SALT agreement with the U.S. President Richard Nixon a highlight or failure for Brezhnev?
3. In what ways was the video anti-Brezhnev propaganda?
Problem 45: Watergatehttps://spartacus-educational.com/USAwatergate.htm
Richard Nixon, Diary Entry, June 1972.I got the disturbing news from Bob Haldeman that the break-in of the Democratic National Committee involved someone who is on the payroll of the Committee to Re-elect the President. Mitchell had told Bob on the phone enigmatically not to get involved in it, and I told Bob that I simply hoped that none of our people were involved for two reasons - one, because it was stupid in the way it was handled; and two, because I could see no reason whatever for trying to bug the national committee.
Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein, Washington Post, October 10, 1972.FBI agents have established that the Watergate bugging incident stemmed from a massive campaign of political spying and sabotage conducted on behalf of President Nixon's re-election and directed by officials of the White House and the Committee for the Re-election of the President.
The activities, according to information in FBI and Department of Justice files, were aimed at all the major Democratic presidential candidates and - since 1971 - represented a basic strategy of the re-election effort.
During the Watergate investigation federal agents established that hundreds of thousands of dollars in Nixon campaign contributions had been set aside to pay for an extensive undercover campaign aimed at discrediting individual Democratic presidential candidates and disrupting their campaigns.
"Intelligence work" is normal during a campaign and is said to be carried out by both political parties. But federal investigators said what they uncovered being done by the Nixon forces is unprecedented in scope and intensity.
Following members of Democratic candidates' families; assembling dossiers of their personal lives; forging letters and distributing them under the candidates' letterheads; leaking false and manufactured items to the press; throwing campaign schedules into disarray; seizing confidential campaign files and investigating the lives of dozens of campaign workers.
In addition, investigators said the activities included planting provocateurs in the ranks of organizations expected to demonstrate at the Republican and Democratic conventions; and investigating potential donors to the Nixon campaign before their contributions were solicited.
Taped conversation, Richard Nixon and John Dean (Attorney), March 21, 1973.John Dean: We have a cancer within, close to the Presidency, that is growing. Basically it is because we are being blackmailed.
Richard Nixon: How much money do you need?
John Dean: I would say these people are going to cost a million dollars over the next two years.
Richard Nixon: You could get a million dollars. You could get it in cash. I know where it could be gotten.
Richard Nixon, The Memoirs of Richard Nixon, 1978.I asked St. Clair how long he thought we could take to turn over the sixty-four tapes covered by the decision. He said that with all the problems involved in listening to them and preparing transcripts, we could probably take a month or more.
I thought that we should assess the damage right away. When Haig called Buzhardt to discuss the decision, I took the phone and asked him to listen to the June 23 tape and report back to Haig as soon as possible. This was the tape I had listened to in May on which Haldeman and I discussed having the CIA limit the FBI investigation for political reasons rather than the national security reasons I had given in my public statements. When I first heard it, I knew it would be a problem for us if it ever became public - now I would find out just how much of a problem.
Buzhardt listened to the tape early in the afternoon. When he called back, he told Haig and St. Clair that even though it was legally defensible, politically and practically it was the "smoking gun" we had been fearing.
On Thursday, August 1, I told Haig that I had decided to resign. If the June 23 tape was not explainable, I could not very well expect the staff to explain and defend it.
Richard Nixon, Resignation Speech, August 9, 1974.In the past few days ... it has become evident to me that I no longer have a strong enough political base in the Congress to justify continuing that effort. As long as there was such a base, I felt strongly that it was necessary to see the constitutional process through to its conclusion, that to do otherwise would be unfaithful to the spirit of that deliberately difficult process, and a dangerously destabilizing precedent for the future.
But with the disappearance of that base, I now believe that the constitutional purpose has been served, and there is no longer a need for the process to be prolonged.
Therefore, I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. By taking this action, I hope that I will have hastened the start of that process of healing which is so desperately needed in America.
I regret deeply any injuries that may have been done in the course of the events that led to this decision. I would say only that if some of my judgments were wrong - and some were wrong - they were made in what I believed at the time to be in the best interest of the nation.
I have done my very best in all the days since to be true to that pledge. As a result of these efforts. I am confident that the world is a safer place today, not only for the people of America, but for the people of all nations, and that all of our children have a better chance than before of living in peace rather than dying in war. This, more than anything, is what I hoped to achieve when I sought the presidency. This, more than anything, is what I hope will be my legacy to you, to our country, as I leave the presidency.
1. What were Richard Nixon’s mistakes in handling the Watergate Scandal according to the documents?
2. Do you think Nixon had anything to do with the break-in or cover-up in the Watergate Scandal? Explain.
3. How effective would Nixon or any President be if the nation believed that he/she was a liar? Explain your answer.
Problem 46: ReaganomicsHistory Channel Explanation of Reaganomics.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeyGdy_SdhQ
1. How does Reaganomics or trickle-down economics work?2. What are the criticisms of this economic policy?3. What were the consequences of Reaganomics? Did it work?
Problem 47: Iran Contra AffairUnderstanding the Iran Contra Affair Timeline.https://www.brown.edu/Research/Understanding_the_Iran_Contra_Affair/timeline-n-i.php
Date Nicaragua Iran
1953-1979 Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi is the secular and authoritarian ruler (known as the Shah) of Iran. Iran is one of the U.S.’ strongest allies in the Middle East.
1961 The Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN; named after Augusto Sandino) is founded in opposition to the ruling Somoza regime. Ideologically, it sees itself as a Marxist-Leninist vanguard organization whose goal is to create a socialist state. They were inspired by the Cuban revolution and were against U.S. intervention.
1977 Jimmy Carter takes office at a time when Americans were wary of foreign intervention due to the Vietnam War. He subsequently cuts off all aid to the Nicaraguan government until it improves its human rights status; Somoza lifts the state of siege in order to receive aid. The Sandinistas renew and expand their attacks against the regime with the support of some academics, businessmen, and priests, including Calero.
1978 The Frente Amplio de Oposición or the Broad Opposition Front (FAO), an umbrella group of opposition movements, is formed. It includes moderates and the more radical FSLN.
Riots and demonstrations break out across Iran, largely in response to the Shah’s secularism and close relationship with the U.S.
Aug. 22, 1978- 1979
Sandinista forces, led by Pastora, captured the National Palace where the Nicaraguan legislature is in session.
Uprisings against the state continue. The Sandinistas, with materiel support from Venezuela and Panama, continue fighting. Carter tried to get all sides together to find a solution to the conflict to no avail.
Cuba supports the FSLN with arms and military advising.
Riots and demonstrations grow increasingly numerous, frequent, and violent, culminating in the Iranian Revolution.
Jan. 1979 The Shah leaves Iran, and the country is declared an Islamic Republic by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The Ayatollah severs all ties with the U.S. and declares the Israeli state illegitimate.
Jul. 19, 1979
The Sandinistas take power and expropriate land and businesses, nationalize banks, mines, transit systems; abolish the old courts, the old constitution, and the legislature; and organize peasants and workers into Civil Defense Committees. Carter sends $99 million in aid to the FSLN, in aims that it would become pro-U.S. Meanwhile,
Cuban officials fly to Nicaragua to advise the FSLN and the FSLN seeks an alliance with the Soviet Bloc.
Nov. 4, 1979
Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line, a fundamentalist, anti-imperialist group made up predominately of young radical revolutionaries, seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran. This was the end of cordial diplomacy between the two nations.
Aug. 28, 1979
The FSLN passes three decrees limiting the freedom of the press and political organizing against the new government.
Sept. 12, 1979
Carter releases remaining aid that is due to Nicaragua. The Iran-Iraq War begins and spans most of the decade.
Early 1980 Carter authorizes the CIA to support resistance forces in Nicaragua with organizing and propaganda, but not armed action.
Mar. 1980 The FSLN signs economic, cultural, technological, and scientific agreements with the USSR. Violent opposition to the new regime begins, and attacks are carried out by peasants and farmers.
Mid-1980 Nicaraguan Democratic Force, or FDN (the main Contras group) is formed.
Late 1980 It becomes clear that the FSLN is supporting revolutionaries in neighboring El Salvador. Carter initially ignores this and continues to give the Sandinistas aid in order to curry favor.
Jan. 20, 1981
Ronald Reagan is inaugurated in the context of a rightward shift in U.S. politics and concern about the Soviet Union. Reagan cuts off all aid to the FSLN indefinitely. This prompts the FSLN to suggest that the U.S. would invade, thereby justifying crack downs and violence against its enemies.
Dec. 1, 1981
Reagan signs the order allowing the CIA to support the Contras with arms, equipment, and money in order to put pressure on the regime. Covert activities are viewed as the best way to pressure the regime. The Contras are trained by Argentineans and operated out of Honduras.
Jun. 1982 The birth of the Reagan Doctrine is publicly announced. This is Reagan’s foreign policy that established support for democratization in countries engaged in socialist revolutions.
Dec. 21, 1982
The first Boland Amendment is passed into law, which bars the use of funds "for the purpose of" overthrowing the government of Nicaragua or provoking a war between Nicaragua and Honduras.
Late 1982-1983
Some in Congress, especially liberal Democrats, are angry at the continued support of the Contras and think it might violate the Boland Amendment.
U.S. is actively engaged in preventing arms sales to Iran, known as Operation Staunch.
1983 Saudi Arabian businessman Adnan
Khashoggi first meets with National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane and CIA Officer Theodore Shackley meets with Iranians Manucher Hashemi, Manucher Ghorbanifar, and Hassan Karoubi.
Spring 1983
McFarlane thinks that Israel could give some of its U.S. appropriations to the Contras.
Late 1983- Jan. 1984
The CIA assists the Contras in attacking transportation and economic targets in Nicaragua.
McFarlane formally requests the National Security Council (NSC) to examine ways to influence Iran. The report conveys an impasse.
Mar. 1984 The religious fundamentalist group Islamic Holy War kidnaps William F. Buckley, the CIA chief in Beirut, Lebanon. More American hostages are taken in the following years.
Jun. 1984 McFarlane gets money from Saudi Arabia for the Contras; he says he just mentioned the problem of losing aid for the Contras, and the Saudis gave money.
Summer 1984
North asks Secord to get involved with the Contras by getting supplies to them. He and Iranian-American businessman Albert Hakim strike a deal with Calero to supply arms.
1984 Some want to set up a private tax-exempt organization to raise money for the Contras and solicit private funds.
Aug. 1, 1984
House passes the second Boland Amendment, which reads: “During Fiscal Year 1985, no funds available to the CIA, the Department of Defense, or any other agency...may be obligated or expended for the purpose...of supporting directly or indirectly, military or paramilitary operations in Nicaragua by any nation, group, organization, movement or individual.” Boland states that U.S. support for the Contras gave the FSLN an excuse to be repressive and undemocratic.The only way to avoid Boland is to solicit third-party funds.
Nov. 4, 1984
Nicaraguan elections are held; Daniel Ortega, a member of the FSLN during the revolution, wins. Channell’s organizations raise $12 million- $2.7 million went to Contras.
Feb. 1985 When the initial Saudi contribution ran out, they donated more. In total, they gave $32 million.North helps to get a $1 million contribution for the Contras from Taiwan.
Ghorbanifar and Khashoggi meet in Hamburg and devise a skeleton plan that will become the Iran arms deal.
May 1, 1985
May 1- Reagan announces economic and trade embargo against Nicaragua due to President Ortega trip to Moscow.
Jul. 1- Reagan publicly denounces bartering with terrorists.
Jul. 16, 1985:
McFarlane meets with Reagan and discuss the possibility of selling arms to Iran via Israel in order to get the hostages released and to open communications with Iran. The details are hazy, but McFarlane
believed the President agreed.
Aug. 1985 Reagan signs into law legislation giving $14 million in humanitarian assistance directly to the Contras.
Reagan approves the Israelis to sell U.S.-made weapons to Iran.
Sept. 15, 1985
American hostage Benjamin Weir is released. North is brought in to deal with the logistics.
Nov. 1985 First funds from arms sales are diverted to Nicaraguan Contras through Secord’s Enterprise.
A second load of missiles is sold. Secord is brought in to help replenish Israel’s supply of weapons.
Late 1985-Early 1986
Boland language is loosened in the 1986 intelligence authorization bill to say that the CIA can provide training and intelligence to the Contras, as long as it does not “amount to participation in the planning for execution of military or paramilitary operations” or participation in “logistics activities integral to such operations.” New legislation also allows the Administration to get funds from third countries and private parties provided there is no quid pro quo.
Taiwan gives another $1 million. North, Ghorbanifar, and Iranian representatives meet in Germany and work out a plan to send further arms in exchange for the release of U.S. hostages.
Feb. 27, 1986
The U.S. sent 1,000 TOWs (anti-tank missiles) to Iran, yet no hostages were released.
Apr. 4, 1986
North writes the “Diversion Memorandum,” which clearly lays out what is going on with the transfer of funds to Contras.
Summer 1986
Only $1.2 million+ of as much as $11 million in the Enterprise’s accounts was actually spent on the Contras. Congress passes $100 million in aid to the Contras. At this point, most in Congress were tired of the Sandinistas.
North meets with this new group of Iranians, and Hakim, serving as a U.S. representative, works out a nine-point plan with the group.
Oct. 1986 A plane flying supplies to the Contras was shot down in Nicaragua and American Eugene Hasenfus was captured; it seemed the U.S. was involved, but Reagan denied it and Congress did not look into it too thoroughly. This eventually led to the full exposure of the operation and the Iran-Contra Affair.
The first shipment through the second channel is sent to Iran. Iran paid $3.6 million to the Enterprise, of which $2 million was turned over to the CIA, who had officially supplied the weapons. The remainder was diverted to the Contras.
Nov. 1986 Two Lebanese newspapers break story of the arms deals and the operations come to an end.
1. How did Carter handle the situation in Nicaragua? What did he do?2. Was the situation in Nicaragua really part of the Cold War or American politics?3. What is the Boland Amendment and how was it the cause of the whole affair?4. How did Reagan handle the situation in Nicaragua and Iran? What did he do?5. Should Reagan be criticized for the Iran Contra Affair? Explain.
Problem 48: RwandaRwanda: 25 Years After Genocide, DW.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lV1RubWD8Y
1. Should more be done to bring those responsible for the genocide of the Tutsis to justice?
2. Why do you believe France has not been helpful in bringing the perpetrators?3. Does the U.S. have a responsibility in the world to prevent genocide? What
needs to be done? Explain.
Problem 49: ImpeachmentIntroduction to Articles of Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton. https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/105th-congress/house-report/830/“Equal Justice Under Law''--That principle so embodies the American constitutional order that we have carved it in stone on the front of our Supreme Court. The carving shines like a beacon from the highest sanctum of the Judicial Branch across to the Capitol, the home of the Legislative Branch, and down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House, the home of the Executive Branch. It illuminates our national life and reminds those other branches that despite the tumbling tides of politics, ours is a government of laws and not of men. It was the inspired vision of our founders and framers that the Judicial, Legislative, and Executive branches would work together to preserve the rule of law. But ``Equal Justice Under Law'' amounts to much more than a stone carving. Although we cannot see or hear it, this living, breathing force has real consequences in the lives of average citizens every day. Ultimately, it protects us from the knock on the door in the middle of the night. More commonly, it allows us to claim the assistance of the government when someone has wronged us--even if that person is stronger or wealthier or more popular than we are. In America, unlike other countries, when the average citizen sues the Chief Executive of our nation, they stand equal before the bar of justice. The Constitution requires the judicial branch of our government to apply the law equally to both. That is the living consequence of ``Equal Justice Under Law.''
The President of the United States must work with the Judicial and Legislative branches to sustain that force. The temporary trustee of that office, William Jefferson Clinton, worked to defeat it. When he stood before the bar of justice, he acted without authority to award himself the special privileges of lying and obstructing to gain an advantage in a federal civil rights action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, in a federal grand jury investigation in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and in an impeachment inquiry in the United States House of Representatives. His resistance brings us to this most unfortunate juncture.
So ``Equal Justice Under Law'' lies at the heart of this matter. It rests on three essential pillars: an impartial judiciary, an ethical bar, and a sacred oath. If litigants profane the sanctity of the oath, ``Equal Justice Under Law'' loses its protective force. Against that backdrop, consider the actions of President Clinton.
On May 27, 1997, the nine justices of the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled that Paula Corbin Jones could pursue her federal civil rights action against William Jefferson Clinton. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997). On December
11, 1997, United States District Judge Susan Webber Wright ordered President Clinton to provide Ms. Jones with answers to certain routine questions relevant to the lawsuit. Acting under the authority of these court orders, Ms. Jones exercised her rights--rights that every litigant has under our system of justice. She sought answers from President Clinton to help her prove her case against him--just as President Clinton sought and received answers from her. President Clinton used numerous means to prevent her from getting truthful answers.
On December 17, 1997, he encouraged a witness, whose truthful testimony would have helped Ms. Jones, to file a false affidavit in the case and to testify falsely if she were called to testify in the case. On December 23, 1997, he provided, under oath, false written answers to Ms. Jones's questions. On December 28, 1997, he began an effort to get the witness to conceal evidence that would have helped Ms. Jones. Throughout this period, he intensified efforts to provide the witness with help in getting a job to ensure that she carried out his designs.
On January 17, 1998, President Clinton provided, under oath, numerous false answers to Ms. Jones's questions during his deposition. In the days immediately following the deposition, he provided a false and misleading account to another witness, Betty Currie, in hopes that she would substantiate the false testimony he gave in the deposition. These actions denied Ms. Jones her rights as a litigant, subverted the fundamental truth seeking function of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, and violated President Clinton's constitutional oath to ``preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States'' and his constitutional duty to ``take care that the laws be faithfully executed.''
Beginning shortly after his deposition, President Clinton became aware that a federal grand jury empaneled by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia was investigating his actions before and during his civil deposition. President Clinton made numerous false statements to potential grand jury witnesses in hopes that they would repeat these statements to the grand jury. On August 17, 1998, President Clinton appeared before the grand jury by video and, under oath, provided numerous false answers to the questions asked. These actions impeded the grand jury's investigation, subverted the fundamental truth seeking function of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and violated President Clinton's constitutional oath to ``preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States'' and his constitutional duty to ``take care that the laws be faithfully executed.''
President Clinton's actions then led to this inquiry. On October 8, 1998, the United States House of Representatives passed House Resolution 581 directing the Committee on the Judiciary to begin an inquiry to determine whether President Clinton
should be impeached. As part of that inquiry, the Committee sent written requests for admission to him. On November 27, 1998, President Clinton provided, under oath, numerous false statements to this Committee in response to the requests for admission. These actions impeded the committee's inquiry, subverted the fundamental truth seeking function of the United States House of Representatives in exercising the sole power of impeachment, and violated President Clinton's constitutional oath to ``preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States'' and his constitutional duty to ``take care that the laws be faithfully executed.''
By these actions, President Clinton violated the sanctity of the oath without which ``Equal Justice Under Law'' cannot survive. Rather than work with the Judicial and Legislative branches to uphold the rule of law, he directly attacked their fundamental truth seeking function. He has disgraced himself and the high office he holds. His high crimes and misdemeanors undermine our Constitution. They warrant his impeachment, his removal from office, and his disqualification from holding further office.
1. What did President Clinton do that led to the Articles of Impeachment?2. Did Clinton deserve to be impeached? Removed from Office? Explain.
Problem 50: September 11, 2001CNN Fast Facts About September 11, 2001.https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11-anniversary-fast-facts/index.html
Facts● Nineteen men hijacked four fuel-loaded US commercial airplanes bound for west
coast destinations. A total of 2,977 people were killed in New York City, Washington, DC and outside of Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
● The attack was orchestrated by al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
The Victims● At the World Trade Center (WTC) site in Lower Manhattan, 2,753 people were
killed when hijacked American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 were intentionally crashed into the north and south towers, or as a result of the crashes.
● Of those who perished during the initial attacks and the subsequent collapses of the towers, 343 were New York City firefighters, 23 were New York City police officers and 37 were officers at the Port Authority.
● The victims ranged in age from two to 85 years. Approximately 75-80% of the victims were men.
● At the Pentagon in Washington, 184 people were killed when hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the building.
● Near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, 40 passengers and crew members aboard United Airlines Flight 93 died when the plane crashed into a field. It is believed that the hijackers crashed the plane in that location, rather than their unknown target, after the passengers and crew attempted to retake control of the flight deck.
● As of October 2019, 1,645 (60%) of 2,753 WTC victims' remains have been positively identified, according to the medical examiner's office.
Timeline
September 11, 2001- 8:46 a.m. ET - American Airlines Flight 11 (traveling from Boston to Los Angeles) strikes the north tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.- 9:03 a.m. ET - United Airlines Flight 175 (traveling from Boston to Los Angeles) strikes the south tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.- 9:37 a.m. ET - American Airlines Flight 77 (traveling from Dulles, Virginia, to Los Angeles) strikes the Pentagon Building in Washington.- 9:59 a.m. ET - South tower of WTC collapses in approximately 10 seconds.
- 10:03 a.m. ET - United Airlines Flight 93 (traveling from Newark, New Jersey, to San Francisco) crashes in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.- 10:28 a.m. ET - North tower of WTC collapses. The time between the first attack and the collapse of both World Trade Center towers is 102 minutes.
December 13, 2001 - The US government releases a tape in which Osama bin Laden takes responsibility for the attacks.
December 18, 2001 - Congress approves a measure to allow the president to designate September 11 as "Patriot Day" on each anniversary of the attacks.
December 2001-June 15, 2004 - The original Victims Compensation Fund processes death and injury claims from families and relatives of September 11 victims. Families of those killed had until December 22, 2003, to apply for compensation. The fund reopens in 2011.
May 24, 2007 - The Chief Medical Examiner of New York City, Dr. Charles S. Hirsch, rules that the death of Felicia Dunn-Jones in 2002, from dust exposure, is directly linked to the 9/11 attack and therefore a homicide.
July 19, 2007 - The New York Medical Examiner's Office announces that the remains of three more people are positively identified. 1,133 victims, 41% of the total, remain unidentified.
January 2009 - The medical examiner's office rules that Leon Heyward, who died the previous year of lymphoma and lung disease, is a homicide victim because he was caught in the toxic dust cloud just after the towers collapsed.
January 2, 2011 - President Barack Obama signs James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, reopening and expanding the scope of the Victim Compensation Fund.
June 17, 2011 - The New York medical examiner rules that Jerry Borg's death on December 15, 2010, is a result of inhaling toxic substances from the dust cloud generated by the collapsing twin towers.
May 10, 2014 - The unidentified remains of those killed in the attacks are returned to the World Trade Center site where they will be kept in a repository under the jurisdiction of the Office of Chief Medical Examiner of the City of New York.
August 7, 2017 - The New York City medical examiner's office announces that the remains of a man killed at the World Trade Center are positively identified due to more sophisticated DNA testing being available.
2019 - The remains of three victims are identified by the New York City medical examiner's office through DNA testing.
September 11th Victim Compensation Fund● The original fund operated from December 2001 to June 2004.● The initial Victim Compensation Fund received 7,408 applications for both death
claims and personal injury claims.● The fund made awards in 5,560 of those cases.● The reopened and expanded fund has operated since January 2, 2011.
Information on total awards is updated regularly and posted here.● Families who agreed to get compensation from the federal fund agreed not to
sue the airlines.
Economic Impact● $500,000 - Estimated amount of money it cost to plan and execute the 9/11
attacks.● $123 billion - Estimated economic loss during the first 2-4 weeks after the World
Trade Center towers collapsed in New York City, as well as decline in airline travel over the next few years.
● $60 billion - Estimated cost of the WTC site damage, including damage to surrounding buildings, infrastructure and subway facilities.
● $40 billion - Value of the emergency anti-terrorism package approved by the US Congress on September 14, 2001.
● $15 billion - Aid package passed by Congress to bail out the airlines.● $9.3 billion - Insurance claims arising from the 9/11 attacks.
Cleanup at Ground Zero● May 30, 2002 - Cleanup at Ground Zero officially ends.● It took 3.1 million hours of labor to clean up 1.8 million tons of debris.● The total cost of cleanup was $750 million.
Homeland Security● The Department of Homeland Security was created in response to September
11.
1. How did the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 change America? Explain in detail.
Related Documents
