Who wants to answer my exam question?

[scottieking]

Maybe you can do better than some of my students did

In Gr 11 American History:

The founding fathers had a very specific vision for America based around the ideals which they fought for during the Revolutionary War. It can be argued that during the course of its history, America has betrayed the very principles of its creators. Using a minimum of three areas or events, defend or refute this idea in a properly structured essay.

I got 19 defending, 3 refuting. Where do you stand?

Edited for BradM

[bradm]

...during the course of it's history...

I'm not going to answer until you revise the question to use the correct form of "its". ::

Aloha,

Brad

[Jaimoe]

On the refuting side, I'd pick these less than pride-inducing events in U.S. history: slavery, McCarthyism and the Vietnam War.

[AD]

I'll be honest and say I know very little of American history as related to the question you posed Scottie.

I did hear that the Red Sox won the World Series though. Do I get part-marks?

AD

[secondtube]

wouldn't those points 'defend'

"It can be argued that during the course of it’s history, America has betrayed the very principles of its creators"

[Jaimoe]

Ah, I think you are correct Tube. As I did in highschool, I scanned the question too quickly.

[secondtube]

to answer this, i would first choose three principles specifically that the founding forefathers spoke of, and then i would draw specific parallels that contradict each principle.

guess i would have to know some of the principles the creaters stood for.

Honesty? Integrity? something tells me they didn't follow through with those...

[teetervillestation]

couldn't it also be argued that some intentions and principals that the founding fathers had, to this day contribute to America's continued participation in imperialism, expansionism and economic slavery?

the founding fathers were not just philosophers and democratic visionaries, they were also military men and slave owners - a big reason for the creation of the republic was to protect the interests of private landowners, and the slave system which the american economy relied on big time in the late 1700's...

[Jaimoe]

You could even draw on some historical events that pre-dated the Founding Fathers: The Mayflower to the Salem Witch Trials. There are many parallels between McCarthyism and Salem.

[bokonon]

couldn't it also be argued that some intentions and principals that the founding fathers had, to this day contribute to America's continued participation in imperialism, expansionism and economic slavery?

the founding fathers were not just philosophers and democratic visionaries, they were also military men and slave owners - a big reason for the creation of the republic was to protect the interests of private landowners, and the slave system which the american economy relied on big time in the late 1700's...

:: :: ::

how come we never get to hear this sort of insight on gig nights? i've never heard you talk politics!!!

but anyways, i'm surprised no one has mentioned how it is now considered "unamerican" to disagree with what the president says when the whole republican system is designed so that the leader can be impeached if he doesn't act in accordance with what the people want. now it's people who are going down if they don't toe the line for the president. it used to be american to be revlolutionary (since that is how the country was founded in the first place), now you're a terrorist who hates america if you disagree with the mainstream.

edit to add: wicked question sk, wish i had teachers that promoted critical thinking at my highschool.

[TonyRage]

To me, the real question is like Teeterville was implying. Did these values/ideals ever actaully exist? Is it not possible that the propaganda machine was alive abd well in the late 18th cent.?

As for refuting the argument, well I can think of a few event that would fit. The funding of contras to fight the democrativally elected government of Nicarauga in the 1980's is one. The overthrow of Iran's previously elected government back in the 50's and replacement with the Shah (a dictator) is another. Tariffs on cnd softwood lumber certainly goes against the principles of free trade which were central in all things merican during the revolution.

[Schwa.]

The founding fathers (for serious lack of a better term) were all money hungry land gulping Freemasons. but hey, ours were drunks.

[scottieking]

This is good stuff, folks. Keep it up.

As far as it goes for my students, as this was a survey course and we didn't quite get past the 60's, I wanted them to incorporate the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine, The Constitution etc and see if America the idea came to pass. The obvious dealt with slavery, the captains of industry, Hiroshima, imperialism in late 19th century, faux isolationism etc.

By far, the two I was most impressed with were the refuters. One who is a clear right winger and loves to get my goat (a note at the end of his exam expressed his distain for my leftist leadings right down to the exam question) but is one of the brightest kids. He argued that there was no way the founding fathers could have predicted the destruction of Europe and its empires, leaving a void for the up and rising USA to fill (personally, I'd argue that the US had already made heavy imperialistic inroads with Asian expansion and keeping their end of the Monroe Doctrine but) and going on to argue that the Fathers would have been proud of the captialistic domination of the US and it's ability to maintain a democratic system.

Another brillant kid riffed off of an adlib comment that I had forgetten that I even made. When talking about civil rights, I quipped that the only time that the US moves closer to equally for all Americans are when Democrats are in control (FDR's New Deal, LBJ's great society). This too was her argument, that one can look at significant leaps forward made by Americans and that it is the legacy of the ideals that still drive Americans to betterment of their situation. Good stuff all around.

A's for discussion marks for all of you involved (except AD who, as requested, will receive part marks just for mentioning the Red Sox's struggle)

[ggrtrhhrtgg]

I think I might take a swing at this later on...

[bokonon]

i have to say that my reply is much more ummm.... concise than i would like it to be since i have two huge assignments due before i leave for ottawa and i just accepted two full extra shifts at work. why am i so dumb?

[Lazlo]

What's an essay?

[Thorgnor]

An hispanic dude from east L.A.

[rubberdinghy]

I hate to say it...Essays I think are the whole reason I never got a post secondary edumication...That's fine, don't need no college to drive a bus!

[Jared]

you drive a bus??? thats super cool

[Del]

You're just getting that now J-Roc?

[rubberdinghy]

Yep, and super proud of it! Maybe one of the few that loves thier jorb.

[Velvet]

Lets see. The founding fathers' ideals included freedom and justice for all, right? Well, considering the fact that the average American equates freedom with living in a democracy, and the current administration is aggressively administering justice to those who don't have a democratic system under the guise of implementing freedom, I'd say they're holding up their original ideals pretty well (in a Bill Clinton sex kinda way).

[ggrtrhhrtgg]

Taken from the "Declaration of Independence."

-"When in the course of all human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature adn of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should never declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths as self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." --July 4th 1776.

Well, I for one really enjoy that little exerpt of language and ideas, and dreams. Humanity can create the perfect ideas, but unfortunately time upon time again, over and over, they stumble in the process to perform the principles they speak of. However, the spoke word has much power and influence in our world, and as long as specific ideas and thoughts are not destroyed and forgotten, these words do influence the policies of those who both Govern and influence Government.

For example, on November 19th, 1863, Abraham Lincoln attempted to address the state of the Nation in the "Address Delivered at the Dedication of the Cememtery at Gettysburg." --"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicat--we can not consecrate--we can not hallow--this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that Government of the people, by the people, for hte people, shall not perish from the earth." Now, I think we all know that these words can be interpreted to be reflecting on the quote I opened this essay with. You can argue that the United States were guilty of taking out mass, gross crimes against humanity. You can argue that those who wrote the Declaration of Independence were slave owner themselves, that maybe they didn't consider slaves to qualify as "men." However, it is irrelevant because in 1863, the President of the United States interpreted those words to include "all men." This does not mean that there could not have been other reasons, for example they needed workers for the industrial revolution, or that there might have been other agendas, it does however, in today's society, after the 1960's civil rights conflicts mean that all men are created equal in many a mind on this earth. Furthermore, may I remind you that this is a infantile idealism in Western History. One of the crucial battles of the American Civil Rights movement reflected this ideology.

Brown vs. The Board of Education of Kansas, the education system was forced to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment as all citizens are equal and thus all citizens must receive equal opportunity in schooling. This was a 'monumental' case that allowed all schools to be non-discrimanatory towards all citizens of the United States, thus African Americans were allowed to attend previously enforced "all white" schools. This principle, and this interpretation from the court case is still fought today, in the court rooms, in the boards, in the classrooms all over America. Sometimes, it is used as a deterrent to equality, for example, "The No Child Left Behind Policy" that the Republicans under G.W. Bush have implemented. Under this policy, Spanish Speaking Americans are forced to study 'shorthanded.' They should have the right, under the Fourteenth Amendment to have the opportunity, or better yet, 'choice' to study in whatever language they feel most comfortable with. However, the idealism of equality does have its defenders, and many educators, Civil Rights workers, Politicians, Lawyers, are fighting to protect the words of their fore-fathers. There is one last example that I wish to share.

Next, there is the future, the people that will continue to fight for Life, True Liberty, and Freedom, and Equality, and most importantly happiness. These future speakers, workers, believers will once again help in the progress of society, and provide yet another example of humanity and its ability to love.

Note: this same story goes on in every state, in every neighbourhood, in every family, and every religion, it is a long and arduous struggle, but hopefully there are enough out there that have faith that love will prevail.

"amor vincit omnia"

[hamilton]

Furthermore, may I remind you that this is a infantile idealism in Western History

I don't get it. What is childish about the idea that all people are equal under the law? Do you mean that it is naive? Or is it infantile to be idealistic?

Or do you not understand the meaning of the word "infantile"? Perhaps you meant to say that it is a "relatively new idea".

Content: C

Style: C-

[ggrtrhhrtgg]

infantile---a. of, as of, infants; [color:"red"] in its infancy That is what I meant, and I will take the C. ::