Civil Rights - Jackie Robinson

In my opinion, Jackie Robinson isn't the absolute greatest civil rights figure, but he definitely deserves a spot among the top three greatest all-time civil rights figures. Although people may not believe that he was a very inspirational figurehead, he went through abuse from not only the fans and other players, but of coaches and his own teammates; he had to put up with all of that stress and pressure for three long years, in order to clinch his spot in major league baseball. Back in the 1950's and 1960's, baseball had become the national pass-time; the ultimate sport that every American could watch and go to and enjoy the day at the park, no matter which park you went to. He was the first ever African American baseball player allowed to play in major league baseball on a white team, and it was all possible because of his exceedingly impressive skills, and the help of a coach that desperately wanted to integrate African Americans into baseball. If not for him, then integration of baseball, among other things, might have taken longer than it did to accomplish. While winning the fight for emancipation in the courts, and all over the country, baseball was making headway as well, advancing right along side the leaders of the civil rights movement, allowing for people to see that all people should have equal rights, and to be treated equally, no matter the skin type or origin. Taking charge in America's favorite sport helped him gain fame, as well as the chance to see people as equals, and they became more tolerant of African Americans, one step at a time, all because of Jackie Robinson.

"The Butter Battle Book"

"No you won't," yelled Grandpa, "if I blow you up fast."
It seemed like no time and all time had just passed,
since VanItch and Grandpa kalupped up the wall.
My hopes were that neither VanItch or Grandpa would fall.
For if they should drop their Bitsy Big-Boy Boomeroo,
it would be the end of all Yooks and Zooks too.
"I'll get to you first," yelled VanItch.
"I'll blow you to bits with the flick of my wrist!"
"Grandpa, be careful," I yelled in great haste.
I tried holding composure with the greatest of grace.
"What will happen next?" "Will we be victorious, or will we be vexed?"
"I cannot tell you what the outcome will be," said he.
"We'll just have to wait here with patience and see."

Acceptable Acts of War

In the act of war, the general assumption is that forces are dispatched to fight other forces of similar or equal skill; but, in some cases, that is not so. Durinf World War II, Hitler engaged in bombings, raids, and blitzkrieg (lightning war) on civilian areas, including major cities, in order to impose his will and instill fear among the population, in order to crush any resistance in his way. In the case of the Battle of London, Hitler was hoping to knock Great Britain out of the war, for Fr4ance was already gone, and then he would have access to almost all of Europe. The question of whether this tactic is justified or not, is a contraversial matter. If there was to be an attack on a civilian area, then it should be with the least amount of casualties, but have the largest impact in order to crush all morale and resistance. Hitler, or his approach to it, wan not justified in this mannor. He tried to bomb major cities for two months, with no avail. If her was to succeedc at his goal, he should've targeted places of more worth, such as landmarks and high morale locations, instead of the cities themselves. We utilized a similar strategy as Hitler when we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the atomis bomb; we targeted those cities, but we made a big enough impact that we forced the surrender of Japan, with the threat that we would continue if they would not back down. But if, theoretically, there was ever a need to attack any non-combatant habitations, one would want to have the least amount of casualties, coupled with the largest impact, in order to attain the intended effects.

Homer Simpson vs. The 18th Amendment

In this episode of The Simpson's, the 18th Amendment was the topic. Back in the 1920's, Prohibition was set in place to end the behavioral issues and drinking in America, but it backfired. Some aspects in the episode were correctly portrayed; for example, the bars where there was the illegal selling of alcohol were called "speakeasies," and were the new hangout for people looking for alcohol. During Prohibition, the amount of establishments that were selling alcohol went from about 1,000 to about 4,000, simply because there was no real enforcement of the licence laws. Overall, the accuracies displayed in the episode outweighed the fictional comedy within the production, such as being flung by a catapult if caught with illegal alcohol during Prohibition. The episode was indeed enjoyable, and was very comical as a whole, although somewhat outrageous at times.

If one were to re-write a part of the episode, then it would have to be the scene where the new head detective steps in. He should have a top-notch squad of police officers who can enforce the laws of Prohibition, much more than the cops in the town already. They should be seen taking bribes and alcohol, however, adding to the bribery and organized crime aspects of the 1920's. The head detective should find his men doing such acts, and become infuriated, leading him to become more focused on the issue, and start to search people more and conduct more interrogations.

Reflection Question Response

Should U.S. citizens be forced to give up civil liberties during a time of war? I don't think so. Should the government have to enforce loyalty? Absolutely not. If citizens are forced to curb their daily life, in order to satisfy a war going on, it greatly affects not only the support towards the war [positively], but also the morale back at home and out on the battlefield(s). In order to mainatin a sure hold on the public, if that is the desired endgame, one must allow the general public to act as they normally would, but set up ways to acquire what you need in other ways; for example, by slightly increasing the price of fuel, you save that four or five cents' worth. As to the issue of whether or not to enforce loyalty, enforcing anything that would probably happen regardless is nothing short of detrimental. It would go against anything productive to enforce loyalty: not one person quite likes being forced to do anything, let alone something that they might have decided upon themselves in the first place. Similar to the laws passed in the early 1800's by John Adams, known as the Alien and Sedition Acts, the new law (the Sedition Act) made gaining ciizenship and access to the United States very difficult, and a log, drawn-out process. It also restricted the "freedom of speech" of the public, especially any negative slandor towards the government. It goes against the Constitution, just as the laws passed back in the early 1800's, and was widely disputed against by many. These laws should not have been passed, because they hindered the view of the government in the eyes of the public, losing support and trust.

Progressive Era Project

Booker T. Washington –
His Stand Against Illiteracy and Under Education of Blacks

In his early years, Booker Taliaferro Washington spent his childhood as a slave, in Hale’s Ford, Virginia. When he turned nine, he began working in salt furnaces and coal mines to help support his family. B.T. Washington always wanted to receive a good education, but didn’t get that until the age of sixteen, when he walked 200 miles to attend school at the Hampton Institute of Virginia. After realizing what most of his fellow people were missing out on, he decided to become a teacher himself in order to spread education to places where there was no real system before. Next, he headed up the educational scale, so to speak, and eventually took his place as the head of the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute, which he himself founded. He was also an esteemed author and poet, and a [political] speaker; he was even asked to speak at the Cotton States Exposition, which was a great honor for a black man in 1895. After all of his accomplishments, even still some blacks viewed his actions as possibly agitating to the white population, but he had even won the hearts of the white community. During his time as head of the Institute, he traveled across the country to raise funds from not only blacks, but also whites, in order to provide the education he had so dreamed of. Also founded by B.T. Washington, the National Negro Business League helped rural extension in America. B.T. Washing never gave up, and finally succeeded in making his dream come to life; providing education for others. Having finally established a foothold in the education business, he was able to provide his well-earned education to any an all students willing to receive a proper education, whether they be of black descent, or white.




http://www.gale.cengage.com/free_resources/bhm/bio/washington_b.htm

Progression in Modern Times

In our moderm-day era, things are quite different thatn in the late 1800's and early 1900's; devices such as computers, cellphones, and so much more enable us to comunicate over greater distances, monitor activity, and overall help ebb the daily flow of life at a suitable pace. Unfortunately, that also means that with these new technologies, we feel as if we need to help "ploice" other countries less economicly developed, just as in the Progessive Era in our early history. Such as the conflicts in Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, where our government is sending out our troops and deploying them in between a waging war full of religious zealots and martyrs, who want nothing more than to eradicate each other from existance. But, due to our abrupt interjection into this conflict, they have somewhat united in a cause that trumps their current objectives; kill all and any American soldiers, for they are considered to be the ultimate heretics and unbelievers. In their minds, they believe that we are completely different than they are, therefore we should be put down with the same hostilities as they share for each other because we are not of the same religious sect. One could argue, if asked, that the involvement of our troops is doing nothing but strengthening their cause to target American soldiers, and therefore is a pure and utter waste of life, on our part. They have acquired a similar enemy now, and although conflicts are still focused towards wach other, they are not as blinded by rage as they used to be. If the lives of countless American soldiers are to be saved and not wasted on a "lost cause" such as this so to speak, then something must be done; it is pointless, in one view of this dilema, to intervein if the end reslut will be inevitable.

One way that this atrocious err may be fixed is by simply withdrawing our troops, and letting the problem smolder out on its own, for it needs no help in kindling it gurther. As we would withdraw our troops, we could simply do unmanned fly-overs and monitor their activity from afar, and lessen the likeliness of any casualties, save for plastic, metal, and computer patrts and pieces instead of human lives. Aslo, one could venture to offer such a suggestion as to evacuating civilians and non-military personnel to "green zones," so we can go in and be more effective, and lessen the possibility of accidentally taking civilian lives in the process of raids on enemy positions. This would also open up the option to simply bomb areas where confirmed terririst or insurgent activity has been documented, also lessening the risk of casualties.