Okay, APUSH bloggers, you have a review list in front of you, so we can address some of those particular issues.
I think it would also be a good idea to look at ways to attack the multiple choice questions that require a "rationale" for your answer to receive full credit. Sound good?
So let's start with your questions first.
13 comments:
I'm wondering what kind of an effect the prohibition time period had on the economy, because I imagine it had some sort of an effect.
Hello, i see "Prohibitionism" on the review sheet there. I'm not really sure what the significance of this is. All I know is that Hayes "cut off the flow of liquor in the White House."
Good question, guys. I quote here, at length, from a neat source: Ambitious Brew: The Story of American Beer.
". . .the late [19th] century middel class was sincerely concerned about the nation's future. Mostly educated, white, and Protestant, they believed that it was their duty as citizens to eradicate the ills that had beset a nation enduring the tumult of industrialization. Not surprising, one group of reformers turned is attention to alcohol. Saloons and drink, they believed, plagued the nation, and like prostitution, urban poverty, and lynching, drink and its bedfellows were particularly overt and thus indentifiable evils. . . The combined efforts of the WCTU [Women's Christian Temperance Union] and NTS [National Temperance Society] produced results. In the 1870s and 1880s, eighteen states pondered the passage of prohibition amendments, and six approved them. In thousands of cities and counties, voters, boards of supervisors, and city councils refused to renew licenses for saloons and drugstores that sold alcohol. . .In hundreds of locales, the "high license" movement [to sell alcohol] raised the operating a saloon from $50 to $500 or even $1000, thereby running many saloon keepers out of business . . ."
So the era had a negative affect on the many people who had placed their livelihoods into the saloon business.
Where there people who sued these organizations for going against the "pursuit of happiness" or anything like that?
Well, not to get to far ahead of our story (remember, the seeds of the era folks will call "the Progressive Era" were at the very least planted at this time--I tend to think that the Progressive Era was certainly well underway in the midst of the Gilded Age, and I know I'm not alone in this) but eventually brewers and saloon owners form an alliance and support publications to support breweries--they fail in an attempt to halt the prohibition movement, which was also well organized and ultimately sucessful by 1919.
Were the Native Americans ever involved in organizations such as the Populist Party? Did they play any party in the Gilded Age besides be victims of the Dawes Severalty Act?
I also have a question about question #5 which talks about Cleveland and Bryan being intellectual and spiritual and political heirs of Andrew Jackson. In what ways are they similar to Jackson?
Derick, good question. I suppose that as far as the House or Reps go, the Bourbon Democrats would best fit the bill of patronage seeking officials. Still, the fact that the Republicans control the White House for so long, party partronage is basically their game to run until Cleveland gets into office with the support of reform-minded Republicans, the mugwumps.
I checked Lawrence Goodwyn's The Populist Moment index for a cross-reference on Native involvement in the Populist Movevment, and found nothing. Interesting idea, however, but no relationship to my knowledge.
Well, you need to think about this one a bit, Rachel. Bryan and Cleveland could both claim that they were Jacksonian in their own ways, in the sense that they were both representing the will of the people against the rise of monied interests of the Northeast. I think Cleveland was willing to cooperate with reformers within the Republican party to help temper American industry, but never behave politically in the way that Bryan did as a democratic nominee, essentially defying the banking industry of the United States with his Populist rhetoric. An provocative way to answer this question would by "if Jackson were to register with a party during the Gilded Age, what party would he favor?" In some ways, I suppose, Jackson was a proto-Populist.
What is an example of Imperialist and Anti-Imperialist arguments during this time?
Okay, we're going to get into this next week. But a basic way to look at the isolationist vs. interventionist debate that starts to brew at this time is to understand that many Americans thought that it was our destiny to expand our borders and our way of life. Spreading American ideals becomes the cornerstone of an imperialist policy, albeit in locales in our own backyard at first, and then farther out trading posts. Another reason to expand is to expand business oppportunities for growing American industries. On the other hand, some Americans at this time believe that it is downright un-American to be hostile to other nations to establish colonies or trade, since we were colonies to begin with and had to fight for our own independence in order to establish our own sovereignty.
Well, I guess there isn't a brief answer to that question, and the one above is incomplete, but its a start.
Have a good night.
hi guys
Post a Comment