History by Hilary

2008-05-09T16:18:00.001-07:00

When the question, "How can we use the internet to shape democracy in America?" arises, my first thought is, how can't we? The internet is growing everyday and it's possibilities are numerous. The most important way that the internet can be used to successfully shape American democracy is through the spread of news. A majority of American's have homepages like AOL or Yahoo where the first thing you see when you log on are the daily headlines. This is so valuable (and unfortunately at the mercy of the major internet corporations) as a source of getting the latest headlines. Knowledge is power and this is the start of a successful democracy.

A great example technology's influence in daily politics is current issue with the Olympics in Beijing. The issues in Tibet and Darfur were kept quiet for many years and as a result of the Olympics they have been highlighted and brought into the conversation of many Americans. (Darfur is apparently so unknown that my spellcheck thinks that it's spelled wrong...) Just getting the conversation started and spreading awareness creates involvement, and involvement is key in any successful democracy.

Mass media and information can be tricky though- as we have seen through the several different news sources available on TV today, not every channel depicts the same message for the same headline. The internet has a vast variety of sources as well and the public just needs to understand what is accurate and what is not. The internet is a bit easier to display stories as they really are for it's much like the newspaper- just words and pictures (However with the YouTube generation on the rise, television is infiltrating much of cyberspace).

The internet is a great tool to shape American's awareness and knowledge which I believe is the foremost important way that it can help in shaping democracy. Like I said, with knowledge comes power, and today it is so important to start conversations about politics to spread the knowledge and return the power back to the people.

How YOU can make a difference

2008-05-04T17:15:00.001-07:00

"Be the change you want to see in the world"

-Mahatma Gandhi

This small idea is so underestimated, but it's really true. There are thousands of ways one can make a difference and it just takes one person to start a movement that can promote this change. When it comes to American democracy, I think some (especially the liberal democrats) feel like there's no more hope, however this isn't true! For those that feel stuck in a democratic rut, I've provided a short list of three ideas that one can do to make a difference in shaping American democracy.

1. VOTE.

This idea is possibly the most underestimated of them all. Every American who is 18 or over has the ability to vote and just by exercising this, you can make a difference. This is a democracy after all...In the 2004 Presidential elections only 60.7% of the population voted and this was the highest voted turnout since 1968. If you really care about our democratic environment voting is a great opportunity to have your voice heard. People say that their one small vote can't make a difference but it can! The 2004 elections are a perfect example with the incredibly close race between Bush and Kerry. Luckily in the past few years the media has gotten much more involved in getting people out there to vote. MTV's Rock the Vote campaign targeted teenagers and toured college campuses encouraging new voters. For this past election they even held their own debates that aired several times on both MTV and VH1.

2. Utilize technology.

In this day and age technology has taken democracy to a whole different level. Websites like moveon.org are aimed to get news out there with a different emphasis then one might see on Fox or CNN. I am a subscriber to this website and they send me monthly informative newsletters following the current campaigns and rallies and encouraging me to show up to their many events that they host. By keeping yourself up to date on the current political issues you're one step further than many other Americans. If you're well informed then when that opportunity arises, you can rise to the occasion and embrace the change.

3. Speak Out.

Say what you feel, protest, write to a local paper, get involved in school government, help work on a campaign...By starting small and dreaming big you WILL make a difference.

The Medium is the Massage

2008-04-27T19:19:00.000-07:00

In Marshall McLuhan's book, "The Medium is the Massage" he discusses media and technology's imprint on our society. He incorporates images and printed word to emphasize his ideas giving his book a very non-traditional feel. This combination makes the book very interesting and informative and I found myself quickly finishing it in one setting.

McLuhan briefly discusses current events, but his message on the Vietnam War is clear. He felt that all the war propaganda created an unrealistic image that unfortunately surrounded the war through it's finish. The was the first war shown on television, so to counter the alarming images of soldiers in battle, the media used propaganda so lessen the intensity. He refers to television as a "window on the world" and the media utilizes this to askew the view.

This subject extends to mass marketing. McLuhan believed that commercials were a cheap extension of television. The idea that we have to "see it to believe it" somehow makes products more appealing. By creating "shorts" without a story plot, the consumers become anxious/curious for more. The media puts ideas about how we should or should not feel about certain things and through mass marketing, individuals have begun to merge together as one. People lose the ability to think for themselves and begin to copy what they see.

In regards to the A-Bomb, McLuhan says, "It is no longer convenient, or suitable, to use the latest technologies for fighting our wars, because the latest technologies have rendered war meaningless. The hydrogen bomb is history's exclamation point. It ends an age-long sentence of manifest violence!" (138). I sense a little bit of sarcasm in his tone, for he is consistently demeaning technology. Something he said that really hit hard for me was, "We have had to shift our stress of attention from action to reaction. We must now know in advance the consequences of any policy or action, since the results are experienced without any delay," (63). Technology has created a sense of urgency throughout our culture because now we've become so used to getting everything right away when we want something.

While this was written in 1967, it's amazing how his ideas still hold true today. In the late 60's at the influx of many new technologies, McLuhan believed that people were losing a sense for who they truly were. Anyone growing up in the 21st century can agree that we now rely on technology everyday to get through our day to day lives. Teenagers feel lost without their cell phones and computers have become the focal point for many business ventures. As early as the 60's McLauhan was able to predict technology's impact on our culture and our growing dependence and addiction to the media and technology. If he were still alive today I would be very curious to hear his thoughts on the upcoming generations...

Changes in power and policy

2008-04-15T20:01:00.000-07:00

After narrowly escaping the Great Depression, the first half of the 20th century was primarily devoted to solving the domestic problems at home. Racism continued to be a constant struggle throughout the country with African, Asian, and Mexican Americans. These tensions were apparent on not only a social level, but on political and business levels as well. The economy was finally starting to surge again after the Great Depression, and so American politicians were doing everything they could to keep the peace with other countries. When World War II broke out in Europe, the Neutrality Acts of the 30’s were efforts to keep America distant from the war, but it became more and more apparent that they would have to be a little bit more assertive. Then came the Atlantic Charter, which was the first sign that FDR’s foreign policy was beginning to shift. Previous to World War II the United States had a very independent foreign policy, but during and after the war, it began to shift to a more power hungry, aggressive stance.

With other emerging foreign super powers like the Soviet Union, the United States was forced to abandon their isolationist policies and become a more dominant force abroad. During WW2, FDR proposed the idea for the Allies to come together in an organization called the United Nations. FDR knew that he could no longer stay disassociated with the problems that the rest of the world was facing and he thought this would be a great way to get involved. The UN would not only bond the Allies, but also be a key tool in imposing a greater US influence among the rest of the world. The Yalta Conference also signified a change in the way the United States’ foreign affairs were being handled. At Yalta, the Allies met to discuss their goals once the war was over, the most prominent being the Soviet Union’s goal to expand their influence over the continent. FDR realizing this possible threat made it a large priority to not only limit this Soviet influence, but to expand America’s as well.

Communist threats and national security became a huge focus in this new foreign policy. First in order to enable the government the power they needed to take control of the Communist situation, they greatly needed the support of the American public, and they gained this through the Truman Doctrine. In this, President Truman alerted the nation of the great threats that Communism posed, therefore scaring American’s and gaining the support in congress that he needed. The National Security Act became one of the primary ways to implement this new plan to demolish Communism and protect America. National security organizations such as the CIA and the NSA became much more actively involved in foreign affairs, and assisted the president in protecting the county. This new connection between the White House and these two security powers greatly expanded the president’s authority over foreign policies not to mention the United States’ power in the world.

With all of these new tactics and policies, America was able to gain the power that wanted to achieve. They were certainly a dominant foreign presence and they took advantage of this position. Unfortunately they took their power a little too far and this overly aggressive attitude resulted in the Vietnam War. Finding a balance in politics is a never-ending battle and sometimes the scale tips toward the side that does more damage then is intended. All in all, the US’s foreign policy greatly evolved from one of very isolationist status, to a great world power, and through the good times and bad, it has allowed us to be the strong nation that we live in today.

Civil War Era Leaders

2008-04-09T20:31:00.001-07:00

When one looks at the Civil War Period, the words

Confederacy

Union

slave states

labor strikes

and reconstruction

probably come to mind.

Amongst all these events,

there were leaders emerging and I think it's important

to recognize and learn about those who made changes in these tumultuous times...

Lincoln-Douglas Slideshow

2008-03-29T15:36:00.001-07:00

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates- Race boundaries put to the test

2008-03-29T14:40:00.001-07:00

In the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, Abraham Lincoln, a member of the Republican Party debated against Stephen Douglas, a Democrat, for the title of Senator of Illinois. Seven debates took place throughout Illinois with one main topic: slavery.

On this matter Douglas believed that each state should have the opportunity to decide for themselves as to if slavery should be legal in their respective state. This idea of popular sovereignty echoed in each of his seven speeches. While he believed that the people should hold all the power in each state, he spoke very openly as to who of these people should hold the power: the whites.

"For one, I am opposed to negro citizenship in any and every form. (Cheers.) I believe this Government was made on the white basis. I believe it was made by white men for the benefit of white men and their posterity for ever, and I am in favor of confining citizenship to white men, men of European birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon negroes, Indians, and other inferior races," (Stephen Douglas).

He continued to accuse Lincoln of being an abolitionist and fighting for the equality of blacks. Lincoln was quick to correct this statement...

"I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people ... I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing, " (Abraham Lincoln).

Although Lincoln borrowed the phrase "all men are created equal" in many of his speeches from the Declaration of Independence he did not believe that all men were created equal on every level of being. He furiously apposed slavery, but this did not mean that he believed that blacks were, "equal in color, size, intellect, moral development or social capacity."

In the end the Douglas and the Democrat party prevailed and he became the Illinois senator, however shortly after, Abraham Lincoln received the nomination of president of the Republican party and became the 16th president of the United States.

What really shocks me about these debates was the racism that surrounded nearly every part of every speech of both of these so called "leaders" at the time. While it is evident that blacks were not always considered equal, it's always disheartening to read things like this where the idea of "white supremacy" ultimately backed the election of a senator.

Something that I also find very surprising is the role reversal of what today we know as the Democrat and the Republican parties. Today, Democrats are known for their more liberal tendencies and attitudes, whereas the Republicans are known for their conservative views. In these debates Lincoln, the Republican, was clearly presenting the more radical ideas, something that is very counter to the Republicans we see in today's politics. Ultimately Lincoln's non-society conforming ideas lost him this election but in the end people began to embrace the "radicalism" if you will, which led to his presidential election and to many more positive changes in race equality throughout the United States.

Thomas Paine's Common Sense

2008-03-12T14:45:00.000-07:00

2008-03-12T14:41:00.000-07:00

The Articles of Confederation vs. The Constitution
by Hilary O'Neil-Johnson

After the colonies established their independence from Britain, they were faced with the incredible challenge of creating their own government. Order had to be established and the Articles of Confederation were the building blocks for this new government to come. The Articles first establish a sense of unity, calling the former colonies by their new title, The United States of America. This theme of unity is continued in the proposed congress when they refer to the need for a “league of friendship”. They propose that delegates be elected for each state, so there is a balance of power amongst all of the states. Foremost, the Articles stress that the states are no longer allowed to show loyalty to the king.

The Constitution continues along these proposed government structures, however it just expounds into further details. It begins with a preamble that spells out the rights of the people of the United States. It then breaks the government into three branches; the Legislative, Executive and Judicial.

The different articles articulate the inner workings of these three branches including the individual states powers and limits and the federal powers. After the initial constitution was written, it was inevitable that amendments would have to be made, and these first ten amendments became known as the Bill of Rights.

If the United States was to be successful as a true democracy, the people needed to vote and approve this new constitution. The Federalist Papers were pleas from John Hancock and others to the American citizens to vote. He outlines the good points of the new ideas, laying them out simply for Americans that perhaps were unable to understand what was really necessary for a new government.

The similarities of these two documents are quite numerous. They both are speaking for a union of states and agree that while these states must work together they also must be able to be self-sufficient. They both talk about state representation in the national government, and elections to ensure that every state has their say. They also most importantly agree that the states must cut all ties and loyalties from Britain, and if an attack is to happen, they should all work together as one country to fight off the enemies.

The differences are harder to pick out because these documents are quite verbose. They are best exemplified by Howard Zinn in his book, A People’s History of the United States. He gives an alternative view on the forming of the constitution then we might have already seen in other history books. While he doesn’t discuss the Articles of Confederation at much length, he does bring up some interesting points about the Constitution.

“When economic interest is seen behind the political clauses of the Constitution, then the document becomes not simply the work of wise men trying to establish a decent and orderly society, but the work of certain groups trying to maintain their privileges, while giving just enough rights and liberties to enough of the people to ensure popular support,” (Zinn, 97).

Zinn points out that although on the surface the constitution stresses unity, if you read between the lines you see that the men who wrote it strategically formatted so they would be able to remain in the comfortable positions that they held pre- constitution. This later became a problem because only the wealthy families held government positions and the division of rich and poor continued to increase.

The Articles of Confederation and the Constitution that were written back in the 1700’s were obviously successful, because today we still use these important documents as the basis of our government, and will most likely continue to do so for the next several decades. Documents like these set the tone for political change and conflicting ideas fuel this process. It’s hard to imagine that these ideas were so revolutionary that we continue to rely on them for the daily running of our government. We can only hope that we can have people as influential as John Hancock in our government so we can continue to move forward towards a positive future…

Historic Monterey Slideshow

2008-03-04T18:38:00.001-08:00

The Birth of Government Control

2008-03-04T17:30:00.000-08:00

After America became an independent nation and was no longer forced to adhere to the laws of Britain, they faced the very difficult challenge of creating a new government. With all the political turmoil that the world was facing in the early 1800's it quickly became apparent that in order to survive America needed to establish itself as a strong world leader. This process took several years to complete, but in the post independence period the main themes were government expansion and strengthening.

The War of 1812 marked a pivotal point in the expansion of America. Andrew Jackson took it upon himself to become a major contributer in this war and fought heavily for the acquisition of Florida, which at the time was occupied heavily by the Native Americans. Meanwhile, the lands of Southern Canada and other Indian Territories were being taken over by American militia and many battles were fought. With the Native Americans at a severe disadvantage in these battles, they sought out the help of Britain, much to the displeasure of America. As the war continued it became not just a war of property ownership but one of racial battles and boundaries.

To strengthen the government the United States needed to ensure safety against enemy powers and also give the federal government, specifically the President, more power over the people. These two were accomplished through the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Alien Act gave the President the power to deport aliens. In the event of a war, the Alien Act made it legal for the President to deport anyone who was visiting America that resided in the countries that were in war with America. In the Sedition Act it declared it a criminal offense for anyone to publish "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" against the government. This made it so that no one could speak out against the government in an unpatriotic way, securing American unity.

Not only were the people of the federal government striving to create a stronger government, but American citizens as well. A well known movement of this time was Universal Male Suffrage. Voting rights were not fair and only wealthier, male property owners were allowed to vote. Before they could even think about extending the right to vote to women and minorities, they needed to make sure that ALL males in the United States were allowed the voting right.

All in all, these tactics did create a stronger more unified government. Although the land in Canada was never acquired, Westward expansion greatly contributed to the quickly growing United States. It is important not to overlook the oppressed in these situations however. Unfortunately the Native Americans faced extreme declines in their population as a result of these expansions. The Trail of Tears and other memorials are important to recognize and look back on all those who wrongly suffered to create the country we live in today.