Final Post

Today is the last day of US History. We have learned so much this year. Ranging from slaves to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Started the year by watching the movie Glory and 12 Years a Slave to learn about the civil war era and slavery in general. We ended with the movie 13 Days. Which ties into our discussions about climate change. We ended with the realization of 'Us'. We are the only ones currently on this planet, and we are the only ones who can take care of it, whether it's climate wise. safety wise, or political wise. We must take care of this planet, so that the people of the future can take care of the planet, and so on and so on. So this is me signing off on the US History Class of 2015-2016.

-Faiza Ismail

"We the People"

Letter to the Future- Politics

 Dear Future!

I hope life in the year 2126 is pleasant, and that the climate is in good condition! Over the past few days, my US History class has been discussing if what we’re doing today is harmful for the future, and what impact we will have on the future, climate wise. Kind of like the Dust Bowl in the 1930’s,  which was caused by poor farming techniques by people of the past. A couple peers and I decided to focus on the politics behind climate change and how it can it can work to improve the future, and I decided to focus on the international affairs of climate change.

There is a lot of debate going around today, on whether or not climate change is a serious issue. It is a heavy topic during presidential debates, some wonder why? But it’s kind of simple, we want to look out for the people of the future. We want society to strive for many more centuries, and if we are careless with our climate now, we won’t be able to achieve that. I went on the  Pew Research Center (1) website and found out that around 54% of the global median thinks that climate is a “very serious problem”, 74% think that it is a good idea for their country to cut back on greenhouse emissions, such as carbon dioxide (CO2). On the website I found a graph* that showed Latin America and Africa being the most concerned about climate control. Their percentage of concern being both above the global median, Africa being at 61% and Latin America being at 74%.which is highly reasonable, and understandable . What I found that is difficult for me to believe is that China and America have the lowest concern, China is at 18% and America is at 45%. Both much below the global median of 54%. The reason this shocks me is because China has the world’s greatest annual CO2 emissions, and America is in second place. Many countries believe that wealthier countries should be responsible for taking care of  and controlling climate change, because they produce most of the global CO2  emissions. Which is completely reasonable, they can afford it and they are one of the main causes to why our climate is in danger.  

*This is the graph that I found on the Pew Research Center Website.

If we did have a negative impact on your current climate state, I would like to apologize. However we are currently, in the year of  2016, are trying to prevent that from happening. See back in 1995, according to the Sustainable Innovation Forum(2),or SIF,  The Conference of Parties (COP) met for the very first time in Berlin, and every year after that, in different parts of the world. Each conference having the same goal, to stabilize “atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses” (SIF). During the third COP meeting (COP3), the Kyoto Protocol was “adopted”, however not put into effect until COP15. This was one of the first steps politically, to improve the globe's climate internationally. Their goal was to cut down global warming related emissions, according to Britannica’s encyclopedia. It was put into action in 2005, but it was first introduced in 1997. My first question was, why was this protocol needed. It was because in 1988 climate observers, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change, were certain that in the future the long terms effect on the climate would lead to the rise of sea levels globally. Which would eventually lead to islands disappearing, glaciers melting, sea ice, and arctic permafrost, in addition to floods, droughts, and the extinction of many plants and animals. So based on these scientific predictions, officials came to a consensus that they needed to make a move to better the climate. There was concern that countries would not be able to meet the protocol due to their lack of resources. But the protocol provided aid for the countries to meet said goals. They had natural processes that removed greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere, known as “sink”. Which was basically countries planting trees everywhere because trees absorb the CO2 and let out oxygen. There were also international programs that encouraged developed countries to invest in technology so that underdeveloped countries could receive said technology to make it easier to reach their protocol commitment. Lastly there was emission trading, so countries could buy and sell emission rights. Which put an economic value on greenhouse gas emissions, leading to many countries meeting their Kyoto Protocol commitment.The Kyoto Protocol was very efficient with providing aid to countries that could not provide for themselves. However there were some worries, such as minimal effect on the climate, and not meeting the goal. Which was mostly due to the fact that China and America had not ratified the protocol. Thankfully this protocol was replaced by a more recent agreement. .  Just a few months ago, leaders from around the world came together in Paris for COP21. It was one of the largest COP meetings to ever happen. There were around 50,000 participants, 25,000 of which were official delegates from “government, intergovernmental organizations, UN agencies, NGO’s, and civil society” (SIF). The goal of this meeting was to create  a “legally binding, and universal agreement on climate” (SIF), and to strive to keep global warming under 2°C .

The COP21 conference was successful in making its goal. The delegates came together and made an agreement known as “The Paris Agreement”. The main goal of which is to keep the global temperature rise below 2°C and limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C, which is a “safer defense line against the worst impacts of climate change.”(UN Climate Change Newsroom (3)). The only big question we have now is how are we going to achieve this? A lot of people say that we can’t because we would have to make drastic changes to our lifestyles, and no one is really willing to do that. But Laurent Fabius, President of the COP21, and French Foreign minister says, “The Paris Agreement allows each delegation and groups of countries to go back home with their heads held high. Our collective effort is worth more than the sum of of our individual effort, our responsibility to history is immense.” I know it seems simple, “work together and you will achieve”, but see Future, there are a lot of conflicts between countries currently, so it’s hard for countries to work together and come up with a solution that’s suitable for all countries. I really hope that that’s not the case in your time. Another issue is money. The Agreement says that by 2020, countries need to have worked together to raise the climate finance to $100 billion. The thing is, not many countries are as developed as America, so they don’t have that kind of money. The agreement says that we need to decrease emissions to reach the temperature. With mitigation, we can hopefully achieve this as soon as possible. We would also need an accounting system for climate action, the strength and ability to cope with the negative effects of climate change, and also the strength to recovery from them as well. Lastly, and most importantly we need financial support. We need money and we need it now!  I personally don’t see how that will happen within the next three years. Maybe if there was more time, it would be believable. But for the time being I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

I really hope that you, the future, understands that we are trying to do everything that is financially, and politically possible to prevent the climate from taking a turn for the worse. And if our efforts weren’t good enough, then I am truly sorry. I really do hope that this works out.

Best Wishes!

The Past

P.S: Are there flying cars yet?

---

Footnotes:
(1) Pew Research Center is a “fact tank” that helps provide the public with information, news, and trends that help shape America. This website includes articles about public opinions, demographic research, and other social science based research. This website is led by Michael Dimock, along with a staff of 130 people. It is funded primarily by The Pew Charitable Trusts, and was originated in 1990.

(2) Sustainable Innovation Forum is an annual event that has, for the past 7 years, partnered with the United Nations Environmental Programme to establish partners with businesses and government to advance the green economy. They do this by having a global media platform, for people to share their technology and expertise that will provide solutions for climate change related issues.

(3) UN Climate Change Newsroom is a website with stories and articles written by staff

I would like to focus on the politics of climate, because I really didn't associate politics with climate until this recent presidential election, and I'm still not sure as to why politicians are discussing it so much. So I would like to find out the reasoning behind it. 

The big question

What do people in the future think about our society today? 

Climate

1.  Weather 
1. Because climate is often associated with weather
2.  Heat 
1. Climate issues mostly revolve in over heating 
3.  Politics 
1. Politicians today are often debating on ways to fix climate control because they are worried about the future
4.  Bernie Sanders
1. I remember him saying something about climate control during a presidential debate 
5.  Summer
1. I feel like you hear more about climate control during the summer because its hotter than the rest of the year 

Read about the Great Depression (Links to an external site.).  According to this article, what was wrong with President Hoover's response?  Why did people blame themselves when things went wrong, and how valid or invalid was this response?

- Hoover said that the Great Depression wasn't a thing of concern and that it would be over in 60 days. He also said that the government should not be involved in offering poverty relief, which led to many people blaming him for the Great Depression.

- People thought that success was earned and failure was deserved, which led to people blaming themselves when things went wrong.
- I don't think the response is valid because people should not be embarrassed for the mistakes that someone else makes. 

Read about Black Sunday (Links to an external site.). How would you have felt if you'd been there on that day? What kinds of fears, concerns, or questions would be going through your mind during, and after, the event described?

- If I was there during the dust storm, I would be very scared. I would be worried about getting the dust in my eyes, or not being able to find shelter. I would wonder if my friends and family are ok and if they were able to find shelter. Afterwards I would try to find out if my friends and family were safe, and if they received any sort of damages. I would also want to know what type of damage and how much damage the storm caused.

Read about The Drought (Links to an external site.).  What areas were affected by it?  What caused it.  The author ends this article with a pithy quote.  Do you agree or disagree with this historian's perspective? Why or why not?

-The eastern part of the country, and later the west where affected by the drought. 

-The drought was caused by misuse of the land.
-Yes and no, because yes they were not taking care of the land, and that's what caused the droughts to occur but the historian appears to be saying that the people of this time period were very lazy and didn't care for much. When that wasn't the case, the people worked very hard in this time to improve their lives. 

Read about Mass Exodus from the Plains (Links to an external site.).  Were does the migration of people out of the Dust Bowl rank in terms of other migrations in US History?  What made life hard for people once they arrived in California?
- People ended up in California
- Migrants faced issues with unfamiliar crops, and the most of the money they made would be used in taxes.   

Politics on the radio in the 1930's

       In the 1930's the radio became a common household item. Almost everyone had one, kind of like cell phones today. Many people would listen to KDKA, the first commercially licensed radio station. On election day in 1920, according to American Radio Works , KDKA broadcasted Warren G. Harding's win in the presidential election. Later in the 30's the radio was used for many political events. Sometimes there were "national town meeting" on air, and other times some politicians would use to the radio to broadcast their speeches. According to PBS Franklin Roosevelt had a program called  "Fireside chats". His program helped the nation feel closer to their president. The radio allowed people all over the nation to hear presidential inauguration speeches as well. Presidential candidates used the radio to campaign, which was more helpful than just photographs. During the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt, Huey Long, and Father Charles Coughlin used the March of Time radio show to broadcast dramatized versions of political and non political news, according  to New Deal New Media . Some people doubted the whole radio system. They thought that the radio "hypnotized audiences falling under the sway of irrational forces like fascism, communism, or even a corrupt and bankrupt capitalism." (American Radio Works).

Franklin Roosevelt broadcasting his program "Fireside Chats" (1935)

Book Review

     "The Days of Prohibition & the 1920s" by Abbie Childs is a great little story about prohibition in the 1920's. Childs writes the story almost like a bedtime story, giving examples of the consequences of drinking too much, almost like a warning to young children. She provides colorful and fun illustrations for young readers to enjoy. Overall I think this was an excellent and informative story, and helps give an idea of what prohibition was in the 1920s. 10/10 would recommend.

"Fight for Women's Rights" by May Merrill Gillespie  is a small narrative about the leader of the National Women's Party. Gillespie does a great job of explaining why it was so important for women to stand for their rights. This is a great book for present day children to read, because they should know that women weren't always as free as they are today. Gillespie did a good job stating facts about the fight for women's rights in the 1920's. I would recommend this book to many people. 

My little book

I made a little booklet about Technology and Economic Growth in the 1920s. I used 13 slang words from the 1920s to make it more realistic, and also drew some pictures. :) 

WWI Poster Analysis

Propaganda is like when there is a bad situation going on in the world and people share made up images, or images not from that situation to make people feel bad about the issue and cause them to show sympathy, and then they'll receive help from people around the world.

According to Merriam-Webster "propaganda" is "ideas or statements that are often false or exaggerated and that are spread in order to help a cause, a political leader, a government, etc."

These images are examples of propaganda

When looking at the first image, I am drawn to the big yellow word "ENLIST" and then next I look at the big red word on the bottom "YOU?". There's also a man looking out of a window, and looking down at an army walking by with an American flag flying above them.  I think the words 'enlist' and  'you' are in bold colors, while the other words kind of blend into the background, because the artist wants the viewer to think about enlisting themselves. I think the man by looking down at the soldiers represents the viewer contemplating about joining the army.

When looking at the second image, I first see the big yellow words "Rivets are Bayonets Drive them home". Then there is a man who appears to doing yard work, and is kind of bent over, In the background there is a shadow of a soldier, holding a bayonet, and in the same crouched position. I think the shadow behind represents the man in the front. Like he was the soldier, but since he had a bayonet he was able to come home. It seems like this poster is an advertisement to fund bayonets for the army.

When look at the third and final image, I notice the big yellow and white words "OUR BOYS NEED SOX KNIT YOUR BIT". Then above that is a basket of yarn and knitting needles, as well as the words "American Red Cross". This looks like the Red Cross is asking for people to knit socks for the army. I think the artist of this chose words that rhymed to catch the viewers attention, so that they will actually knit some socks for the army.

Chapter 21 Multiple Choice Answers

1.  D
2. B
3. A

Group title

In class we shared our group theses and combined them in one giant thesis

   During the progressive era the government and public realized that their society had several issues. So they separately sought out ways to move forward in society. The government restricted the negative, while the public pushed for new reforms to improve their health, well-being, and society. 

Chapter 21 Multiple Choice Questions

1. The Muckrakers exposed all EXCEPT:                                                         
a) Scandal                                                                 

b) Social injustice                                  
c) Corruption                                                                                                        

d) Health injustice  
e) Economic Injustice

2. Few women managed to establish themselves with with the following jobs EXCEPT:             
a) Physician                                                                                                               

b) Factory jobs                                                 
c) Lawyers                       
d) Engineers                                                                                                             

e) Corporate managers

3. What were the "Clubwomen" focused on in the early 20th century?
a) Cultural Betterment       
b) Religious Betterment        
c) Economic Betterment     
d) Social Betterment                
e) Environmental Betterment

Living Essay About Progressivism

I was working with Abby Schmidt and Raquel Scherlis, and we were to bring together 3 topic of the Progressive Era in a thesis statement, introduction, and conclusion.

Introduction:

During the Progressive Era, the public cared about the well being of the society. The public wanted to move forward in different areas such as health and personal safety to improve the human body. Most of their views included ideas of prohibition, protests, and finding a replacement for hard liquor.

Conclusion:

Prohibition, protests, and a replacement for hard liquor were ideas that the public focused on during the Progressive Era so that they could better the health and security of what goes into, and happens to people, often calling for government action.Prohibition forced people to drink healthier drinks and have a healthier lifestyle, which led to boom in healthier people. Soft drinks and Coca-Cola especially helped improve the innovations toward marketing, advertising, and the entertainment of Americans, and Americans made major advancements during this time. Mary Jones was known as a mother to children and “boys” she led in strikes, she devoted her life to the health and safety of everyone she led on independent strikes.Overall, these ideas for a better society had a positive effect and improved the human mind and body during the Progressive Era.

Prohibition and How it Relates to Progressivism

    It is the early 20th century, liquor has been banned for almost a year now. I feel like this has been a positive experience. I read in a paper somewhere that there have been less arrests ever since the prohibition laws were enforced. The amount of insane and immoral people on the streets have gone down. I personally think that Congress was wise to ban the sale and use of liquor. I was reading the paper the other day and I came across this article with a quote from the New York Medical Society. It said: 

    "that among the evils which they see constantly resulting from the use of ardent spirits, are  

impaired appetite for food, nausea, a sensation of faintness at the stomach, tremor of the limbs and   body, headache, palpitation of the heart, dyspepsia, ulcerations of the stomach and bowels, fevers 

of the most fatal character and inflammation of the brain. The habit cannot be indulged, even to a 

moderate degree without expense to the constitution  of the individual” “that they will endeavor to   impress on the minds of their patients the importance of abstaining from the strong liquors, and  

that they will endeavor to use their influence in correcting the popular error, that what is called a  

moderate use of then is conducive to health, and permanently increases to the vigor of laboring  

people"

Honestly if liquor is causing us so many health problems, why should it be allowed? If we want to better our society, we should get rid of what's holding us back. All the death and disease caused by these liquors is ruining the potential of so many young and intelligent people. If they spend their nights drinking, and their days hungover how will they better themselves? How will they educate themselves? They won't be able to get jobs and they won't be able to provide for their families. Speaking of families, I have seen so many of them destroyed because of the excessive amount of liquor consumption. My friends husband is a prime example of this. He's out all day working, and always stops at the local bar to get a drink on the way home. Except one drink always leads to another and another. He spends most of his monthly paycheck in just one sitting. When he gets home he's completely wasted. He can't even walk normally, let alone take care of his kids. So his wife does everything. She cleans the house, cooks the food, and cares for all the children, all while her husbands wastes their money and his health.

I don't believe that I am the only one who thinks this is a positive thing for our society. Congress said that the 18th amendment must be ratified from every state within 7 years. However 3/4 of the states ratified in less than a year. This means that other states agree with what I am saying. They know that in order to move forward, economically and socially, liquor must be banned. Society needs to develop an abstinence towards liquor, it is for their well-being, and futures.

States Ratify Quicker than Thought 

Pro-Prohibition Poster 

18th Amendment- States ban of selling Liquor 

Newspaper Archive

• March 8, 1828, Haverhill Gazette- Opinions of Physicians:New York City Medical Society-1327-
• A detailed account of the 18th Amendment by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue,Daniel Roper-State February 9, 1920
• National overview of Prohibition's first year Baltimore American - Maryland, Baltimore, January 16, 1921
• Kentucky targeted as a source of much of the nation's liquor Lexington Herald - Kentucky, Lexington, October 25, 1921