Chapter 23 Responses
2) What factors contributed to economic globalization in the second half of the twentieth century?
After World War II, the capitalist victors, particularly the United States, were determined to avoid any return to Depression-era conditions. Because of this, they set up the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and other agreements of institutions which laid the foundation for postwar globalization. This system negotiated the rules for commercial and financial dealings among the major capitalist countries in addition to promoting relatively free trade and high levels of capital investment. In addition, new technologies dramatically lowered transportation costs, while fiber-optic cables and the Internet provided the communication infrastructure for global economic interaction. Meanwhile, in the developing countries, population growth further fueled globalization as dozens of new nations entered the world economy.
3) In what ways has economic globalization more closely linked the world’s peoples?
World trade skyrocketed from a value of 57 billion in 1947 to 18.3 trillion in 2012. Money achieved an amazing global mobility in three ways. First was foreign direct investment, in which a firm opens up a factory in another country. This practice practically exploded in the 1960s as companies in rich countries sought to take advantage of cheap labor, tax breaks, and looser environmental regulations in developing countries. A second form of money in motion has been the short-term movement in capital, in which investors annually spend trillions of dollars purchasing foreign currencies or stocks likely increasing in value and often sold them quickly thereafter. A third form of money movement involved the personal funds of individuals, with international credit cards taking hold almost everywhere. Central to the acceleration of economic globalization have been transnational corporations, producing and delivering goods or services in many countries simultaneously.
5) What new or sharper divisions has economic globalization generated?
Although the economic growth was the most remarkable spurt in world history, and the overall life expectancy increased everywhere, accompanied by decreasing infant mortality and poverty rates and increasing literacy, a somewhat troubling trend has emerged in the instability of this emerging world economy and the distribution of the wealth it has generated. While the economy has grown overall, recent world history has been shaped by periodic crises and setbacks. Because most of the world is deeply interconnected, economic woes can be far-reaching in the consequences. In addition, the ratio of income between the income of the top and bottom 20 percent of the world's population has increased dramatically, from 3:1 in 1820 to 68:1 in 1991. Such gaps have led to great disparities in income, medical care, availability of clean drinking water, educational and employment opportunities, access to the Internet, and many other things.
Tuesday, April 21, 2020
Wednesday, April 15, 2020
Pandemic Essay
Pandemics and History
While
history is often shaped by the people living in the world at any given time,
sometimes disease has also played a crucial role in shaping cultures and
societies affected by such outbreaks, as their effects have often been dramatic
when they become an epidemic or even a pandemic. For example, the Black Death, or bubonic
plague, had catastrophic effects on Europe and Asia once it spread throughout
the area, killing an estimated 75 to 200 million people during the 14th
Century. As a result of this colossal
death toll, the European social structures at the time were completely upended,
leading to massive changes both in European societies and its position in
global affairs. While subsequent
pandemics have proven to be nowhere near as deadly in terms of the human toll,
they have still proven to be a semi-regular occurrence in history. In that context, the current COVID-19
pandemic, which the World Health Organization declared as such on March 11, is
not particularly exceptional, since there have been other widespread disease outbreaks
in history. However, this current
outbreak may be somewhat different with regards to the steps taken to address
the pandemic, especially the near-total shutdown of ordinary life as a result
of policies aimed at containing the spread of the virus. This current pandemic way well be the worst
since the 1918 Spanish flu outbreak in terms of its scale, though obviously
these involve two different diseases.
Time will tell what long-term impacts the current COVID-19 pandemic will
have on the world as a whole, but even at this stage it seems as though it will
be a long time before life returns to normal.
To
understand the context in which the coronavirus pandemic is occurring, we must
first understand what a pandemic is.
While the terms epidemic and pandemic have specific meanings, they are
sometimes mistakenly used in an interchangeable way. This is perhaps understandable, as both words
contain -demic and are used to describe diseases. (Osborne) However, the key difference is in the scale
of the outbreak. An epidemic disease is
one affecting many people at the same time and spreading from person to person
in an area where the disease is not permanently prevalent. As further defined by the World Health
Organization, epidemic refers to an outbreak occurring at the community or
regional level. In comparison, a
pandemic disease is an epidemic which has spread over a large area. In other words, it’s prevalent throughout an
entire country, continent, or even the whole world. Pandemics are not limited by the length of
time over which a disease spreads. For
example, the ongoing spread of HIV/AIDS since the 1980s is considered a
pandemic even though it has been going on for so long. (LePan) Because of the definition of the term pandemic,
it could rightfully be used to describe the massive spread of diseases to the
Native Americans upon coming into contact with Europeans for the first time,
since these diseases spread very quickly across entire populations, obviously
in large part due to their lack of any previous exposure to such diseases. (Strayer, 557-558) Similar outbreaks occurred
in Australia as a result of Europeans coming into contact with the Aboriginal peoples
there, though the death rate wasn’t quite as severe there or in the Maori
population of New Zealand. Overall,
though, such pandemics occurred often when two groups of people interacted for
the first time. Nowadays, however, since
our world is much more interconnected, modern pandemics are far more likely to
come about due to poor sanitation or travel, which is what makes outbreaks
potentially more widespread than in the past, as well as making them rather
difficult to contain.
As
I’m living through the current coronavirus pandemic, it feels like a rather
bizarre situation, especially with all major public gatherings being called off
and/or banned in order to try and contain the spread of the virus. Although I completely understand the
reasoning for this, and support these efforts as necessary for the health of
the public as a whole, it’s definitely a weird experience to be living through
it, particularly in how I’m not allowed to physically go to classes yet still
take part in them online. In addition,
the complete social isolation that’s resulting from these measures is something
I’ve never experienced before in my life, even when there have been previous pandemics
that I was alive to know about.
Sources Cited:
Osborne, Joe. “‘Epidemic’ vs.
‘Pandemic’: What Do These Terms Mean?” Dictionary.com, Dictionary.com, 4 Mar.
2020, www.dictionary.com/e/epidemic-vs-pandemic/.
Strayer, Robert W. Ways of the
World: a Brief Global History with Sources; Volume 2: since the Fifteenth
Century. Bedford/St. Martins, 2019.
Monday, April 13, 2020
Chapter 22 Responses
Chapter 22 Responses:
2) What was distinctive about the end of Europe’s African and Asian empires compared to other cases of imperial disintegration?
Like the ends of the Austrian and Ottoman Empires following World War I, which gave rise to numerous new states in Europe and the Middle East, and the ends of the German and Japanese empires after World War II, the African and Asian movements for independence featured the ideal of national self-determination. However, the new independence movements not only asserted political independence but also affirmed the vitality of their cultures, which had been submerged and denigrated during the colonial era. Although these new nations claimed an international status equal to that of their former rulers, like their earlier counterparts, they stood in contrast with the earlier independence movements in the cultural factor. In the Americas, many of the colonized people were themselves of European origin, and subsequently shared much of their culture with their colonial rulers.
3) What international circumstances and social changes contributed to the end of colonial empires?
On one hand, Western ideals sat awkwardly at odds with the reality of colonialism, especially the ideal of national self-determination being at odds with the possession of colonies denied any opportunity to express their own national character. On the other hand, the world wars had weakened Europe, while discrediting any sense of European moral superiority, and the United States and the Soviet Union became the new global superpowers. Meanwhile, the United Nations provided a prestigious platform with which to conduct anticolonial agitation. In addition, within the colonial world, a second or third generation of Western-educated elites were deeply aware of the gap between European values and its practices and no longer viewed colonial rule as a vehicle for their people's progress, as a result increasingly insisting on immediate independence.
16) How and why did thinking about strategies for economic development change over time?
At first, in newly independent nations, most people expected that the state authorities would spur the economic development of the countries, since the private economy was weakly developed and few entrepreneurs had substantial funds to invest. State control also held the promise of protecting vulnerable economies from the worst parts of capitalism. Over time, however, the favor switched to the market to generate economic development. In part this was due to the failure, corruption, and mismanagement of many state-run enterprises, but this was also influenced by the collapse of the world's first state-dominated economy in the Soviet Union. In addition, Western pressured pushed developing countries in a capitalist direction.
Thursday, April 9, 2020
Flu of 1918
Perhaps the deadliest pandemic in modern times was the Spanish flu from 1918 to 1920. It infected an estimated 500 million people worldwide, one third of the world's population at the time. Between 20 million and 50 million people were killed by the particular strain of flu worldwide, including some 675,000 Americans. However, this epidemic occurred in two distinct stages. In the first stage, in the spring of 1918, the sick, largely experiencing typical flu symptoms, mostly recovered within a few days, and the number of reported deaths was relatively low. In the fall of 1918, however, the flu returned with much more serious and devastating consequences, as victims died within hours or days of developing symptoms, their skin turning blue and their lungs filling up with fluid, causing them to suffocate. In just one year, 1918, the average life expectancy in the United States plummeted by a dozen years, most likely due to the flu combined with the casualties in World War I.
In fact, the war helped play a role in the illness being dubbed the Spanish flu. The name came from an impression that Spain was particularly hit hard by the pandemic, when in reality it was hitting many other countries just as hard. The reason for this false impression was that reports of the disease were censored in Germany, Britain, France, and the United States in order to maintain the morale of their troops. This was not the case in Spain, which was neutral during this time, and so they were much more open about reporting the deadly effects of the disease. The most peculiar thing about the Spanish flu outbreak was in the demographics of the casualties. Most flu outbreaks disproportionately kill the very young and the very old, with a higher survival rate for those in between. With this epidemic, however, there was a higher than expected mortality rate for young adults. The reason for this is still unknown, though some suspect that the conditions resulting from the war, including malnutrition, overcrowded medical camps and hospitals, and poor hygiene resulted in bacterial superinfection, which is what killed most of the victims.
In fact, the war helped play a role in the illness being dubbed the Spanish flu. The name came from an impression that Spain was particularly hit hard by the pandemic, when in reality it was hitting many other countries just as hard. The reason for this false impression was that reports of the disease were censored in Germany, Britain, France, and the United States in order to maintain the morale of their troops. This was not the case in Spain, which was neutral during this time, and so they were much more open about reporting the deadly effects of the disease. The most peculiar thing about the Spanish flu outbreak was in the demographics of the casualties. Most flu outbreaks disproportionately kill the very young and the very old, with a higher survival rate for those in between. With this epidemic, however, there was a higher than expected mortality rate for young adults. The reason for this is still unknown, though some suspect that the conditions resulting from the war, including malnutrition, overcrowded medical camps and hospitals, and poor hygiene resulted in bacterial superinfection, which is what killed most of the victims.
Monday, April 6, 2020
Chapter 20 & Fascism
At the ideological level, fascism was extremely nationalistic, aiming to revitalize and "purify" the nation and to mobilize its people for some great task, whatever that was, though it usually involves violence against enemies. In addition, its leaders celebrated action over reflection and placed their faith in a charismatic leader. Fascists were ideologically opposed to individualism, liberalism, feminism, democracy, and communism, which they argued weakened the nation. Fascism first took shape in Italy, perhaps due to it not having developed a modern democratic culture yet due to it being a relatively new state. In a period of social upheaval, Benito Mussolini came to power on the promise of strong leadership in contrast to communism and democracy. Mussolini saw the Italian state as an entity unto itself, with its citizens all having roles to play. Perhaps most crucially, he viewed expansion through war and empire building as essential to its vitality.
Although fascists believed in a rigid social hierarchy, unlike communists, both ideologies prioritize loyalty to a collective society over individualism. This may not be all that surprising, considering that Mussolini had a socialist background. It almost seems like fascism was the right-wing answer to communism and the Russian Revolution Considering the social, political, and economic situations in Italy, Germany, and Japan at the time, it is somewhat easy to see why influential people in those countries were attracted to fascism as a solution to the problems.
I agree that some fascist tendencies are on the rise today, especially the emphasis on nationalism. While I don't necessarily think our current president is a fascist, I can definitely see the element of banding around a charismatic leader in that particular political party at the present. However, not all of these tendencies necessarily indicate actual fascist ideology being on the rise, especially here in the United States, since we do have a strong democratic tradition. As far as the element of racism, that in itself does not necessarily indicate that fascism is returning, as racists may not agree with the dictatorial elements.
Although fascists believed in a rigid social hierarchy, unlike communists, both ideologies prioritize loyalty to a collective society over individualism. This may not be all that surprising, considering that Mussolini had a socialist background. It almost seems like fascism was the right-wing answer to communism and the Russian Revolution Considering the social, political, and economic situations in Italy, Germany, and Japan at the time, it is somewhat easy to see why influential people in those countries were attracted to fascism as a solution to the problems.
I agree that some fascist tendencies are on the rise today, especially the emphasis on nationalism. While I don't necessarily think our current president is a fascist, I can definitely see the element of banding around a charismatic leader in that particular political party at the present. However, not all of these tendencies necessarily indicate actual fascist ideology being on the rise, especially here in the United States, since we do have a strong democratic tradition. As far as the element of racism, that in itself does not necessarily indicate that fascism is returning, as racists may not agree with the dictatorial elements.
Tuesday, March 31, 2020
Chapter 19 Responses
Chapter 19 Responses
What accounts for the massive peasant rebellions of 19th century China?
Unlike in Europe, no Industrial Revolution occurred in China to accompany the massive increase in population which the country had seen, nor did China's internal expansion to the west and south generate anything even remotely resembling the wealth and resources deriving from Europe's overseas empires. As a result, there was growing pressure on the land, smaller farms for China's vast peasant population, and widespread unemployment, impoverishment, misery, and starvation. In addition to this, China's centralized and bureaucratic state failed to enlarge itself to keep peace with the growing population, leaving it increasingly unable to perform its many functions in an effective manner, which left most of the power to local provincial officials. However, these officials often were corrupt and brutal in their treatment of the peasants. To top it all off, European military pressure and economic penetration was leading to substantial unemployment and raised peasant taxes.
What lay behind the decline of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century?
The Ottoman Empire's territory had shrunk as a result of Russian, British, Austrian, and French aggression. In particular, Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was a stunning blow, and when the French left, a newly independent Egypt started a modernizing and empire-building program on its own, on one occasion nearly overthrew the Ottoman Empire itself. In addition, other parts of the empire, such as Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania, achieved independence based on their own increasing nationalism and British and Russian support. Like in China, the central Ottoman state had weakened, especially in its ability to raise revenue, and its military had weakened. Economically, they lost their central role in Afro-Eurasian commerce thanks to the Europeans achieving direct oceanic access to Asia.
In what respects was Japan’s 19th century transformation revolutionary?
The means of promoting national unity marked a major break with the past, as it required an attack on the traditional power and privileges of the daimyo and the samurai, with the government now being centralized and featuring regional governors appointed by the national government. In addition, the central state, not local authorities, now had the power to collect the nation's taxes and raise a national army. As a result, the old social order was essentially abolished, and almost all Japanese were now legally equal as commoners and imperial subjects. In addition, there was a widespread interest in the Western world, and to adopting Western ways, and later blending foreign and Japanese elements in distinct ways.
What accounts for the massive peasant rebellions of 19th century China?
Unlike in Europe, no Industrial Revolution occurred in China to accompany the massive increase in population which the country had seen, nor did China's internal expansion to the west and south generate anything even remotely resembling the wealth and resources deriving from Europe's overseas empires. As a result, there was growing pressure on the land, smaller farms for China's vast peasant population, and widespread unemployment, impoverishment, misery, and starvation. In addition to this, China's centralized and bureaucratic state failed to enlarge itself to keep peace with the growing population, leaving it increasingly unable to perform its many functions in an effective manner, which left most of the power to local provincial officials. However, these officials often were corrupt and brutal in their treatment of the peasants. To top it all off, European military pressure and economic penetration was leading to substantial unemployment and raised peasant taxes.
What lay behind the decline of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century?
The Ottoman Empire's territory had shrunk as a result of Russian, British, Austrian, and French aggression. In particular, Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was a stunning blow, and when the French left, a newly independent Egypt started a modernizing and empire-building program on its own, on one occasion nearly overthrew the Ottoman Empire itself. In addition, other parts of the empire, such as Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania, achieved independence based on their own increasing nationalism and British and Russian support. Like in China, the central Ottoman state had weakened, especially in its ability to raise revenue, and its military had weakened. Economically, they lost their central role in Afro-Eurasian commerce thanks to the Europeans achieving direct oceanic access to Asia.
In what respects was Japan’s 19th century transformation revolutionary?
The means of promoting national unity marked a major break with the past, as it required an attack on the traditional power and privileges of the daimyo and the samurai, with the government now being centralized and featuring regional governors appointed by the national government. In addition, the central state, not local authorities, now had the power to collect the nation's taxes and raise a national army. As a result, the old social order was essentially abolished, and almost all Japanese were now legally equal as commoners and imperial subjects. In addition, there was a widespread interest in the Western world, and to adopting Western ways, and later blending foreign and Japanese elements in distinct ways.
Thursday, March 26, 2020
Chapter 18 Responses
Chapter 18 Responses
In what ways did the Industrial Revolution shape the character of 19th century European imperialism?
The Industrial Revolution led to new economic needs which Europeans found solutions to abroad. For one, the enormous productivity of industrial technology created the need for extensive raw materials and agricultural products, the vast majority of which could be found on other continents. Furthermore, Europe had to sell its own products that had come about as a result of the Industrial Revolution, as industrial capitalism periodically produced more manufactured goods than its own people could afford to buy. In addition, European investors found it more profitable to invest their money abroad than doing so at home.
What contributed to changing European views of Asians and Africans in the 19th century?
With the advent of the industrial age, Europeans developed an arrogance that fused with or replaced their previous notions of religious superiority. After all, they had unlocked the secrets of nature, created a society of unprecedented wealth, and had used both to produce military power that was unsurpassed. Such things became the criteria that Europeans used to judge themselves and the rest of the world. Because other cultures had not achieved such things, Europeans' views of them dropped sharply, coming to see them as "naturally" inferior using science to reinforce their racial preferences and prejudices.
In what different ways was colonial rule established in various parts of Africa and Asia?
Constructing the European colonial empires required military force or the threat. In this area the Europeans had a massive advantage, not just in military organization but also in firepower. The passage to colonial status, however, occurred in various ways. In India and Indonesia, for example, colonization grew out of earlier interactions with European trading firms. In contrast, for most Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific islands, colonial rule came later and more abruptly and deliberately, with European nations negotiating amongst themselves which areas of land were theirs for the taking, mainly through military conquest in Africa. Meanwhile, Britain's colonization of Australia and New Zealand came about rather similarly to their earlier colonization of North America.
In what ways did the Industrial Revolution shape the character of 19th century European imperialism?
The Industrial Revolution led to new economic needs which Europeans found solutions to abroad. For one, the enormous productivity of industrial technology created the need for extensive raw materials and agricultural products, the vast majority of which could be found on other continents. Furthermore, Europe had to sell its own products that had come about as a result of the Industrial Revolution, as industrial capitalism periodically produced more manufactured goods than its own people could afford to buy. In addition, European investors found it more profitable to invest their money abroad than doing so at home.
What contributed to changing European views of Asians and Africans in the 19th century?
With the advent of the industrial age, Europeans developed an arrogance that fused with or replaced their previous notions of religious superiority. After all, they had unlocked the secrets of nature, created a society of unprecedented wealth, and had used both to produce military power that was unsurpassed. Such things became the criteria that Europeans used to judge themselves and the rest of the world. Because other cultures had not achieved such things, Europeans' views of them dropped sharply, coming to see them as "naturally" inferior using science to reinforce their racial preferences and prejudices.
In what different ways was colonial rule established in various parts of Africa and Asia?
Constructing the European colonial empires required military force or the threat. In this area the Europeans had a massive advantage, not just in military organization but also in firepower. The passage to colonial status, however, occurred in various ways. In India and Indonesia, for example, colonization grew out of earlier interactions with European trading firms. In contrast, for most Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific islands, colonial rule came later and more abruptly and deliberately, with European nations negotiating amongst themselves which areas of land were theirs for the taking, mainly through military conquest in Africa. Meanwhile, Britain's colonization of Australia and New Zealand came about rather similarly to their earlier colonization of North America.
Monday, March 23, 2020
Chapter 17 Responses
Chapter 17 Responses:
In what ways did the roots of the Industrial Revolution lie within Europe? In what ways did that transformation have global roots?
Some of the reasons that it first occurred in Europe include certain patterns in Europe's internal development which favored innovation. This is because its many small, highly competitive states provided an insurance against economic and technological stagnation which the larger Chinese, Mughal, and Ottoman empires lacked. In addition, the relative newness of these European states caused their rulers to ally with the merchant class, which made technological innovation in the best interests of the governments. However, the transformation also had global roots in the sense that the Europeans had, by that time, established the largest and most varied network of exchange in history, thus allowing the technology to spread far more quickly than it could have before. In addition, other regions of the world, especially the Middle East, India, and China had also experienced times of great technological and scientific flourishing.
What was distinctive about Britain that may help explain its status as the breakthrough point of the Industrial Revolution?
Britain was the most commercialized of Europe's larger countries, its landlords having long ago enclosed much agricultural land, while a series of agricultural developments, such as crop rotation, selective breeding of animals, lighter plows, and higher-yielding seeds, increasing agricultural output, keeping food prices low, and freeing up labor from the countryside. In addition, employers were able to run their manufacturing enterprises as they saw fit, with a ready supply of industrial workers. Unlike most European aristocrats, those in Britain were greatly interested in business, some taking part in mining and manufacturing enterprises. Meanwhile, political life encouraged commercialization and economic innovation, thanks to Britain's policy of religious toleration, welcoming anyone with technical skills regardless of their faith, and to its checks on royal prerogative, allowing for a freer arena for private enterprise than elsewhere in Europe. Finally, science in Britain was much more concerned with observation, experiment, precise measurements, mechanical devices, and practical commercial applications.
Why did Marxist socialism not take root in the United States?
While the often poor working conditions generated much protest from workers in the United States, like in most of the world, and class conflict certainly was an issue in the U.S. during this time, unlike in many European countries, no major political party emerged during this time that represented the interests of the working class. In addition, socialist ideas, especially Marxist ideals, did not particularly appeal to American workers as much as they did to European workers. As a reference, the Socialist Party of America only garnered 6 percent of the vote in the 1912 Presidential election, at the height of its popularity. This stood in sharp contrast to countries such as Germany, where socialists held the most seats in the Parliament. One reason for this lack of popularity is that American union organizations, particularly the American Federation of Labor, were relatively conservative, focusing on skilled workers and excluding the more radical unskilled laborers, in addition to its refusal to align with any political party, thus limiting its influence in the American political sphere. In addition, the country's remarkable economic growth generated a higher average standard of living for American workers than those in Europe, with land being cheaper and home ownership being more affordable.
In what ways did the roots of the Industrial Revolution lie within Europe? In what ways did that transformation have global roots?
Some of the reasons that it first occurred in Europe include certain patterns in Europe's internal development which favored innovation. This is because its many small, highly competitive states provided an insurance against economic and technological stagnation which the larger Chinese, Mughal, and Ottoman empires lacked. In addition, the relative newness of these European states caused their rulers to ally with the merchant class, which made technological innovation in the best interests of the governments. However, the transformation also had global roots in the sense that the Europeans had, by that time, established the largest and most varied network of exchange in history, thus allowing the technology to spread far more quickly than it could have before. In addition, other regions of the world, especially the Middle East, India, and China had also experienced times of great technological and scientific flourishing.
What was distinctive about Britain that may help explain its status as the breakthrough point of the Industrial Revolution?
Britain was the most commercialized of Europe's larger countries, its landlords having long ago enclosed much agricultural land, while a series of agricultural developments, such as crop rotation, selective breeding of animals, lighter plows, and higher-yielding seeds, increasing agricultural output, keeping food prices low, and freeing up labor from the countryside. In addition, employers were able to run their manufacturing enterprises as they saw fit, with a ready supply of industrial workers. Unlike most European aristocrats, those in Britain were greatly interested in business, some taking part in mining and manufacturing enterprises. Meanwhile, political life encouraged commercialization and economic innovation, thanks to Britain's policy of religious toleration, welcoming anyone with technical skills regardless of their faith, and to its checks on royal prerogative, allowing for a freer arena for private enterprise than elsewhere in Europe. Finally, science in Britain was much more concerned with observation, experiment, precise measurements, mechanical devices, and practical commercial applications.
Why did Marxist socialism not take root in the United States?
While the often poor working conditions generated much protest from workers in the United States, like in most of the world, and class conflict certainly was an issue in the U.S. during this time, unlike in many European countries, no major political party emerged during this time that represented the interests of the working class. In addition, socialist ideas, especially Marxist ideals, did not particularly appeal to American workers as much as they did to European workers. As a reference, the Socialist Party of America only garnered 6 percent of the vote in the 1912 Presidential election, at the height of its popularity. This stood in sharp contrast to countries such as Germany, where socialists held the most seats in the Parliament. One reason for this lack of popularity is that American union organizations, particularly the American Federation of Labor, were relatively conservative, focusing on skilled workers and excluding the more radical unskilled laborers, in addition to its refusal to align with any political party, thus limiting its influence in the American political sphere. In addition, the country's remarkable economic growth generated a higher average standard of living for American workers than those in Europe, with land being cheaper and home ownership being more affordable.
Saturday, February 22, 2020
Chapter 16: Part Two
The second part of this chapter focuses on some of the repercussions of the Atlantic revolutions which reverberated far beyond their places of origin and persisted long after those upheavals were concluded. The most significant of these repercussions were three major movements that arose to challenge continuing patterns of oppression and exclusion. These movements were abolitionism, which aimed to end slavery, nationalism, which aimed to foster unity and independence from foreign rule, and feminism, which challenged male dominance. Each of these movements bore the marks of the Atlantic revolutions, and each came to have a global significance in the following centuries.
It's quite remarkable that the practice of slavery, widely practiced and little condemned since at least the beginning of human civilization, lost its legitimacy and was largely ended in little more than a century, from 1780 to 1890. In the abolition movement, the ideas and practices of the Atlantic revolutions played a key role. In way this movement towards abolishing slavery can be seen as a natural manifestation of Enlightenment ideals, with slavery coming to be seen as a violation of the natural rights of every person, in a very obvious way. This thinking was bolstered by an increasingly vociferous religious opposition to the practice, particularly in Britain and the United States. Furthermore, contrary to much earlier thinking, slavery began to be seen as not essential for economic progress, as both England and New England were among the most prosperous regions in the Western world at that time, and both were based on free labor. As a result, moral virtue and economic success were joined. These various strands of thinking came together in abolitionist movements.
Although the idea that humankind is divided into separate nations with distinct culture and territory deserving of independent political life is so widespread nowadays it may seem natural and timeless, it for most of human history states didn't usually coincide with the culture of a particular people, and most governments ruled over very diverse societies. During the 19th century, however, nationalism proved to be an infinitely flexible and enormously powerful idea, not just in Europe, but elsewhere as well. For example, it inspired the establishment of Germany and Italy, as well as groups within vast empires to seek independence, but it also exacerbated existing rivalries among nations, which helped set the stage for World War I.
It's quite remarkable that the practice of slavery, widely practiced and little condemned since at least the beginning of human civilization, lost its legitimacy and was largely ended in little more than a century, from 1780 to 1890. In the abolition movement, the ideas and practices of the Atlantic revolutions played a key role. In way this movement towards abolishing slavery can be seen as a natural manifestation of Enlightenment ideals, with slavery coming to be seen as a violation of the natural rights of every person, in a very obvious way. This thinking was bolstered by an increasingly vociferous religious opposition to the practice, particularly in Britain and the United States. Furthermore, contrary to much earlier thinking, slavery began to be seen as not essential for economic progress, as both England and New England were among the most prosperous regions in the Western world at that time, and both were based on free labor. As a result, moral virtue and economic success were joined. These various strands of thinking came together in abolitionist movements.
Although the idea that humankind is divided into separate nations with distinct culture and territory deserving of independent political life is so widespread nowadays it may seem natural and timeless, it for most of human history states didn't usually coincide with the culture of a particular people, and most governments ruled over very diverse societies. During the 19th century, however, nationalism proved to be an infinitely flexible and enormously powerful idea, not just in Europe, but elsewhere as well. For example, it inspired the establishment of Germany and Italy, as well as groups within vast empires to seek independence, but it also exacerbated existing rivalries among nations, which helped set the stage for World War I.
Monday, February 17, 2020
Part Five Intro and Chapter 16: Part 1
In the introduction to the fifth section of the book, the author begins by noting that between 1750 and 1914, sometimes called "the long nineteenth century," two new, related phenomena took center stage in the global history of humankind. The first new phenomena during this time was the creation of a new kind of society, today called "modern society," which arose out of the intersection of the Scientific, French, and Industrial Revolutions, all of which initially took shape in Western Europe. Such societies have generated many of the transformative ideas which have guided human behavior over the past several centuries. Such ideas include the ideas that movement towards social equality and the end of poverty was possible, that ordinary people could participate in political life, that nations could trump empires, that women could be equal to men, and that slavery was no longer necessary.
The second of these new phenomena was the growing ability of these modern societies to exercise enormous power and influence over the rest of humankind. In many places, this took place within expanding European empires, while elsewhere it still took place, albeit within less formal means, such as economic penetration, military intervention, diplomatic pressure, and missionary activity. When taken together these two phenomena thrust Western Europe into a new, far more prominent role in world history than it had ever held before, as it was here where modern living emerged most fully. These societies, as well as their North American descendants, came to exercise a wholly unprecedented role in world affairs, collectively achieving something close to global dominance by the early twentieth century.
The Atlantic revolutions in North America, France, Haiti, and Latin America took place within a larger global framework of upheavals, but were distinctive in various ways. For one, the costly wars that strained European imperial states were global rather than regional. In addition, the Atlantic revolutionaries were closely connected to one another, in addition to sharing a set of common ideas, largely derived from the English Enlightenment. However, such ideas generated endless controversy and debate that has continued to this day in some form or another.
The second of these new phenomena was the growing ability of these modern societies to exercise enormous power and influence over the rest of humankind. In many places, this took place within expanding European empires, while elsewhere it still took place, albeit within less formal means, such as economic penetration, military intervention, diplomatic pressure, and missionary activity. When taken together these two phenomena thrust Western Europe into a new, far more prominent role in world history than it had ever held before, as it was here where modern living emerged most fully. These societies, as well as their North American descendants, came to exercise a wholly unprecedented role in world affairs, collectively achieving something close to global dominance by the early twentieth century.
The Atlantic revolutions in North America, France, Haiti, and Latin America took place within a larger global framework of upheavals, but were distinctive in various ways. For one, the costly wars that strained European imperial states were global rather than regional. In addition, the Atlantic revolutionaries were closely connected to one another, in addition to sharing a set of common ideas, largely derived from the English Enlightenment. However, such ideas generated endless controversy and debate that has continued to this day in some form or another.
Sunday, February 16, 2020
Catholic Social Teachings
Note: The following blog post has nothing to do with the textbook, but rather a handout we received
The handout about the nine key themes of Catholic social teachings was quite interesting for me to read, especially because most of these themes seem like important values to have in our lives. The nine main themes of Catholic social teachings are: the dignity of every person and human life; solidarity, common good, and participation; family life; subsidiarity and the proper role of government; property ownership in modern society, and the rights and responsibilities that come with it; the dignity of work, rights of workers, and support for labor unions; colonialism and economic development; peace and disarmament; and option for the poor and vulnerable. While many of these themes seem very familiar, the Catholic Church emphasizes them in special ways.
For example, with the topic of the dignity of every life, the Catholic position on this is rooted in the belief that each human being is made in God's likeness. Because of this belief, they are entitled to be treated with the upmost respect and dignity, as God intended us to be. Catholics take this idea to its logical extreme, believing that there is nothing one can do to forfeit this lofty status. While some may find this somewhat extreme and/or naive, such a view of human life can serve to guide us on our interactions with others. Perhaps most crucially, the idea of human dignity contains a strong element of equality regardless of differences in ethnic, religious, or any other aspect of one's background.
Catholic social teaching also emphasizes the connections we have with our fellow human beings, encouraging us to be interdependent on one another for the good of the whole community, not just as individuals. With the common good in mind, there is also a major emphasis on family life, since families are considered to be the most basic unit of society. This is because a family is the most intimate sphere in which people cooperate, as well as the first place children learn about themselves. For these reasons, healthy societies are dependent on healthy families, so families should get as much support as possible, including support from the government. These themes were the ones that stuck out to me the most.
The handout about the nine key themes of Catholic social teachings was quite interesting for me to read, especially because most of these themes seem like important values to have in our lives. The nine main themes of Catholic social teachings are: the dignity of every person and human life; solidarity, common good, and participation; family life; subsidiarity and the proper role of government; property ownership in modern society, and the rights and responsibilities that come with it; the dignity of work, rights of workers, and support for labor unions; colonialism and economic development; peace and disarmament; and option for the poor and vulnerable. While many of these themes seem very familiar, the Catholic Church emphasizes them in special ways.
For example, with the topic of the dignity of every life, the Catholic position on this is rooted in the belief that each human being is made in God's likeness. Because of this belief, they are entitled to be treated with the upmost respect and dignity, as God intended us to be. Catholics take this idea to its logical extreme, believing that there is nothing one can do to forfeit this lofty status. While some may find this somewhat extreme and/or naive, such a view of human life can serve to guide us on our interactions with others. Perhaps most crucially, the idea of human dignity contains a strong element of equality regardless of differences in ethnic, religious, or any other aspect of one's background.
Catholic social teaching also emphasizes the connections we have with our fellow human beings, encouraging us to be interdependent on one another for the good of the whole community, not just as individuals. With the common good in mind, there is also a major emphasis on family life, since families are considered to be the most basic unit of society. This is because a family is the most intimate sphere in which people cooperate, as well as the first place children learn about themselves. For these reasons, healthy societies are dependent on healthy families, so families should get as much support as possible, including support from the government. These themes were the ones that stuck out to me the most.
Monday, February 10, 2020
Sisters of Notre Dame
This post concerns a handout outside of the normal textbook, the link which can be found here: https://whspring2020.blogspot.com/2020/02/handout-for-tuesday-february-11.html
It was very interesting to me to read the story of how the Sisters of Notre Dame was established, especially as it was this group that established the college campus that I currently attend. I was especially interested in the fact that the two co-founders of the order, Julie Billiart and Francoise Blin de Bourdon, came from drastically different backgrounds. Julie came from a rather humble upbringing, the daughter of a shopkeeper. While most members of France's Third Estate owned very little land, her father owned not only the shop, but some land as well, assets which gave him more means than an average member of his social class. Because of this, he was able to afford Julie a basic religious education. Through her education, she came to believe that the status quo was unfair, and sought about remedying it by bringing her own lessons to the children too poor to afford such an education, sparking a passion of educating poor children that would endure throughout her life. After her education was complete, she began working in the fields to help support her family. The combination of physical strain from the hard labor, and emotional stress brought on by the attempted murder of her father, led to the onset of multiple sclerosis, which left her bedridden at the age of 22.
Meanwhile, Francoise, the daughter of two wealthy landowners, had lived a life of privilege until the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror, during which she was spared from being executed only by the overthrow of the revolutionary government itself. Even before this, however, she had long shown inclinations towards religion rather than what seemed to her a frivolous, useless life. In 1794, one of Julie's followers took up residence at Francoise's family's house and rented a room for Julie. The following winter of 1794-1795 marked the beginning of a friendship between the two women, with the thoughts that they shared during that time forming the core mission of the Sisters of Notre Dame.
It was very interesting to me to read the story of how the Sisters of Notre Dame was established, especially as it was this group that established the college campus that I currently attend. I was especially interested in the fact that the two co-founders of the order, Julie Billiart and Francoise Blin de Bourdon, came from drastically different backgrounds. Julie came from a rather humble upbringing, the daughter of a shopkeeper. While most members of France's Third Estate owned very little land, her father owned not only the shop, but some land as well, assets which gave him more means than an average member of his social class. Because of this, he was able to afford Julie a basic religious education. Through her education, she came to believe that the status quo was unfair, and sought about remedying it by bringing her own lessons to the children too poor to afford such an education, sparking a passion of educating poor children that would endure throughout her life. After her education was complete, she began working in the fields to help support her family. The combination of physical strain from the hard labor, and emotional stress brought on by the attempted murder of her father, led to the onset of multiple sclerosis, which left her bedridden at the age of 22.
Meanwhile, Francoise, the daughter of two wealthy landowners, had lived a life of privilege until the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror, during which she was spared from being executed only by the overthrow of the revolutionary government itself. Even before this, however, she had long shown inclinations towards religion rather than what seemed to her a frivolous, useless life. In 1794, one of Julie's followers took up residence at Francoise's family's house and rented a room for Julie. The following winter of 1794-1795 marked the beginning of a friendship between the two women, with the thoughts that they shared during that time forming the core mission of the Sisters of Notre Dame.
Tuesday, February 4, 2020
Chapter 15: Cultural Transformations, 1450-1750
This chapter discusses the cultural changes that occurred across the world, both in a religious sense, and from a scientific sense, between 1450 and 1750. The two major trends that developed in this time period were the spread of Christianity to Asians, Africans, and Native Americans, and the emergence of a scientific outlook that sharply challenged Western Christianity even as both acquired a global presence.
The most interesting thing about the expansion of Christianity into other continents is that fact that this occurred while Western Christianity was splintering as a result of the Protestant Reformation and the various new Protestant churches that formed as a result. It makes sense that all this occurred at a time when literacy was increasing, so it was more likely that people would read the Bible for themselves and disagree with their priest's interpretation of a particular passage, and that people would express written concerns about the corruption within the Catholic Church at the time. The response by the Catholic Church to reform itself from within also hints at a possible reason Christianity expanded during this time in the various missionary groups that were established following the Reformation. Another interesting aspect of the expansion of Christianity is the ways in which it was blended with traditional religious traditions, particularly in the Americas. However, Christianity's spread was quite limited in Asia and Africa, as Islam was also rapidly expanding during this time as well, with many similarities in terms of blending with traditional cultural beliefs elsewhere as well as movements during this time to return to traditional Muslim values, much like what was going on in the Christian world. Because of this, it's no surprise to me that these two religions are among the most common faiths in the world to this day.
Partially in contrast to this religious expansion abroad, within Europe, others were beginning to develop an understanding of the world at least partially at odds with Christian teachings, in what became known as the Scientific Revolution. Rather than accepting the accepted wisdom of the time, they sought to gain knowledge through their own inquiries and experiments. One can hardly overestimate the long-term significance of the Scientific Revolution, as science has since become the chief marker of global modernity, even a universal worldview of sorts, open to all who could accept its premises and its techniques.
The most interesting thing about the expansion of Christianity into other continents is that fact that this occurred while Western Christianity was splintering as a result of the Protestant Reformation and the various new Protestant churches that formed as a result. It makes sense that all this occurred at a time when literacy was increasing, so it was more likely that people would read the Bible for themselves and disagree with their priest's interpretation of a particular passage, and that people would express written concerns about the corruption within the Catholic Church at the time. The response by the Catholic Church to reform itself from within also hints at a possible reason Christianity expanded during this time in the various missionary groups that were established following the Reformation. Another interesting aspect of the expansion of Christianity is the ways in which it was blended with traditional religious traditions, particularly in the Americas. However, Christianity's spread was quite limited in Asia and Africa, as Islam was also rapidly expanding during this time as well, with many similarities in terms of blending with traditional cultural beliefs elsewhere as well as movements during this time to return to traditional Muslim values, much like what was going on in the Christian world. Because of this, it's no surprise to me that these two religions are among the most common faiths in the world to this day.
Partially in contrast to this religious expansion abroad, within Europe, others were beginning to develop an understanding of the world at least partially at odds with Christian teachings, in what became known as the Scientific Revolution. Rather than accepting the accepted wisdom of the time, they sought to gain knowledge through their own inquiries and experiments. One can hardly overestimate the long-term significance of the Scientific Revolution, as science has since become the chief marker of global modernity, even a universal worldview of sorts, open to all who could accept its premises and its techniques.
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
Chapter 14: Section 2
The second part of this chapter mainly deals with the Atlantic slave trade. Between 1500 and 1866, the trade in human beings took an estimated 12.5 people from African societies, shipped them across the Atlantic in the infamous Middle Passage, and deposited some 10.7 million of them into the Americas, where they lived out their often-brief lives as slaves, with the other 1.8 million dying on the trip. Beyond the individual tragedies that it spawned, the Atlantic slave trade transformed all of its participants. Within Africa itself, the slave trade thoroughly disrupted several societies, strengthened others, and corrupted many, as elites often enriched themselves while the slaves were victimized almost beyond imagination.
In the Americas, meanwhile, the slave trade added a substantial African presence to the mix of European and Native American peoples, which also introduced into these new societies issues of race which still endure to this day, as well as adding elements of African culture into the making of American cultures. Certainly the profits from the slave trade and force labor of African slaves enriched European and Euro-American societies, even as the practice contributed much to the racial stereotypes of European peoples.
However, this was only the most recent large-scale expression of what was a very widespread human practice, as slavery had been present in the world as far back as the early hunting-gathering societies, but was especially prevalent in civilizations where it was generally accepted as an enterprise and closely linked to war. That being said, the slavery that emerged in the Americas was distinctive in several ways. The most obvious distinct quality was simply the scale of slave trafficking and the central role it played to the economy of the Americas. In addition, this New World slavery was based on plantation agriculture, treating slaves as a form of dehumanized property lacking any rights in the society of their owners, with slave status being inherited across generations. Most significantly, Atlantic slavery came to be associated wholly with Africa and with "blackness."
The origins of Atlantic slavery largely came about due to the Europeans' introduction to sugar in the Mediterranean, where they first set up plantations. Initially, they used Slavic-speaking peoples from the Black Sea to work on these plantations, which is where the term "slave" comes from. However, when the Ottoman Turks seized Constantinople, this source of labor was cut off, at the same time that Portuguese mariners came across an alternative source of slaves in West Africa, which established links to this supply source. Therefore, when the native peoples of the Americas were decimated by disease, Africans became the primary source of slave labor in the plantations largely through a process of elimination.
Within Africa itself, African rulers generally controlled the trade through negotiations and agreements with Europeans not unlike other forms of international trade at the time. For the slaves themselves, it was anything but a commercial interaction, and some decided to commit suicide by jumping off the ships and drowning in the ocean rather than make the painful journey to the New World. The vast majority of them ended up in Brazil and the Caribbean, where the labor demands were most intense.
In the Americas, meanwhile, the slave trade added a substantial African presence to the mix of European and Native American peoples, which also introduced into these new societies issues of race which still endure to this day, as well as adding elements of African culture into the making of American cultures. Certainly the profits from the slave trade and force labor of African slaves enriched European and Euro-American societies, even as the practice contributed much to the racial stereotypes of European peoples.
However, this was only the most recent large-scale expression of what was a very widespread human practice, as slavery had been present in the world as far back as the early hunting-gathering societies, but was especially prevalent in civilizations where it was generally accepted as an enterprise and closely linked to war. That being said, the slavery that emerged in the Americas was distinctive in several ways. The most obvious distinct quality was simply the scale of slave trafficking and the central role it played to the economy of the Americas. In addition, this New World slavery was based on plantation agriculture, treating slaves as a form of dehumanized property lacking any rights in the society of their owners, with slave status being inherited across generations. Most significantly, Atlantic slavery came to be associated wholly with Africa and with "blackness."
The origins of Atlantic slavery largely came about due to the Europeans' introduction to sugar in the Mediterranean, where they first set up plantations. Initially, they used Slavic-speaking peoples from the Black Sea to work on these plantations, which is where the term "slave" comes from. However, when the Ottoman Turks seized Constantinople, this source of labor was cut off, at the same time that Portuguese mariners came across an alternative source of slaves in West Africa, which established links to this supply source. Therefore, when the native peoples of the Americas were decimated by disease, Africans became the primary source of slave labor in the plantations largely through a process of elimination.
Within Africa itself, African rulers generally controlled the trade through negotiations and agreements with Europeans not unlike other forms of international trade at the time. For the slaves themselves, it was anything but a commercial interaction, and some decided to commit suicide by jumping off the ships and drowning in the ocean rather than make the painful journey to the New World. The vast majority of them ended up in Brazil and the Caribbean, where the labor demands were most intense.
Thursday, January 23, 2020
Chapter 14, Part 1
This chapter is split into two sections. The first section mainly talks about the role that Europeans played in Asian commerce.
As most schoolchildren are taught, Columbus landed in the Americas by accident - he was actually trying to find a "shortcut" to East Asia by sailing there from the west. The end result was the development of colonial societies and new commercial connections to the west. In Asia, however, it was a very different story. Vasco da Gama's voyage to India, the first ever by Europeans, was the result of a deliberate Portuguese effort to find a sea route to East Asia, going around the western part of Africa, past the tip of South Africa, up the eastern coast, and finally to the Indian Ocean, where the most prestigious trade markets were at the time. The Europeans had many motivations for this massive effort to gain access to this trading network, chief among them tropical spices which were widely used as condiments and preservatives. However, they saw major problems with the pattern of trade with Asia they had used previously. First, the source of supply for the desired goods was solidly in Muslim hands, particularly Egypt, which was the primary point of transfer into the Mediterranean. In addition, the Italian city of Venice held a monopoly on the European trade in Eastern goods. Other European powers increasingly disliked having to rely on Venice and Muslims, providing another impetus for Portugal to attempt a sea route to India that bypassed both intermediaries. Another problem Europeans had was that few of their products were attractive enough for Eastern buyers, so they were required to pay gold or silver for the Asian goods, a persistent trade deficit that further spurred the desire for precious metals.
In succeeding in finding a sea route to India, the Portuguese paved the way for other European countries, such as the Spanish, British, Dutch, and French, to make their way into the Indian Ocean commercial network. In doing so, they established three main patterns of behavior and control in that region. The Portuguese came to build an empire of sorts based on the establishment of trading ports, as they had relatively little interest in controlling huge amounts of land in these regions, but rather in controlling the commerce there. However, they were only able to control around half of the spice trade to Europeans. Their neighbors, the Spanish, meanwhile, established themselves on what they named the Philippine Islands, after their king, Philip II. Unlike the Portuguese, they were encouraged to establish outright colonial rule on the islands, for a variety of reasons, including their proximity to China. Meanwhile, the British, Dutch, and later the French, established their presence in East Asia mainly through the establishment of privately chartered companies that enabled them to establish trading post empires of their own, with little direct involvement from their respective governments. That being said, the involvement of Europeans overall was much more limited than it was in Africa and the Americas during this time period.
As most schoolchildren are taught, Columbus landed in the Americas by accident - he was actually trying to find a "shortcut" to East Asia by sailing there from the west. The end result was the development of colonial societies and new commercial connections to the west. In Asia, however, it was a very different story. Vasco da Gama's voyage to India, the first ever by Europeans, was the result of a deliberate Portuguese effort to find a sea route to East Asia, going around the western part of Africa, past the tip of South Africa, up the eastern coast, and finally to the Indian Ocean, where the most prestigious trade markets were at the time. The Europeans had many motivations for this massive effort to gain access to this trading network, chief among them tropical spices which were widely used as condiments and preservatives. However, they saw major problems with the pattern of trade with Asia they had used previously. First, the source of supply for the desired goods was solidly in Muslim hands, particularly Egypt, which was the primary point of transfer into the Mediterranean. In addition, the Italian city of Venice held a monopoly on the European trade in Eastern goods. Other European powers increasingly disliked having to rely on Venice and Muslims, providing another impetus for Portugal to attempt a sea route to India that bypassed both intermediaries. Another problem Europeans had was that few of their products were attractive enough for Eastern buyers, so they were required to pay gold or silver for the Asian goods, a persistent trade deficit that further spurred the desire for precious metals.
In succeeding in finding a sea route to India, the Portuguese paved the way for other European countries, such as the Spanish, British, Dutch, and French, to make their way into the Indian Ocean commercial network. In doing so, they established three main patterns of behavior and control in that region. The Portuguese came to build an empire of sorts based on the establishment of trading ports, as they had relatively little interest in controlling huge amounts of land in these regions, but rather in controlling the commerce there. However, they were only able to control around half of the spice trade to Europeans. Their neighbors, the Spanish, meanwhile, established themselves on what they named the Philippine Islands, after their king, Philip II. Unlike the Portuguese, they were encouraged to establish outright colonial rule on the islands, for a variety of reasons, including their proximity to China. Meanwhile, the British, Dutch, and later the French, established their presence in East Asia mainly through the establishment of privately chartered companies that enabled them to establish trading post empires of their own, with little direct involvement from their respective governments. That being said, the involvement of Europeans overall was much more limited than it was in Africa and the Americas during this time period.
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Chapter 13: Political Transformations: Empires and Encounters, 1450-1750
Why was it so easy for Europeans to conquer the Americas? As is often the case, there is no single answer for why this was the case. For starters, the Europeans had a relative geographical advantage in that countries such as Portugal, Spain, Britain, and France were and are simply closer to the Americas than any potential Asian competitors were. In addition, European innovations in mapmaking, navigation, sailing techniques, and ship designs enabled Europeans to penetrate into the Atlantic . Another factor behind the European domination was that the rich markets along the Indian Ocean provided little incentive for Chinese, Indians, or Muslims to explore beyond their own waters. On the other hand, Europeans had strong incentives for doing so, as they held a rather marginal position within the Eurasian trade world and hoped to gain more access to that system. The discovery of the Americas eventually provided the means to do so, thanks to the windfall of natural resources there that proceeded to drive even further expansion that would ultimately underpin the long-term growth of the European economy. In addition to this, the rulers of European countries were also driven by the enduring rivalries among competing states. As far as their military victories, they were often helped by divisions within the local societies of the areas they conquered. Perhaps most significantly of all, however, was the germs and diseases which the Europeans, likely unknowingly, carried with them. While they were safe from these diseases due to having built up immunity over the years from exposure to animals, the Native Americans had no such biological resistance, and the diseases soon decimated up to 90% of the native population, which led to the collapse of Native American societies, in what is referred to as the Great Dying. Regardless of the reasons for their domination of the Americas, the European acquisition of empires had a profound global significance. In sharply diminishing the population of the Americas, the Great Dying created a massive labor shortage, which helped make room for new immigrants, including both European colonists and African slaves. The end result was that various combinations of indigenous, European, and African peoples created entirely new societies in the Americas.
However, the Europeans weren't the only people to carve out empires in the early modern era. Russia, for example, established the world's largest territorial empire by conquering adjacent territories, including Siberia, which, while a vast barren wasteland, provided a link to Asian trading networks through its animal pelts, which were in great demand on the world market. Meanwhile, the Chinese expanded their own empire by pushing deep into Central Eurasia. Turko-Mongol invaders from Central Asia established the Mughal Empire, bringing most of Hindu South Asia, including India, under a single Muslim-ruled political system. In addition, the Ottoman Empire brought Muslim rule to a largely Christian population in southeastern Europe and Turkish rule to largely Arab populations in North Africa and the Middle East. While none of these empires had the global reach or impact of Europe's American colonies, they still gave rise to profoundly important cross-cultural encounters, with legacies that echoed for many centuries.
Why was it so easy for Europeans to conquer the Americas? As is often the case, there is no single answer for why this was the case. For starters, the Europeans had a relative geographical advantage in that countries such as Portugal, Spain, Britain, and France were and are simply closer to the Americas than any potential Asian competitors were. In addition, European innovations in mapmaking, navigation, sailing techniques, and ship designs enabled Europeans to penetrate into the Atlantic . Another factor behind the European domination was that the rich markets along the Indian Ocean provided little incentive for Chinese, Indians, or Muslims to explore beyond their own waters. On the other hand, Europeans had strong incentives for doing so, as they held a rather marginal position within the Eurasian trade world and hoped to gain more access to that system. The discovery of the Americas eventually provided the means to do so, thanks to the windfall of natural resources there that proceeded to drive even further expansion that would ultimately underpin the long-term growth of the European economy. In addition to this, the rulers of European countries were also driven by the enduring rivalries among competing states. As far as their military victories, they were often helped by divisions within the local societies of the areas they conquered. Perhaps most significantly of all, however, was the germs and diseases which the Europeans, likely unknowingly, carried with them. While they were safe from these diseases due to having built up immunity over the years from exposure to animals, the Native Americans had no such biological resistance, and the diseases soon decimated up to 90% of the native population, which led to the collapse of Native American societies, in what is referred to as the Great Dying. Regardless of the reasons for their domination of the Americas, the European acquisition of empires had a profound global significance. In sharply diminishing the population of the Americas, the Great Dying created a massive labor shortage, which helped make room for new immigrants, including both European colonists and African slaves. The end result was that various combinations of indigenous, European, and African peoples created entirely new societies in the Americas.
However, the Europeans weren't the only people to carve out empires in the early modern era. Russia, for example, established the world's largest territorial empire by conquering adjacent territories, including Siberia, which, while a vast barren wasteland, provided a link to Asian trading networks through its animal pelts, which were in great demand on the world market. Meanwhile, the Chinese expanded their own empire by pushing deep into Central Eurasia. Turko-Mongol invaders from Central Asia established the Mughal Empire, bringing most of Hindu South Asia, including India, under a single Muslim-ruled political system. In addition, the Ottoman Empire brought Muslim rule to a largely Christian population in southeastern Europe and Turkish rule to largely Arab populations in North Africa and the Middle East. While none of these empires had the global reach or impact of Europe's American colonies, they still gave rise to profoundly important cross-cultural encounters, with legacies that echoed for many centuries.
Thursday, January 16, 2020
Intro to Part 4: 1450-1750
In his introduction to this part of the book, Strayer notes how historians often describe this time period as representing the beginning of the Modern Era, seeing as it was during this period that Europeans began what would be a long period of domination over world affairs, which led to genuine globalization for the first time. Certainly, the most obvious expression of this was the oceanic journeys of European explorers and the resulting conquest and colonial settlement of the Americas by Europeans. In addition, the Atlantic slave trade also created a permanent link between Africa and the Western Hemisphere. It should be noted, however, that while Europeans were the beneficiaries of this slave trade, African rulers also had a large amount of control over how the trade occurred. Meanwhile, a global silver trade allowed Europeans to use metals found in the "New World," the Americas, to buy their way into old Asian trade routes. The massive transfer of plants, animals, diseases, and people, known as the Columbian exchange, enabled the creation of completely new networks of interaction across both the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans. This increase in globalization also allowed missionaries to spread Christianity far beyond Europe, which allowed for it to truly become a major world religion.
During this time period, small-scale signs of what would become known as modernity began to appear. The most obvious of these took place in Europe, where the Scientific Revolution transformed people's view of the world, their approach to knowledge, and their understanding of Christianity. In terms of demographics, China, Japan, India, and Europe experienced the beginnings of the modern population growth. In various parts of Eurasia and the Americas, more highly commercialized economies centered around large cities began to develop. Another developing global pattern during this time period was the emergence of strong and more cohesive states incorporating various local societies into larger units while actively promoting trade, manufacturing, and a common culture within their borders.
However, the whole story is much more than that, as European world domination and more fully modern societies were far from a sure thing at the time. For example, even though Europe fully controlled the Americas and the world's sea routes, their influence was much more limited in Asia and Africa at this time. Also, Christianity wasn't the most rapidly spreading faith during this time, but rather Islam, especially in Asia and Africa. In terms of manufacturing output, Europe was about equal with China and India in 1750, so it was not obvious that Europeans would come to dominate the planet, nor that the population growth would be a lasting thing.
There also wasn't much evidence that anything like modern industrial society was on the horizon. Electricity and machines were still far from being introduced, and wealthy elites still provided leadership, while rural peasants were the primary lower social group. In addition, countries were still governed by kings and nobles, and females were subordinate almost everywhere. In short, modern society hardly seemed fast approaching, and most people still lived in long-established traditional ways.
Overall, this era was as much a late agrarian era as it was an early modern era. It can best be described as a time of transition, much as most time periods can be seen as.
During this time period, small-scale signs of what would become known as modernity began to appear. The most obvious of these took place in Europe, where the Scientific Revolution transformed people's view of the world, their approach to knowledge, and their understanding of Christianity. In terms of demographics, China, Japan, India, and Europe experienced the beginnings of the modern population growth. In various parts of Eurasia and the Americas, more highly commercialized economies centered around large cities began to develop. Another developing global pattern during this time period was the emergence of strong and more cohesive states incorporating various local societies into larger units while actively promoting trade, manufacturing, and a common culture within their borders.
However, the whole story is much more than that, as European world domination and more fully modern societies were far from a sure thing at the time. For example, even though Europe fully controlled the Americas and the world's sea routes, their influence was much more limited in Asia and Africa at this time. Also, Christianity wasn't the most rapidly spreading faith during this time, but rather Islam, especially in Asia and Africa. In terms of manufacturing output, Europe was about equal with China and India in 1750, so it was not obvious that Europeans would come to dominate the planet, nor that the population growth would be a lasting thing.
There also wasn't much evidence that anything like modern industrial society was on the horizon. Electricity and machines were still far from being introduced, and wealthy elites still provided leadership, while rural peasants were the primary lower social group. In addition, countries were still governed by kings and nobles, and females were subordinate almost everywhere. In short, modern society hardly seemed fast approaching, and most people still lived in long-established traditional ways.
Overall, this era was as much a late agrarian era as it was an early modern era. It can best be described as a time of transition, much as most time periods can be seen as.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)