Saturday, November 29, 2014

Racial Prejudice in the Past and Present

The essential question as we studied Latin American Revolutions was, "Why is it essential to acknowledge human value regardless of race?  How are the events of the Latin American Revolutions evidence of this social imperative?"  The essential question is still very important to think about today because racial prejudices are still prevalent in society, and continue to shape peoples' opinions of one another, and societies as wholes.  We were able to see the impact of race firsthand in our studies of Latin American Revolutions when we saw the pie chart of different races which made up Latin American culture and society at the time.  It was made up of 50% Indian peoples, 23% Creoles (White Europeans born in the New World), 11% slaves, 8% Mulattoes and free blacks, 7% Mestizos, and 1% Peninsulares (White Europeans).  The amount in which they catagorized people by their race, and created names based on race shows just how horrifically dependent these societies were on race.  The Peninsulares were the minority, only making up 1% of the population, yet they belittled others and hurt them simplay based on their race, so that they would be able to stay on top and control the 99% of other people within that society.














Gran Colombia 
Timeline-
  • April 19, 1810- a junta expels Spanish governor of the province of Venezuela and takes control 
  • July, 1811- National Assembly in Caracas formally declares Venezuela's independence 
  • July, 1812- Spanish authorities rally and recover a military initiative, regaining control of the entire province 
  • 1813- Simón Bolívar returned to Venezuela and won 6 successive engagements against Spanish forces 
  • August 6, 1813- entered Caracas and took dictoral control and power 
  • July, 1814- Bolívar lost Caracas again, then headed to Bogotá and recaptures it from Spain temporarily 
  • 1817- back in Venezuela, built an army on Orinoco River, deciding there that he will strike the capital city of New Granada
  • 1819- Bolívar's small force of 2500 men crossed a succession of flooded tributaries of the Orinoco, followed by a mountain crossing where a significant number of his men died
  • August 7, 1819- the Spanish army surrenders in an engagement at Boyocá
  • December 17, 1819- the republic of Colombia is proclaimed, covering the region of modern Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela
  • June 24, 1821- "The Liberator" wins a battle at Carabobo in Venezuela, giving him Caracas.  
  • May 24, 1822- Bolívar's favorite general, Antonio José de Sucre, wins a battle at Pinchicha, Ecuador, bringing the patriots into Quito.  
  • May, 1830- Bolívar resigns and later dies of tuberculosis
  • September, 1830- Ecuador and Venezuela formally secede from Gran Colombia
Our group's timeline outlines the main events of the revolution in Gran Colombia.  When we did a jigsaw and shared out what we discovered with other groups, we found that our similarities with Brazil and Mexico were that there were wars and battles fought during all of the revolutions, and that all of the oppositions to the revolution were European powers at the time.  The difference was that the battles were fought in all different countries.  Race was an issue in all three revolutions.  In Gran Colombia it was an issue because the Spanish governor of Venezuela that was overthrown, and originally ruled Gran Colonbia may have brought Spanish ideas about racial inequality over to Venezuela with him, and people within the society were being treated differerently because of Spain's control, so they wanted to be independent to escape the unequal treatment by that government.  Race was an issue in Mexico because there were racist royals who took land from the Indians and Mestizos, who Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla fought against.  Finally, race was an issue in Brazil because workers in mines became angry because they were working a tireless job they didn't want to do simply, based on their skin color.

The issue of race is still very apparent in the world today.  Just recently, think about the Ferguson, Missouri case, in which supposedly, an unarmed Michael Brown was shot by white police officer, Darren Wilson, of the Ferguson Police Department, showing how racial prejudice is still occuring in our law enforcement today.  Trayvon Martin is another example of racial prejudice, where he was shot to death in Sanford, Florida by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, because Trayvon "looked suspicious", when in reality all he was carrying was juice and skittles from a local convenience store.  These two are only a few of the examples of how racial prejudice is still very apparent in our culture in the U.S. today, as well as worldwide.

Friday, November 21, 2014

The Many Legacies of Toussaint Louverture

Toussaint Louverture possessed a multitude of important qualities in being a liberator of slaves, a military commander, and a ruler of Saint Domingue, leading to his success in making Saint Domingue an independent country not under French rule, and in ending slavery in Saint Domingue.  However, the most important role that he played in his life was a liberator of slaves- his actions in abolishing slavery in Saint Domingue, and in leading the slaves in an uprising to their freedom was the origin of all of the other important steps he took in other areas, both governmental and military.

Louverture’s inspiration for  his role as a liberator of slaves may have began when Louverture was a young slave,"...he served as a herder, then a coachman, and later, an overseer of fellow slaves in the field," (Background Essay). Louverture's past as a slave may have helped him to be able to understand the slaves' situations, feelings, and desires for freedom, leading him to rise up as a leader against the system of slavery. The slaves began to rise up against slavery because of the Declaration of the Rights of Man when, "1789: The French Revolution begins," (Document A).  However, having said that, a few years later the French Directory became the government that ruled France between 1795 and 1799, and Louverture was worried that they would reinstate slavery.  Louverture wrote them a letter advising them not to, saying, “Could men who have once enjoyed the benefits of liberty look on calmly while it is taken from them!  They bore their chains when they knew no condition of life better than that of slavery,” (Document B).  Thankfully, the French Directory did not reinstate slavery, and Louverture continued in building a new society which did not involve slavery of any kind.  He signed the Saint Domingue Constitution of 1801, in which it says in Article 3, “There cannot exist slaves in this territory, servitude is therein forever abolished.  All men are born, live and die free and French,” (Document C).

Louverture was also a crucial military leader at the time of the Haitian Revolution.  Louverture took the reins as leader and steered the 4,000 man rebel army into battle, fighting against French troops on the island in 1793.  He not only possessed military intelligence but also inspiration for his troops, some of his famous words before battle being, “Here come the enslavers of our race.  All France is coming to St. Domingo, to try again to put the fetters upon our limbs; but not France, with all her troops of the Rhine, the Alps, the Nile, the Tiber, nor all Europe to help her, can extinguish the soul of Africa,” (Document F).  By successfully fighting the French forces there on the island of Saint Domingue, the French government abolished all slavery in the colonies in 1794, accomplishing his goal of freeing the slaves of the island.  However, Louverture also had to make some very tough decisions regarding his military leadership as well.  After slavery was abolished in Saint Domingue, there was a group of rebels who did not agree with having to do the same work under the same master that they did when they were enslaved, although they were being paid.  This reminded them too much of their past work as slaves, and they wanted to experience their freedom more fully.  This group of rebels was led by Hyacinthe Moyse, Louverture’s nephew, and he led a rebellion on October 29, 1801, “...whites were massacred from Fort Liberté to the gates of Cap Français.  The new insurrection swept all over the Northern Department within two days… The war cry of the rebels was ‘General Moyse is with us- death to all the whites,” (Document E).  This enraged Louverture, causing him to order some of the rebels to step out of the ranks and kill themselves, as well as set his own nephew up for execution by a firing squad.  This shows just how strong-willed Louverture was, that he had to put what he thought was the  actions that were for the good of the country ahead of family.

Finally, Louverture’s role as a ruler of Saint Domingue was also an important part of his legacy.  Louverture began to take the form of the leader of the newly free Saint Domingue, and wrote many legal documents in making an effort to reform the society after such a drastic change in it occurred, the abolition of slavery.  Louverture outlined many ideas about new forms of work, adn rules regarding it, in the Proclamation on November 25, 1801, such as, ”As soon as a child can walk, he should be employed on the plantation according to his strength in some useful work…” (Document D).  By Louverture’s involvement and power in the government of Saint Domingue, he was able to reshape the social structure and society as a whole, because of how dependent Saint Domingue’s whole societal structure originally was on slavery.

Although all of the roles that Louverture played in the Haitian Revolution, liberator of slaves, military leader, and ruler of Saint Domingue alike, liberator of slaves is the most important, and is the way he should be remembered.  Not only was this role the most important and the most formative for the island of Saint Domingue and for the fight towards the abolition of slavery as a whole, but it was also what created his other roles in the Haitian Revolution as well.  If he had not been a liberator of slaves, he would have never been a military leader in the fight against slavery, and he never would have been a ruler of Saint Domingue because he never would have had a chance to reshape and form the government without the abolition of slavery.

Saturday, November 8, 2014

European Revolutions of 1830 and 1848

The essential question for this unit was "were the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 really failures as many historians have concluded?"  In order to truly be able to answer this question, we focused on five different, crucial revolutions between 1830 and 1848, the Decembrist Revolt, the French Revolution of 1830, the French Revolution of 1848, the Frankfurt Assembly, and the Hungarian Revolution of 1848.  In order to really understand what the essential question was asking of us, and to ensure that we would answer the essential question accurately, we outlined in small groups what a scale of success would look like.  Our group's scale included five benchmarks- nothing changes at all based on the revolution (complete failure), the fighting leads to destruction and small governmental change (partial failure), only half of the country is satisfied with the changes (neutral), the majority of the country is happy with the changes (partial success), and the government changes for the better and all the people of the country in general are happy (complete success).  Creating this scale allowed us to be able to more clearly define which revolutions were successful and which were not, answering the essential question.  We then broke up into different, smaller groups, each group receiving one revolution to learn all information about our specific revolution.  Each group then took notes based on articles that we received about each revolution.  We defined the basics of the revolution first, which country it took place in, when it took place, what the goals were, who the opponent was, what the outcome was, and the reasons for success or failure.  We then categorized each source as goals, opponent, or outcome, determined where our revolution fit on the scale of success, and then created a SurveyMonkey survey for the rest of the class to take after reading the documents provided about each revolution.  

Our group's revolution was the Hungarian Revolution of 1848.  This revolution took place in Hungary, Austria, and the Czech Republic in approximately 1848.  The revolution began in Austria, causing Metternich to flee, and spread to Hungary where Louis Koussouth led the HUngarian nationalist movement wanting an independent government, an end to serfdom, and a written constitution.  The Czechs made similar demands as the Hungarian nationalists in Prague.  According to the intro document, "Overwhelmed by events, the Austrian government agreed to the reforms.  The gains were temporary."  The document also states, "Austrian troops soon regained control of Vienna and Prague.  With Russian help, Austrian forces also smashed the rebels in Budapest.  Many were imprisoned, executed, or forced into exile."  One final loss of the revolutionaries was that many of the revolutionary leaders fled, specifically Koussouth.  Using this information, as well as other information from the other primary sources, we created our SurveyMonkey: 
One question about the Hungarian Revolution of 1848 included in our SurveyMonkey
Another example of a question included in our SurveyMonkey survey

I think that historians are wrong, and that in general the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 were more successes than they were failures.  The only true failure was the Decembrist Revolt in which the rebels got nowhere, and many were killed and jailed, as declared by Nicholas I, "“The leaders and the instigators of the conspiracy will be dealt with without pity, without mercy.  The law demands retribution and, in their cases, I will not use my power to grant mercy.  I will be unbending; it is my duty to give this lesson to Russia and to Europe,” (Decembrist Revolt Document).  However, all of the other revolutions involved some element of success, even if not completely successful or permanent, there was still a small change, and most importantly, the possibility for change to occur again in the future.  For example, the Hungarian Revolution was not very successful, the revolutionary leaders fled, and many rebels were jailed or killed, but at one point in time they were able to dissolve the Diet, "We dissolve the Diet by this our Decree; so that after the publication of our present Sovereign Rescript, the Diet has immediately to close its Session," (Hungarian Revolution Document- Imperial Manifesto Appointing Baron Joseph Jellachich Royal Lieutenant and Civil and Military Commissary of Hungary).  Another example of a partially successful revolution was the French Revolution of 1848.  Although their new president Louis Napoleon I ended up not doing a good job in leading the country, the road that the French took to get there by getting Louis Phillipe to abdicate his throne, and "... the National Assembly, dominated by members who wanted to restore order, issued a constitution for the Second Republic. It created a strong president and a one-house legislature. But it also gave the vote to all adult men, the widest suffrage in the world at the time. Nine million Frenchmen now could vote, compared with only 200,000 who had that right before," (French Revolution of 1848 document).  Although none of the revolutions were complete successes, they allowed for some small changes to occur, which helped ignite the spark for more successful revolutions in years to come.