American History Homework Ten Answers - Student Three

Steven m

1. I definitely should have taken your advice in memorizing the presidents. It's hard to keep them straight in that era in between the Era of Good feelings and the Civil War. I think I could improve with that the most. Also, I should mark the questions I haven't answered to be sure I don't miss any.

Excellent points.

2. I liked number 15. The history of partisan politics and what a party favors is a fascinating study. History is full of people, parties, and positions flip-flopping in kaleidoscope fashion.

Superb! Could use as a model.

3. The Scopes trial was obviously an example of judical activism. Everyone knew the teacher had taught evolution, this was just a chance for Darrow and Bryan to argue as to whether the law was right or not. Undoubtedly, Scopes had broken the law: when Darrow realized that the best he could hope for was the jury declaring the State law invalid, he gave up. The Court soon tired of the Bryan's debates with Darrow, and Darrow's bickering with Bryan. So the "evidence" became void for both sides: all they had to work with was words. This is why the Scopes trial was not a fair fight between Creation and Evolution. There was no science on either side.

On Wikipedia, the fact that Darrow dodged his deal with Bryan is downplayed, and his act of pleading guilty is cunningly worded. It says "Darrow asked the judge to bring in the jury only to have them come to a guilty verdict." [1]

Well done! That's an insightful catch about Wikipedia. I'll add it to our Bias in Wikipedia.

4. This comes down to deciding what the greater good is, and to whom you owe more allegience, your country or the human race? Obviously, if the war would end faster by our country joining it, it would be better for the world for us to get our hands dirty. But is it worth putting our own nation in harms way? Never mind that in many cases the war comes to our nation whether we go to the war or not. Is our duty first to help as many people on earth as we can, or is it to our own country first?

I feel our devotion belongs to our country, America, first -- at least, if the playing field is level, if their war is as bad as ours. But in this case, that of World War I, the atrocities of the enemy were so vile that the act of going to war was more righteous than not going to war. If our strength had been less than theirs, I would not be so sure as to whether it was worth it to go. The idea is, first to avoid war until the benefit to the world strongly outweighs the benefit to ourselves. And second, to find the scenerio with the least bloodshed once we've gone to war. With these principles, I feel is easier to determine when to go to war, which, in 1917, was a good decision.

Excellent analysis. Truly superb!!!

5. He was rough, smart, and sure of himself. I love how he loved the wilderness of our land, but having National Parks can be annoying nowadays.

He said "I did not usurp power, but I did greatly broaden the use of executive power." In the U.S., with the series of checks and balances, you're always taking power from somebody. Like Jackson, or perhaps Reagan, I think he did very admirable things in expanding executive power. But inevitebly, the authority that was removed from the bottom never made its way back down, and today we live with a government more centralist then Jefferson ever would have wanted.

Terrific analysis. Will use as a model!

6.

Oh no, what happened here? At least try. (Minus 10).

7. Teddy Roosevelt is pulling Russia and Japan apart by the ears, administering peace for them.

No, Teddy Roosevelt is bringing them together to make peace.

H1. Write about any military battle or innovation or tactic in World War I.

Let me know if you fill this in.

H2. What is your view of the limitations on free speech during World War I?

Let me know if you fill this in.

Unfinished. Great work for what you've done so far!--Aschlafly 14:27, 22 November 2008 (EST)