Smith PSA

Smith, Adams. The Wealth of Nations (Excerpts). Modified from the Modern History Internet Sourcebook. 1776. Fordham University. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/adamsmith-summary.asp (accessed on September 30, 2013)

In the book "The Wealth of Nations", author Alex Smith focuses on a different economic strategy that is a better fit for the world. Smith is an honest and trustworthy source. He is not only educated but also was a professor at the University of Glasgow. At Glasgow he was known for his insightful lectures that drew many people. Smith known as the father of capitalism had a good life and was never really in a position of being financially unstable. Smith's ideas most related to Capitalism. Smith believed that the harder one worked. Some men that most likely influenced Smith's thoughts were Voltaire, and Rossoue. One reason Smith liked the idea of capitalism was because for a good portion of his adult life he toured Europe with the stepson of Charles Townshend. This affected him because he got to travel all over Europe observing different styles of living and economies.

Luddite Letter

Dear Cousin Tom,
I am really starting to get annoyed with them. The Luddite's have been protesting industrialism for weeks now. They have protested by cross dressing, attacking machines factories, and even having there leader Ned Ludd send threatening letters to us here in Nottingham. I spoke to one of the Luddite prisoners we captured and he said its not that they hate technology, but they hate the fact that it is being misused. Personally I think they are just mad because the machines are faster and make better quality wool and cotton. The machines put them out of the job and forced them to work in the factories.

As a soldier payed by the government I am completely against the Luddite's ways. Why would I support someone who is attacking there own country because they are mad that the machines took their jobs. Soon after the industrial revolution begun I was starting to get impacted by it. I was sent to Nottingham to defend a factory from some Luddite's that had been terrorizing it. I have been here for weeks trying to catch Ned Ludd so we can end this revolt for good, it is said he lives in Sherwood forest. Sadly though our stakeouts have proved useless because it seems he doesn't get his hands dirty.

I must end this letter here for I have another night of waiting and hoping that we can catch the man who caused this mess.

Your Cousin,
Ryan

Curator Post

In order to make our poster my group went through a series of steps.  First we all read each document and then discussed them as a group to get the best idea about the document. Once we did that we wrote down on the outline the first draft of our captions. Then we refined and perfected them to the best of our abilities. It is so important to curate because curating is a great way to give a lot if information clearly in not a lot of words and that is what you want on a poster as to not bore the reader and keep them interested in the poster. The sources we analyzed were all about how steam engines  and railroads improved trade and the lives of the people in Europe during the time. Our exhibit is laid out in a way that each caption you read will give you a helpful load of information that will make you want to read what else the poster has to say.  Almost as if your guided by a railroad. We thought of our title by trying to combine the concepts we had put on the poster. When visitors looked at my poster I hoped they learned about the steam engine and the impact it had on Europe.

Two things I learned from a poster were that children were working in dangerous conditions and that they were working complicated machines every day. Another two things I learned were the power loom didn't need people to power it and the spinning jenny made weavers obsolete. Another thing I learned was slaves was a major part of the industrial revolution and Britain imported cotton from all over the world. I also learned that mostly everybody worked in factories during the revolution and all you could hear were machines. I also learned that people who weren't high class had terrible living conditions.

Engels PSA Assignment

Engels, Friedrich. The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844. London: Swan Sonnenschein            & Co, 1892.

Friedrich Engels is a believable and trustworthy man. I know this for several reasons. One reason he is a trusted person is because he lived during the time of these events. Another reason for him being a trusting source is because he experienced or because he saw other people in these conditions. He is also a trusted source because he was a well respected philosopher. To help him with his research he met Mary Burns who was his guide through Manchester and showed him districts with terrible conditions for his research. Mary Burns was a worker who experienced the problems  in Manchester. Engels was appalled at the conditions in Manchester. He claimed that some parts were almost impossible for people to live in. He said that he was astounded by how much filth there was and little amount of room for a persons living quarters.  The reason Engels wrote about the living conditions in Manchester was to show people how bad some of the districts were and to tell people if they wish "to see in how little space a human being can move, how little air - and such air! - he can breathe, how little of civilisation he may share and yet live". Manchester was a manufacturing town for England, one of the largest actually. It had many districts separating the workers not in the same field from each other.Some districts were kept better than others. For example one of the worst courts to live was Allen's Court . The filth was so bad the sanitary police had evacuate it to clean it. In order to persuade me Engels often used negative words live filth, and dirty when he was talking about Manchester. 

***Couldn't indent every line after the first in the citation and annotation. 

 

Socratic Seminar Review

The situation in Syria has changed a lot since the discussion. At this point in time the UN seems to be finalizing a plan to end the chaos. Earlier this week was a different story. The UN was in a stalemate and had no plan. Throughout the Socratic seminar I noticed that most participants had a strong grasp on the concept.They made several good points by citing their sources and using quotes. The participants in the meeting were split between people who supported foreign intervention and those who did not. The people who did not support it felt that it was important not to interfere because of the rising tensions between the US and other countries (Iran, Russia, etc.) and that the US won't help the situation by adding bullets or bombs. Although I disagree with their decision I see there point. Both sides made some good points to defend their cases. Although they did give a lot of good information I feel they didn't touch on some subjects as much as others. For example I feel like they did not talk a lot about the origin of the problem in Syria. If they spent a little more time on that everyone would have been on the same page.  

They discussed many options in their meeting. An idea they had was to simply follow Obama's plan of using military force. Then they realized it was be more harmful than helpful. Forcing peace would stop the use of tanks and missiles, but it wouldn't settle any problems between the two parties. A peace treaty was impossible because both would refuse to make peace after what the others had done. Sending guns to the rebels would just cause more bloodshed. Taking away the Assad regimes chemical weapons wasn't a bad idea, but there was still going to be a lot of bloodshed between the two parties. The majority of the group was leaning towards foreign intervention seeing as it would be the most logical choice.

In my opinion I think the meeting went rather well. There weren't any lulls that I noticed and the conversation had a great flow to it. I feel the meeting was most productive when new info surfaced and people got to add their opinions to it. The least productive part of the meeting was when information was repeated. It caused a slight pause that stopped the flow of the conversation

In my opinion I agree that with the idea of crippling crippling? Assad by taking away his weapons. This way Obama would not look weak when he said chemical weapons were the "red line" and we would not anger Russia, Iran or China by attacking their ally. All three countries agreed making Assad hand over the weapons was the best choice. The least viable would be to try to use military force while Russia and China are against it because it isn't worth fighting with them over something like this. That could lead to a much larger war that would do harm the US and its allies.

All in all the best choice was the one the UN made.