Westward Expansion

Ah, the beautiful land of California, and the rustic southern wonderland of Texas. Both of these states are defining factors and contributors to what foreigners imagine the Unite States to be. Can you just imagine what we'd be without them? Many people that I've talked to from other parts of the world always romanticize the idea of living in California, figuring that it would be their go-to location if and when they could ever move over to the States. But the way we obtained the area wasn't the most righteous of systems, but to what cost? We knew were going to win the battle for the states, and the Mexicans knew that they were going to lose, but still, they continued to fight, and we continued to slaughter them, and all for chunks of land claimed to be filled with prospect and hope, take for example, the gold ore found in California.

Many flocked to go and strike rich in California, return home to their families and become successful in their area of expertise along with the bit of fortune they earned when they went panning for gold. This, like many other issues, was just another romanticized idea of what people wanted to believe would happen. Instead, there was a mass amount of suicide rates, death from the dangers of mining, and don't get me started on those dead by illness. Men couldn't return home to their families, as they had earned little to nothing, and what they did earn, they gambled away. Some people got in quarrels between races over who had the say-all for where they could pan or what they found.

It was a real mess, like many other facets of the formations of this country, yet in the end, when we think of California, we don't think of the devastation of the Gold Rush. Instead, we think of sunny skies, never-ending beaches along the coast, lush flora and fauna, and warm climates. To a point, do you think we still have the romanticized ideal of what we wish a place to be? Are we, and fellow foreigners, holding onto that illustrious hope of beautiful lands abroad to ease their reality, when and if they ever do make it over here? What will they do when the realize its not all what the advertisers say it was?

The Arrogance of the Southern States Pre-Independence from Britain.

Arrogance, I could also use other, more profane, words to describe how I loathe the character of the whites in the mid to late 18th century in South Carolina. Note, this doesn't not directly correlate with the lecture from this week, but I felt the need to post this in my blog on the Formative Period of America, as it certainly pertains. The (rather God-awful) book I'm reading currently, The Hanging of Thomas Jeremiah, is in reality an essay on the abuses of slaves by white slave-holders and the Patriots of the South nearing the Revolution. But I shall go on into more detail of the book in my analysis.

I must point out though, that it absolutely frosts my cookies that these people are so indignant that they feel they can rule over everything. It seems like they have some law set up, but most of the time, they just do whatever they feel like. Certain members of their government and active political parties such as the Patriots brainwash even their own citizens of South Carolina to make them believe whatever they see fit. They will punish innocent men just to show other slaves that rebelling would not be a good idea. Did they really think that if the slaves were going to rebel that they'd shake in their boots because the radical parts of government decided to hang a few slaves? Hello! They'd been doing that for ages, and that wasn't going to stop the slaves.

And this whole idea of Protestant Christians against the Catholics, or the Christians who thought it was okay to have slaves because the Bible said so was ridiculous. Did they not realize that was more than a century ago when they had them? And they didn't all treat them like the scum of the earth either. Many people in the Bible respected their slaves, and there is no mention of any such treatment as the atrocities that the Southerners showed to their own slaves.

How is it that you can consider a slave a piece of commerce and merchandise but you can put them to jury as a human? If an apple tree did not grow as much fruit as the others around it would you hack it to the ground, would you burn it? This simply does not make sense. You cannot attempt to consider them both. It causes many problems and mix-ups, where its up to a few individuals to choose the fate of these people.

South Carolina seemed to be the heart of the radical patriot acts in the South, and it also seemed to show the most instability in governmental actions and ethics. There was quite a mix of people towards the turn of the century, but this only made South Carolina delegates even more crazed. Things were falling apart, and they were panicking. Radical groups panicking is never a good thing. They choose to act upon their emotions, and cause serious damage. I'm not at all surprised the Civil War occurred. It was a surefire way to attempt to put these crazed official back into reality, and make them pay for their 'hellish deeds' they so accused others of doing.

Andrew Jackson: Good or Bad towards progression?

Andrew Jackson, seventh president of the United States of America. Strong, stubborn, bull-headed, and powerful. He wasn't one to mess with, and would make sure a job would get done and get done just how he wanted. But that didn't always end in good measure. For example, one large fact that he's rather infamous for was his way of handling the Natives. Instead of trying to work with them (I can't blame the Natives for not wanting to work with the American people at this point, I wouldn't want to either if I were them), Jackson decides to 'relocate' them for their own good, which we all know is a load of crap. The American citizens wanted their land, and instead of fighting wars over it, Jackson made it clear to the Natives that they would have to leave their homeland and everything they knew to Oklahoma, to start anew. This not only caused thousands of people to die along the journey there, but was it ever considered that there could be other Natives living in Oklahoma that didn't want to give up their own land to share with these foreign natives? Surely not, or perhaps, maybe, but it wasn't taken too seriously by Jackson, as he had hardly any concern for these people once they marched off of his own property which he could then use for his own domestication and uses for expansion, never mind what any other people thought.

In my opinion, Jackson didn't really do much good for the United States in the areas of accepting diversity. Imagine if all presidents were like him! Our allowances of such a diverse level of populous that we currently have would be severely decreased. I wouldn't be surprised if we still had slaves and only white folks could live in safety in America. Thank goodness other leaders came into play with other opinions on how to rule.