|
Post by Tys on Feb 14, 2007 0:07:24 GMT -5
>.> no because I haven't procrastinated with anyting recently that will hurt my lab partner who is the same person as my history partner =D
|
|
|
Post by cool guest on Feb 19, 2007 17:37:39 GMT -5
do u have the background info for me to put on the poster? if not, its ok, just bring them into class and we can put it together then
|
|
|
Post by Tys on Feb 19, 2007 17:41:45 GMT -5
>.>the past days have not been good with not procrastinating...sorry...I'll get it done today....sometime.....
|
|
|
Post by cool guest on Feb 19, 2007 17:53:49 GMT -5
lol its ok, ive been doing the same thing
|
|
|
Post by Tys on Feb 19, 2007 22:26:35 GMT -5
There were several reasons why Russians left their home land and went to America. Trouble with farming caused many Russians to migrate between the years of 1905 and 1910. Also around the same time, Russians Jews from the southern part of Russian also left their home lands because of extreme hatred from the Gentiles. Also the treatment from the Czar was less then kind. Another cause of Russian migration was the Russian Civil War, between the Red Communist Army and the White Anti-Communist army between the years of 1918-1922. The worse fighting of the war happened during 1918 through 1920.
The conditions on the trip to American differ between the classes, first, second and third. Though all of them had in common, that they had to travel through other countries to get to the port, and that could have been longer then the sea voyage. The voyage held many different dangers, such as storms, sickness because of the dirtiness of the boat and other such related things. The entry to America was many times worse for the third class. They were questioned many times more then the other two classes, also they had to deal with degrading physical and mental examinations. They were questioned about such things as names, ages, jobs, home country, where they are going, if they have been in prison and other such questions.
><!! all the notes for their life in america went boom T.T......I'll be need find them again...freaking procrastination isn't good...and now I feel bad...stupid project...
|
|
|
Post by Oliver on Feb 19, 2007 23:32:20 GMT -5
*holds up an 'I told you so' sign and then goes back to studying Japanese* >.>;
|
|
|
Post by cool guest on Feb 20, 2007 22:54:22 GMT -5
Life in America
Once the immigrants were in America, they had to learn to read, write, and speak English very quickly. If they didn’t, they would have trouble communicating, and would also probably be discriminated against. The immigrants would also have to find a job to support their family and a house to live in. Most of the jobs that were available at that time were very low-paying jobs that helped the family make just enough money to get by. Most immigrants lived in the cities near where the ships came in because those areas were the cheapest ones to live in. Life was very difficult for immigrants of this time period.
this is what i got from the notes she gave us..it might work
|
|
|
Post by Shikaru on Mar 5, 2007 9:38:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Oliver on Mar 6, 2007 22:26:59 GMT -5
Here's a thought... How about communism, laissezfreakingshithead, and the person who stole the computer mouse.. die.
Laissez-Faire economics, the belief that the government should keep a "hands off" approach when it came to business, and communism, the belief that class struggle is inevitable in society are two completely different views on the way things in a country should be run. One insists on no government intervention while the other relies on it. During the industrial revolution, these two viewpoints were issues that brought of major controversy between working classes and business owners. The only one that would, for the most part, stick around past the industrial age and influence the world would be communism.
Laissez-Faire had it's share of supporters in the industrial age. One supporter was Adam Smith, a Scottish economist and writer of An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Smith believed that the self-interest of a laissez-faire economy would bring public welfare. He was not alone in his belief. Others, such as Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo, were also a fan of Laissez-faire. Each believed that the government should stay out of business and individuals should be left to improve their lot through thrift, hard work, and limiting the size of their families.
Though Laissez-faire was popular among business owners who found things were cheaper without safety precautions and small children working dangerous jobs, it was eradicated through the efforts reformists aimed for better working conditions. In order for workers to obtain shorter hours and safer conditions in which to work, the practice of laissez-faire economic needed to be done away with. Without government regulations, there were no limitations to say that a worker could only work for so many hours and was entitled to a weekend off. The owners of the business established working hours as they saw fit, which usually meant the hours were long and tedious.
Communism, however, has outlived Laissez-faire. It's ideas were brought up by the Communist Manifesto, written by Karl Marx. Marx based the book off of history, claiming that struggle between classes was unavoidable. His ideas were based on the "have" and "have nots" of society. Those of a working class were considered the "have nots" and were there for lower, which Marx believed was due to capitalism. He believed Capitalism created prosperity for only a few individuals and not for many. Communism focuses more on the prosperity of everyone in the community.
In theory, communism sounds like a good idea, and although it has been tried many times and failed, it is a reoccurring attempt at a government throughout history. Countries such as Russia and China have attempted methods of communism which have shaped the government of them today. The belief of communism outlasted that of laissez-fair and has been repeatedly tried among nations to make them better, despite that fact that it doesn't work the way it was meant to by Karl Marx.
|
|
|
Post by Oliver on Mar 8, 2007 2:53:24 GMT -5
Amber Stacey Research Outline 7 March 2007
I. Introduction A. B. In Lous Lowry’s The Giver, the “utopian” society is in truth a dystopia due to the eradication of difference within the community, the disposal of individual choice, and the limitation of freedom.
II. The community eradicates difference, reverting to “sameness” to keep order. A. The people of the community are raised to not bring up difference. a. It’s considered rude to ask personal questions that might imply difference. It is awkward and not easy to speak about. i.) “It was the sort of thing one didn’t ask a friend about because it might fall into the uncomfortable category of ‘being different’.” (The Giver. Pg. 38) b. More comfortable, easier, pleasant to talk about what’s the same. It’s more familiar and less rude. i.) “Always better, less rude, to talk about things that were the same.” (The Giver. Pg. 38) c. The Chief Elder admits that the citizens are raised to not be different. i.) “You Elevens have spent all your years till now learning to fit in, to standardize your behavior, to curb any impulse that might set you apart from the group.” (The Giver pg. 52) ii.) “Citizens conform to uniform expectations. Individuality and dissent is bad.” (Dystopia definition and characteristics. Read. Think .Learn.) B. Different natural occurrence were done away with to create “sameness”. a. There was once snow and sunshine but they climate control was developed to to make the weather predictable and easier to grow things in. i.)”Climate control. Snow made growing food difficult, limited the agriculture periods. And unpredictable weather made transportation almost impossible at times. It wasn’t a practical thing, so it became obsolete when we went to sameness.” (The Giver pg. 84) b. The people of the community lack the ability to see color. Things appear in in black and white which makes skin, hair, and eye color just about the same except when it comes to Jona’s pale eyes that he shares with the Giver and a girl in the six age group. i.)”...his people literally have limited vision (they can only see in black and white, so they do not notice racial difference, or colors of any kind..” (Over view of The Giver - Galenet)
|
|
|
Post by Tys on Mar 14, 2007 12:12:36 GMT -5
amelia bloomer (May 27, 1818—December 30, 1894) was an American women's rights and temperance advocate. She received only two years of formal schooling. The Lily, which she began publishing in 1849. When Amelia was 22, she married a lawyer by the name of Dexter Bloomer. He encouraged her to write for his newspaper One of the major causes promoted by Amelia was a change in dress standards for women so that they would be less restrictive. wearing of shorter skirts, but with undergarments reaching to the ankles to preserve modesty ankle-length garments came to be known as "bloomers" after her Amelia served as president of the Iowa Woman Suffrage Association. She died at Council Bluffs, Iowa. Amelia was also known as Amanda Bloomer, particularly in Great Britain.1850's: Amanda Bloomer goes to England to popularize her clothing - most every one is appalled with the notable exception of Queen Victoria who finds these modern cycling ladies quite sensible. The press and most everyone in a position of power makes life truly hell on wheels for the ladies following the bitch www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAWbloomer.htmnext few years she wrote articles in favour for prohibition and women's rights. Bloomer used the journal to promote the causes of woman's suffrage, temperance, marriage law reform and higher education for women. The Lily was a great success and quickly built a circulation of over 4,000. In 1851 Bloomer began to publish articles concerning women's clothing. The Lily was a great success and quickly built a circulation of over 4,000. In 1851 Bloomer began to publish articles concerning women's clothing. Female fashion at the time consisted of tightly laced corsets, layers of petticoats and floor-length dresses. Bloomer began to advocate the wearing of clothes that had first been worn by Fanny Wright and the women living in the socialist commune, New Harmony in the 1820s. This included loose bodices, ankle-length pantaloons and a dress cut to above the knee
|
|
|
Post by cool guest on Mar 14, 2007 12:21:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cool guest on Mar 14, 2007 20:10:00 GMT -5
what did you do to change america? what did you think about the temperance movement? why did you think ladies needed a change in fashion? what problems did long skirts cause? how did you fix the issue? what did others think of you and your idea? (that can be split into 2 questions if we need to) how did you get your idea to be accepted by the community? did you have the support of other women? how did you mass produce the bloomers? feel free to change them however you want or add or take some away if you cant find enough info
|
|
|
Post by Tys on Mar 14, 2007 20:19:20 GMT -5
those questions are good^^ good job! >.> did you give your pen that chipmunk yet? *isn't procrastinating on getting info* <.<''
|
|
|
Post by Oliver on Mar 14, 2007 21:54:58 GMT -5
Tyson havn't we established procrastination is bad?
*isn't just startingMetternich paper for Aulenbach that was started like a month ago and is due Friday* >.>;;;
|
|