Tuesday, September 1, 2015

The American West

What themes stood out most to you in the assigned readings and lecture this week?  What questions did the lectures and readings raise for you?  Please post your responses in the comment section below.

16 comments:

  1. I think the theme that stood out most to me was the parallel between American and European Social Darwinism, particularly embodied in the document by Richard Pratt. Whether it be Africa or the American West, both groups displayed a huge in-group bias by proclaiming it a duty to civilize the "savages" of these respective unknown territories. Statements like these affirm the facetious view by Europeans and those of European descent that their society is both the most advanced and cultured, downplaying hundreds if not thousands of years of African and Native American cultural growth. My main question from the lectures was how will this huge tension between differing racial and socioeconomic classes play out in the American West without a movement filled with mass violence?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The theme that stood out to me this week was syndicalism and the exploitative and rapid capitalism that led to it. The entrepreneurs that came to the west, bought hard rock mines, and formed new communities centered on the mines exploited their control over the people by dominating the town in every aspect.
    A question I had from the lectures was why people continued to go on strike, when there were many strikebreakers ready to accept a lower wage? Also, when the black fled to the Indian Territory during the Exoduster Movement, how did the Indians in that territory react? Did they simply leave each other alone or were there tensions that arose?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was most intrigued by the Western Federation of Miners and the Cooperation Idea from our lectures. With workers no longer under control of their companies, they had opportunity for freedom in their civic, social, and work lives. But with such a diverse population in the West - Mormon, Christian, Chinese, Mexican - there must have been prejudices and conflicts that arose out of the WFM. If the white Christians held majority over policy making in these hospitals, in what ways were the minorities held short? It's funny to think, if it is true that minority miners were discriminated against, that the majority Catholic miners held some autonomy over the other groups. While the capitalist, mine-owning, town leaders had control over the miners, the miners may have had control over their own subgroups.

    Or, after the "tyranny" of Western capitalists, the miners were completely democratic and ignored racial and ethnic differences because they knew it was detrimental.

    - Logan

    ReplyDelete
  4. What really stood out to me was the overall selfish attitude of the American people during the time period. Whether it be desiring to take the land Native Americans inhabited or not wanting "aliens" to take their jobs for lower wages, the white population at the time seemed inclined on repressing any minority group. The one question that arose for me during the lectures is fairly specific: Did Indian Territories not have to have to follow U.S. law? More specifically, how could Native Americans legally own slaves in the post-Civil War era after slavery had already been abolished?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The thing that stood out to me the most this week was the idea (from Monday) that the development of the West can be seen as a "West to East" movement as opposed to the "East to West" way that we currently view it. I understand the value of accounting for the diversity of the Native Americans and their presence in the area, and the impact that frontier life had on the American character, but can't shake the idea that America's story is one of moving from East to West. Did the East (with its population centers and commerce) or the West (with its frontier lifestyle and "rugged individualism") contribute more to the development of the United States?
    Also I deleted my last post to fix a typo.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I thought that our discussion in class today about the split labor theory with regards to Chinese immigrants, accepting extremely low wages and taking jobs from Americans was interesting because it is a dynamic that still has a major presence in our society today. In the late 1800s, Chinese immigrants came to the US to work in the gold mines and on the railroads, both hard and physically demanding jobs, but were met by American workers upset over the loss of their jobs to less expensive labor. Mexican immigrants today face the same hatred and discrimination for "stealing jobs" from American citizens. I found these similarities interesting because we like to think that we have become a much more tolerant society, when in fact we are just as judgmental and harsh on immigrants today as we were 130 years ago. My question was whether the treatment of Chinese and other immigrant workers improved once the gold rush had declined and more factory jobs were becoming available?

    ReplyDelete
  8. One theme that stood out to me was the treatment of the Native Americans. It amazes me how greedy and entitled Americans felt and I will never understand how they justified the terrible actions they took against the Indians, whether it was pursuing acts of war, such as the Battle of the Little Big Horn, or attempting to "citizenize" them. Chief Joseph's accounts of the experiences both he and his father had with Americans gave insight on how pushy the Americans were being. I also found the Western Confederation of Miners and the initiative the group took to change their desperate working situations interesting. The strides they took towards better treatment did raise a question for me, where were the hospitals the Western Confederation of Miners created located if the mine owners also owned the town? I would think the mine owner and his exploitative nature would make it difficult for the miners to develop a hospital in which they received accurate diagnoses potentially keeping them from work.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The one thing that stood out to me was the Split Labor Theory, which states that the labor market was segmented into different pools of workers who were usually grouped by race. This kind of labor market benefited the employers, because they could choose the cheapest pool of workers and kept workers of different races against one another, thus won't work together against the employers. This reminds me of a book I read before called Lakota Woman. Author Mary Crow Dog talked about Indian boarding schools, where the Indian kids with lighter skin color were treated better than the ones with darker skin. Now it seems to me that this two methods achieved the same goal.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The one thing that stood out to me was the Split Labor Theory, which states that the labor market was segmented into different pools of workers who were usually grouped by race. This kind of labor market benefited the employers, because they could choose the cheapest pool of workers and kept workers of different races against one another, thus won't work together against the employers. This reminds me of a book I read before called Lakota Woman. Author Mary Crow Dog talked about Indian boarding schools, where the Indian kids with lighter skin color were treated better than the ones with darker skin. Now it seems to me that this two methods achieved the same goal.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The theme that stood out to me most was the discrimination the Chinese faced in the West during this time period. While reading, "Pun Chi Appeals to Congress in Behalf of the Chinese Immigrants in California," I could not help but feel emotionally moved by what hardships they had faced. They were subject to robbery and murder without any repercussions and treated as less than human. All they wanted to do was earn enough to survive out in the West like everyone else and they were willing to work hard for it, but prejudice stood in the way. A question I had from Wednesday's lecture was, what was the relationship between the strikebreakers and the strikers? There must have been a good amount of tension between the two groups and I was curious about what potential conflict could have ensued.

    ReplyDelete
  12. From Alex Sasse:

    "The theme that most stood out to me was the consistent maltreatment of native Americans and any "non-white" races. While racism was still prevalent, even with the recent abolition of slavery, the fact that it was not simply focused entirely on one group was rather surprising. While each group may have faced different types of discrimination, they all faced it nonetheless. A question that I thought of during lecture today was whether the social contract theory was used by business owners to prevent any sort of movement for greater freedoms from any one race and to encourage dissent among the different workers. The "assimilation" undertaken by many races does not seem to be an assimilation into the American culture, but rather an assimilation into the servitude of the American Culture, helping to grow the country and the owners' interests, while not furthering their own."

    ReplyDelete
  13. From Emma Winburne:

    "What I found most interesting from this week was the concept of the cooperative idea. The owners of the mines in the mine towns were oppressive and greedy. They paid their workers in script, which could only be used in their stores, and controlled the government in the area. The miners used the cooperative idea to band together against the owners and gain their freedom. They created their own hospitals, payment agents, and helped get safety and health laws enacted in order to protect the miners. However, at the same time, racism clouded the West and the mines. The Chinese were abused for their labor and could hardly stand up for themselves, while the former slaves were fled to Kansas in the Exoduster Movement in order to flee severe racism. At the same time that friendship and bonding happened between the white miners, severe separation and abuse of the races was a big problem in the West."

    ReplyDelete
  14. One part of the lecture that I felt was interesting was the idea of how diverse the West really was. It seems that most information regarding the West during this time period portray it as a place that was only inhabited by Native American tribes and gold miners, and that otherwise, it was empty. However, we learned that the West had all types of different religions and ethnicities, which ignited many conflicts. One question I was left with is in regard to this huge diversity that was prevalent in the West. How did this diversity shape the West's identity during this time period? How was the identity of the West set apart from that of the East? Was this diversity prevalent in the East as well?

    ReplyDelete

  15. The major theme that stood out to me was the conflict between American settlers and Native Americans over land. Also, the role of the environment and the natural world during this time period stood out to me as well. American’s slaughtered the buffalo, and in turn eliminated many nomadic tribes way of life. The Native Americans had no sense of fixed boundaries, yet the American government continuously tried to create treaties that formed land restrictions. The one question I had from the lectures and readings was how the completion of the transcontinental railroad would further affect the Native American way of life?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Personally, the theme that stood out most to me was a renewed hope for American individualism, as represented by the new lands of the west. Legislation, namely, the Homestead Act, provided the mechanism that encouraged poor easterners, who have largely already lost their jeffersonian ideals to operate as yeoman farmers due to the emergence of large companies and businesses, to revert back to those ideals and attempt to operate their own land. Of course, this idea, in reality, failed for the most part as a result of wealthy individuals and companies purchasing all of the prime farming lands and proceeding to hire these migrants as laborers. The biggest question I had regarding this movement was whether or not this was the final downfall of the independent farmer, or was it later on? Perhaps the Dust Bowl era?

    ReplyDelete