TA #3 - Student Protest

Text Analysis #3 – Student Protest

Who is writing:

Document 1: Edward Schwartz
Document 2: Students for a Democratic Society
Document 3: Counterthrust (conservative group at Wayne State University)

Who is the audience:

Document 1: For the people who want to know what the National Student Association is.
Document 2: Everyone in that the writers are explaining their actions for the takeover of five buildings at Columbia University.
Document 3: Students of Wayne State University.

Who do the writers represent:
Document 1: Edward Schwartz represents the largest college students organization caked National Student Association. Edward Schwartz believes that they have more rights in regards to their education and their system.
Document 2: The SDS represents the participants in student protest and also represents the people who would believe in a higher moral ethic which expects them to apply equally to all nation.
Document 3: Counterthrust, a group at Wayne State University represents students who believe in the very opposite of the SDS they also believe that they were negative towards the campuses.

What is being said, argued, and/or requested:

Document 1: Edward Schwartz has stated that students should have the rights to dictate what they can and cannot do in the educational system. He also announced that students essentially run colleges and that professors and administrative figures should be there merely to advice. He stated that “he who must obey the rule should make it”, meaning that, the students should be the one who makes the decisions because for the fact that they are ones that are taking the classes and participating on campus. He further states that administrators and academia should only advise or persuade, but not decide. He argues that this method brings democracy to the campus, rather than anarchy.
Document 2: In this document, SDS argues about Columbia not being supportive to the beliefs of their students and the SDS shares about the faulty dealings of Columbia that was involved in these evictions which secretly worked for the CIA. However, SDS finally explains why they chose to be part of this movement and clearly justifies their action in the student protest.
Document 3: I believe the Counterthrust argues that SDS is ruining the standard of college education and also argues that SDS is very radical, thinking students should not be involved in the inner workings of the education system and should only focus on their job as a student.

How is it being said, argued, and/or requested:

Document 1: In this document Schwartz speaks to somewhat persuade and argue to appeal his professors. As he gives many reasons why his belief and judgment is correct, he emphasizes on the behalf of the academic field and he also does a brilliant job on answering every question about people having ideas and comments about students protest.
Document 2: In this document SDS argues the dangers in being a “neutral” institution and states that this result is weighing out too many differing goals and values, especially leading to far more susceptible manipulation. SDS was very professional as they speak to justify the deeds that Columbia was directly or indirectly involved in the eviction which later uses an emotional appeal by giving examples of their thoughts while in school.
Document 3: I believe Counterthrust clearly pinpoints the wrongdoings of the SDS which that includes narrowed viewpoint, radicalism, and irresponsibility as student of the US. Counterthrust uses emotional wording to manipulate and they never hide the fact that they are extremely against student protest. Counterthrust actually tried to separate themselves from SDS by constantly using the words “left wing”, “leftists”, and “radicalism”.

What proof and/or justification is being used to legitimize the request:

Document 1:Schwartz uses examples and argument to legitimize his request and also to prove to be powerful in his argument because they appeal to all audiences. In this document he states that “he who must obey the rule should make it” referring to the students which later he talks about how students should make their own rules in regards to dorm hours, visitation. He also justifies that student power should be threatening, much like how a bright student threatens a teacher in the classroom.
Document 2: The significance of the SDS proof was to specify the place and circumstances Columbia was involved in. to justify their participation in the student protest, they have stated that Columbia Trustees had “evicted tenants from their homes, taken land through city deals, and fired workers for trying to form a union”.
Document 3: Counterthrust actually uses their arguments and their opinion as their justification. In this documents Counterthrust actually tries to reach other students and readers though an emotional appeal. They have their own way of using and choosing word to make people on their side. They use “our”, “we”, “us” a lot to leaflet readers.

What is the historical significance/relevance of this document:

Document 1: The historical significance of this document would have to be Schwartz representing the student protest of his time.
Document 2: Relevance of this document is that SDS supports the student protest in the 1960 which were also part of one of the major protest of their time.
Document 3: This document’s historical significance was that the students against the protest felt just as strongly about their views as any pro student protesters of that time. Also there were quiet many groups who did not support them which include young Americans for freedom and counterthrust.

How does this document’s premise or theme fit into the historical context you are reading about in your textbook:

These documents fit into the theme of what we are reading because we are on the subject of “student rebellion, the new left, and the counterthrust. Not only that but students from all campuses fought together to gain freedom and equality. However, they strongly believe that they have every right as much as anyone else to make change in their education and government system.

CDL - Textile Workers Strike for Better Wages and Working Conditions

In the 1920’s and continuing into the 1930’s, one of the Mill hand wrote “the stretch out”. Basically the stretch out was a term for the mill workers for cost cutting efficiencies implemented by the mill owners that led to layoffs and poor working conditions for textile workers during the 1920’s and 1930’s. One of the workers who tended thirty looms in 1920 was responsible for ninety to one hundred looms by 1929 which that was the reason why so many people were out of jobs because the mill owners have put two and three men’s job on one man. Also because of the difficult working conditions and lack of jobs for many people led to a strike in September of 1934 which hundreds of thousands of textile workers walked out if the mills in the largest strike in American history. However, all the workers demanded for better working conditions though enforcement of the New Deal’s National Recovery Administrations textile code. Textile workers celebrated the passage of the NRA in June 1933 which the workers were provided with 40 hours of workweek, a weekly wage of $12 for southern mill hands but $13 for northern mil workers, and the right of workers to organize unions. Mill hands had returned to work with confident and surly believed that President Roosevelt would assure their terms were being upheld but unluckily the code was unnoticed and ignored. The Mill owners who were headed the NRA code authority, which they were able to get away with continuing the stretch out even with the textile code. This had led 400,000 mill hands to go on strike seeking to realize what they viewed as the unfulfilled promises of the New Deals NRA. After three weeks, the mill workers increasingly desperate financial situation and for the need of industrial peace to achieve economic recovery had brought the strike to an end. As the stretch out continues, the Mill owners fired and blacklisted those workers that headed for the strike which the working conditions still did not improve.

1. With the economy crises that were going through today, do you think some of the people today wouldn’t care what the wages are or if their wages were to cut in half is better than losing their jobs?

2. How do you think mill hands felt when their code was ignored?

CDL - A place of one’s own: The quest for Home ownership

Summary:
In America, it was always important for someone to own their own place. In the 19th century with the rise of industries and cities, Americans goal of a family farm gave way to the goal of a single family house. In the 19th century, the whites thought that the blacks would drive down property values and fill their streets with criminals which made the white remove all the black into what’s called the Black Bottom, the downtown ghetto. However, Dr Ossian Sweet, a black physician bought a home in a working-class white neighborhood stating that he just wanted his little girl to be in good surroundings. On September 8, 1925 the Sweets finally moved to his new home the whites were telling the Sweets to get out of their neighborhood and go back to where the blacks belong and started to throw rocks, and breaking windows which made the sweet shot 2 white men and they were killed. This case has been sent to the court, sweet was asked why he moved into the white neighborhood, his answer was “because I bought the house, and I felt I had a right to live in it. Then soon, hired the greatest lawyer, Clarence Darrow who defends the accused. Clarence Darrow defends by stating “when they defended their home they were arrested and charged with murder…every man’s home is his castle, which even the king may not enter. Every man has a right to kill to defend himself or his family, or others, either in defense of the home or in defense of themselves.” Then soon the judge had declared that Sweet was not guilty.

Discussion Questions:
1. Do you think, still as of today, the Americans are still segregating the African-American to the downtown “ghetto”?
2. Even as of today, do you think that there’s still a boundary between the Americans and African-Americans?

Text Analysis:In Defense of the Bible

Who wrote it:
H. L. Mencken, a journalist.

Audience:
The citizens of the United States were listening to the radio to listen to the scopes trial, which this was a huge media circus, also Judge John T. Raulston.

Represents:
This reading represents the trial of John Thomas Scopes, who was violating an act of the state legislature which prohibited the teaching of evolution in his high school. Which this piece represents the two perspectives of the important people which are William Jennings Bryan, John Scope.

What’s being said:
The trial began in Drayton on 11th July, 1925; over 100 journalists arrived in the town to report on the trial and this became the first trial in American history to be broadcast to the nation. Because of the butler act, the butler act had stopped educating of any theory of the creation of man which comes from the bible and the state legislatures has stated that whoever was caught teaching of Darwinism in any schools, they would be sent to trial and this would consider as a crime. There were two lawyers that were to put on this case to defend and prosecute in this trial. When scopes came to trial in the summer of 1925, Clarence Darrow, a brilliant defense lawyer from Chicago, who volunteered to defend him, Darrow, an avowed agnostic, took the prosecution’s William Jennings Bryan. William Jennings Bryan was a Democratic Party candidate for president several times from 1896, 1900 and 1908. A lawyer of the defense side Clarence Darrow and a speaker for evolution Bryan was called to a position to be questioned for the first trial and later it would be Darrow’s turn, but the judge has changed his mind the next day which they found scope’s guilty and he was fined $100.

How it’s being said:
I believe that Darrow was a man who tried to prove a point of his beliefs, speaks out in a little resentment which Bryan who clearly fighting back to answer back at his questions and they were somewhat mocking, and cynical. However Bryan states that he does not have any proof to believe in what the bible says after Darrow questions on the evidence to back up his believe of the bible.

What proof:
There was a bible that Darrow wanted to use as evidence and also to use as proof of the questions that Bryan might answer. Overall Bryan continued to hi beliefs about the truth of the bible and Darrow continued about his scientific view of the bible

Historical significance:
This trial was very significant in history because this was the first trial that was ever broadcasted to the nations in the United States. I believe there was a law called the Butlers Act which was passed by the state legislature and still Scope had to take the crime for it.

Text Analysis #1 - The Final Push for Woman Sufferage

Text Analysis #1 – The Final Push for Woman’s Suffrage

Who wrote:

Document #1: Susan B. Anthony, written on October 1902

Document #2: Mary Garrett Hay, vice president of the NAWSA, written on March 13, 1919

Document #3: Woodrow Wilson, President of the U.S., written on September 30, 1918

Document #4: Carrie Chapman Catt, written on Thanksgiving Day, 1920

Audience:
Document #1: Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Document #2: Mrs. Maud Wood Park

Document #3: The Senate

Document #4: NAWSA staff

Represents:
Document #1: Susan B. Anthony represents for the women leaders who would fight and do anything in any circumstances for women rights.

Document #2: Mary Garret Hay represents who fought for rights and equality. Also a woman who gathered petitions, lobbying legislators, building alliances who protested outside the Whitehouse.

Document #3: President Wilson also represents the women who seek suffrage, but through a political point of view.

Document #4: Carrie Chapman Catt represents the opinion of most American women after the victory.

What is being said:
Document #1: Susan B. Anthony reflects the mission that she has accomplished, with her partner Elizabeth Cady Stanton who was her best friend and close colleagues in the woman suffrage movement. A women of a background with a college education who has a firm ability to speak her mind and soul to the public what she has fought for and most importantly who has no doubt in the faith of future women leaders to gain victory.

Document #2: Mary Garret Hay’s write in her letter that she believes and made up her mind not to trust either Democrat’s or the Republican’s until the Suffrage Amendment has passed. She does all she can to do part of her work and what needs to be done to show her strength of mind to change and grow in Women’s suffrage.

Document #3: President Wilson urges the Senate to pass the 19th Amendment to the argument on behalf of democracy mirrored specifically that of radical suffragists who were protesting in front of the white house. He also admits partnership of suffrage, sacrifice and toil and not to a partnership of privileges and rights. He also mentions, after the war, the needs of clear moral instinct of the women of the world but most importantly their moral sense to preserve what is right and fine and worthy in their system of life.

Document #4: Carrie Chapman Catt reflects on the importance of the winning battle which is the passage of the 19th Amendment and also reflects on the importance on the long road victory and the satisfaction of the journey. It is a proof to women about the authority of faith and strength in winning the battle.

How is it being said:
Document #1: Susan B. Anthony speaks with satisfaction and confidence in the work she has accomplished with her partner. She is a woman having no doubt in woman’s gain of victory.

Document #2: Mary Garrett Hay speaks very optimistically and very strong minded for her part to stand and fight for woman’s suffrage.

Document #3: Woodrow Wilson speaks with force and power. He argues on the behalf of the protest and the importance of them allowing the vote and how it would help the country.

Document #4: Carrie Chapman Catt speaks very proudly of the passage of the 19th amendment. Even is it’s a long road to victory but she is satisfied of the journey.

What proof:

Document #1:Her thoughts and prediction of the future, optimistic with the hope and buoyancy of youth and leaving the finished battle to another generation of women.

Document #2:Her experiences and self-belief in herself is used as a reason for her argument. Also her ability to get things done. “I do not say this to men, only to you, and I shall keep my eyes and ears open and busy and on the job all I can”.

Document #3:President Wilson talks about in different aspect of women who fought for right to vote.

Document #4:She gained confidence by passing the 19Th amendment which it was her proof in women and for right to vote.

Historical significance:
The significance of these documents is the passing of the Nineteenth Amendment, which allows women the right to vote. Before this had begun woman went through numeral of suffrages to fight for their right to vote. Which these women showed their gain of victory and full equality of women.