The Buffalo Soldier and the White Man

In class this week, we went over several documents and videos involving the westward expansion as well as the new policies that the government imposed to force the native Americans out of their land to free up space for the Americans. As a class, we decided on the essential question being: "Did the government have good intentions when enacting policies for westward expansion? In what ways did these policies impact the natives and buffalo soldiers?" The question of whether or not the government had good intentions is subjective. There can be multiple viewpoints regarding the answer to this question, and in this blog post, I will go in depth on what the intentions of the government truly were.

To answer the essential question, I believe the government did have a good intentions, but didn't realize the impact that their actions would truly have on the Native American tribes. For example, when president Andrew Jackson initiated the policy of Indian removal during the 1830s, tribes such as the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole natives were already forced out of their land towards the west of the Mississippi River. Soon after, during the 1840's California gold rush, settlers began to trespass on the Native Americans rightful land, and encountered hostility from the Native Americans. The settlers demanded military protection because of this, immediately striking up the possibility of more hostile encounters between the settlers and native Americans. The following years, war proceeded amongst the Indian plains, and the American government implemented a new type of soldier: the Buffalo Soldier

 Buffalo soldiers were highly discriminated against, as they were black troops that were essentially sent to do the dirty work of the white troops, while being given the supplies that no other troops wanted. These include old and disobedient horses, along with faulty rifles and ruined uniforms. It is believed that the government knew exactly what they were doing when establishing black regiments into the army, purposely being discriminatory against the buffalo soldiers themselves. This answers the essential question, showing that although the American government wanted to expand westward for the good of the American people, they did not consider the lives involved in the process of doing so.

In conclusion, I believe this information is accurate. It shows the long-term discrimination that has being going on and the difference between how black and whites lives were treated. The difference between white troops and the buffalo soldiers were so extreme, and thought of as extremely unfair towards those in the black regiment. In my opinion, I fully agree with this belief, as these troops were sent to war with their lives on the line to serve their country. Regardless of skin color, the men that went to war should've been treated with equal respect from all groups of people.

To learn more about the buffalo soldiers as well as the policies enacted, click the following link to go to a diagram showing the timeline of these events.

 http://www.edline.net/files/stream/2CCF071593645104-0000014DC410FB41/ABC-CLIO+Federal+Native+American+Policies+Visual.gif

Rockefeller and Carnegie: Robber Barons or Captains of Industry?

In class this week, we took an individual route as a class as opposed to having a teacher teach the main content. Instead, we taught ourselves the first of three final units. In this self taught unit, we watched several videos and read several documents about the industrial legends Carnegie and Rockefeller. We learned about important people, events, and key terms to help us understand whether or not the tactics and ploys of these men made them Robber Barons, or Captains of Industry.

As our class soon begun to find out, whether or not Carnegie and Rockefeller were Robber Barons remains an open ended question and is based purely off of what one thinks the representation of a Captain of Industry should look like. A Captain of Industry is a positive term used to label an industrial leader who was well liked among the population and has good intentions in what he or she does. Conversely, a Robber Baron is the opposite of that, meaning that the industrial leader is seemingly corrupt and is not well liked among the general population. After reading thoroughly through the biographies of Carnegie and Rockefeller, I agree fully with the general belief that Rockefeller was the epitome of a Robber Baron. Being a very competitive man, Rockefeller was all about monopolies, vertical integration, and taking over or pushing out many oil companies until he was the prominent oil company in the area. Because of this, the public did not like him very much and viewed him as an infamous Robber Baron.

Primary Source of a classic cartoon illustrating the interpretation of a Robber Baron

Carnegie, on the other hand, was the paragon of a typical Captain of Industry. He was very well liked from the mere beginnings of his business occupation, and earned great respect from his peers as he continued to advance in his career. His main belief in life was this: the first half of a man's career involves making as much money as he can, and the second half involves giving back to the community. Both he and his wife were great benefactors towards man companies throughout their industrial careers. In the end, I belief Carnegie and Rockefeller became polar opposites of a each other, being a Captain of Industry and a Robber Baron respectively.

In conclusion, I believe these common beliefs of Carnegie and Rockefeller hold true to themselves, as both of their practices are the perfect example of what a good businessman should and shouldn't do. I believe all sources were reliable and offered fantastic insight on the lifestyle and practices of both industrial leaders. Between the two, I believe Carnegie had the better lifestyle practices as opposed to Rockefeller, and deserves more recognition as a great man with great ethics.

Rockefeller Biography

Carnegie Biography