ALTSCHULER & BLUMIN

What i learned from the reading was that the antibellum politics and political world was a change for the U.S. because more and more people were participating in the political world. I did not understand why politics had suddenly become popular, but then i realized it was because in this new political age, people had a say in it and it was easy to become involved. For example, if someone wanted to be involved, they had the opportunity to vote for the person who was running for a certain position, unlike before, therefore making them feel like they were a part of something important.

The Soviet Union

In my blog post, I am going to describe the changes the Soviet Union went through in the post world-war 2 era. Immediately after world war 2, Stalin adopted policies in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. He tightened their grip on the liberated nations of Europe, moved the country back towards dictatorship, revived labor camps of the 1930’s, purged Culture and art, and tried to make Russia anti-western. In addition, he launched a violent verbal attack against Jews and reasserted communist control of the government. These changes created a wave of confusion with the people because they occurred so fast and they were a step back from progression. Thankfully, Khrushchev changed some of this by launching an attack against Stalin and his crimes, stopping the foreign policy and going against stain, that wars were not unavoidable. He also got independence in 1955 for Austria. One would think that a change was about to come, yet shortly after, Brezhnev reversed Khrushchev’s policies because his communist colleges saw de-Stalinization as a serious threat to the dictatorial authority of the party. The party had to tighten up a lot, which included reversing all of Khrushchev’s policies, leaving the Soviet Union in a state of disarray.

During the 1960s and 1970s, there was a growth of the urban population, a rise of highly trained scientists, managers, and specialists, and education and freedom for experts in their special areas helped foster the growth of soviet public opinion. By the 1970s the worst aspects of stains dictatorship were eliminated, and it strengthened the regime and almost all western experts concluded that rule by a self-perpetuation communist party elite in the soviet union was solid. This was a step in a new direction for the Soviet Union, and they were finally able to progress after Stalin left. 

Causes of the Iranian Revolution

I believe that the Iranian revolution was a rejection of the Shah and his policies. The people of Iran enjoyed freedoms unheard of in the Middle East, yet these people were kept in check by the force of the secret police, the SAVAK, and the freedoms that they got were westernized ideas, something which many Iranians opposed to. Therefore, it is clear that the main cause of the revolution is because of the Shah’s westernizing leadership and his indifference to the people.

In the 1970’s Iran was the most western of any Islamic Countries, however this lifestyle was not a popular way of life with the older clerics, particularly Khomeini, an exiled cleric living in France. Around this time, the Shah adopted a number of controversial policies. He took over the courts and brought them into the central government, and appointed the judges himself. He had the Nation’s laws standardized and written down, and he began to collect taxes. He had an amicable relationship with the European governments and companies and allowed them to extract oil, and emphasized Iran’s Persian heritage instead of the Arab/Muslim one. He replaced the Arab lunar calendar with the Persian solar calendar. Finally, he had the government take over religious schools, and made studies focused on other things than Islam, and ordered women to stop wearing veils, something enforced by the Islamic religion. Many of his policies weakened the power of Islam, and were looked on as an attack on the Muslim community because they went against the traditional Muslim rule. In my opinion, these reforms were what caused the revolution. The shah wanted to reduce the power of ancient traditions in Iranian culture because he thought that these traditions prevented progress. Therefore, he tried to model Islam after the European states. At the end, the youth of Iran rebelled against the brutal oppression of the secret police, and the westernizing reforms that were put in place by the Shah 

The shah’s rule angered the people, and they finally protested. In 1978 a strange story appeared in the Iranian newspaper. It claimed that Khomeini was a homosexual and an agent of the British government. Since the Shah controlled all the newspapers, few doubted it and the next day furious religious students gathered to protest, and the police were brutal in handling them. Another protest broke out when people mourned their friend’s deaths. The police reacted with violence again. The rioters went crazy and attacked westernized things, and this cycle repeated itself and with this the government lost much credit. The shah attempted to stop the rebellions by exiling Khomeini to France, but at this point it was too late. The people were filled with revolutionary fervor and there was nothing that could be done to stop them.

The Chinese Communists

In class we are learning about the Communist rise to power, a topic which interests me very much. I decided to explore the possible reasons of why their rise to power was successful, so that is what i will be dedicating this blog to. 
It is well know that there are many reasons why the communists were successful in their movement, but in my opinion, the main reason for their success was the mass support they gained.

By 1949, communism was becoming popular. The Nationalists lost public support to China because their government was corrupt and inefficient, unable to build an effective army, incapable of halting the inflation, and unmindful of the peasants' demand for land and the workers' demand for better living conditions. This was the perfect time for the communists to come in, take charge, and gain support. They taxed the rich, broke up the large estates, gave land to the peasants, encouraged the formation of cooperatives to foster industry, and maintained an effective fighting force, assisted by military supplies from Russia. Although these are a few reasons why the communists gained popularity, there are two main reasons. These reasons are, a) they provided a means of criticizing the western dominance, thereby slaving Chinese pride, and b) they were anti-Japanese. With this stance, the Chinese could blame Chinas pitiful weakness on foreign capitalism invasion. It promised salvation soon. In addition, because the communists were anti-Japanese and the Japanese aggression was the main factor in Mao’s power, aligning with people against the Japanese made the communists popular with the common people, especially the peasants who were the vast majority of the population.

photo --> http://rationalrevolution.net/war/maoist_china.htm

Gandhi, the Failure

When one thinks of “Gandhi,” they usually think of an incredible man who was an intellectual leader, and a brave representative for India's independence in the 20th century. When I think of Gandhi, I think of a failure. I believe that although Gandhi did help India in their goal towards independence, his main goal, a united India, failed. Although Gandhi had some success with his campaigns, his success was more in his ‘legacy,’ because he is so well known for his movements towards independence.

In my opinion, Gandhi is a major failure. He set out to achieve one of the biggest tasks in the history of mankind, an independent and united India, and failed miserably. This was a huge challenge and Gandhi had unrealistic opinions if he truly believed that unification could be achieved. To believe that he could have convinced people who had been fighting for years to live amicably, respect each other’s differences, and tolerate diversity, was absurd. Although Gandhi stated that people are always different, he did believe that unification was the only way that independence would be achieved properly. I believe that Gandhi could not deal with the issue of diversity, since he wanted everyone to be alike. One can see this in the example of the spinning wheels. Gandhi wanted everyone to have a spinning wheel in his or her home so that they could create and wear the same garments – making everyone alike, and eliminating the class system.

Unfortunately, this did not go according to plan, and Gandhi could not keep the partition from happening. Gandhi’s main goal failed, and as a result there were close to a million deaths from people fleeing their homes during the time of the partition.

Photo - http://www.room111heroes.com/labels/gandhi.html

The Egyptian Uprisings 2011

Protestors in Egypt

Like the Russian Revolution, the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 (or the Egyptian ‘uprisings’), began with a poor government system. There were many problems in Egypt before the uprisings began, such as the presence of police brutality, a lack of free elections and freedom of speech, corruption within the government, economic issues, inflation in food prices, and low minimum wages. While these issues were already in place before the uprisings began, it seems as if the uprisings have made these problems clearer, and forced government officials to hear the peoples pleas for change. Therefore, the Egyptian Revolution is similar to the Russian Resolution in how it began. In both the Russian and Egyptian Revolutions, the Peasant’s rebelled and started to protest against the government because of the poor government system. However, my main question which i am going to answer, is what causes a revolution? I believe that in all revolutions there is a spark, something such as an event or a protest, which pushes the revolution forward. In my opinion, the spark of the Egyptian revolution was oppression.

For one to understand the ‘spark’ of the Egyptian Revolution, one must understand the history leading up to the ‘spark.’ Protests started on Tuesday, January 25, when several people began to take to the streets to protest poverty, unemployment, government corruption and President Mubarak, who has ruled the country for thirty years. The government, who had not seen such protesting in nearly 30 years, responded poorly and oppressed the people (note the ‘spark’) by blocking Twitter, which was being used by organizers, mostly of young age (15-30), to coordinate protests. The people were protesting because it was hard for 700,000 graduates to to compete for 200,000 job spots. The protests were quickly shut down, and this only enraged Egyptian citizens while bringing a large amount of national attention to the uprisings. Over the course of the next two days, the government proceeded to stop Internet, mobile, and satellite devices. Once again, further oppressing the people which only resulted in anger and caused widespread violence. In my opinion, President Hosni Mubarak should have resigned as president. Unfortunately, a few days ago Mubarak released a statement saying ‘although [he] would take less control over the government, he would not resign.’ This speech resulted in protestors chanting, "Down, down with Mubarak." I believe that the Egyptian people are more than capable of figuring things out without Mubarak in power, keeping him there only makes the situation worse because he is a corrupt leader, and most are not fond of him. It's like saying that 'Britain should have stayed in power over America.'

Tahrir Square, 2011 Egyptian Protestors

Although the oppression of the people was the ‘spark’ that pushed the revolution further, the Egyptian Revolution would have happened anyway because of existing conflicts that were going on before, just like Russia. What do you think the ‘spark’ of the revolution was? 

Sources sited: 

Photo #1
Photo #2

The Industrial Revolution

In class we spent a lot of time discussing the Industrial Revolution. The effects of the Revolution on society, such as the economy, the population, and the income, gender roles, family life, and class structure fascinated me, and I am going to analyze these effects in my post. First, I’m going to talk about how the Industrial Revolution affected Britain’s economy, population, and income. Britain’s economy had greatly increased its production of manufactured goods. In terms of income, the British people dramatically increased their wealth, and their national income. And lastly, the population rapidly expanded, growing from 9 million in 1780, to 21 million in 1851! For the most part, these changes were good, except for the raise in population. The Industrial Revolution made the overcrowding worse in cities by building factories, which drew in many workers in need of a job. Secondly, the Sexual Division of Labor law gave more power to men and put women at a disadvantage, establishing clear gender roles. This law allowed men to emerge as the family’s primary earner, while the women could only find a few jobs, which didn’t pay well. Instead of working, women were expected to do housework, take care of their children, and do craftwork. While this ideal was not uncommon for women of this time, the creation of this law was bad because it suppressed women, and put unmarried women and widows at a disadvantage because they couldn’t rely on a man for money. Thirdly, family life changed over the course of the Industrial Revolution. During the revolution, families came to the mills together, so that they could work together. This was good because it made working in factories in the 1790’s easier, and it made the new surroundings more tolerable, however it was also bad because it enabled young children to work long hours. Lastly, the Industrial Revolution changed the way people thought about social classes by forming a new way of thinking about people. This way was called a paradigm, which said that the well educated, known as the “public” came to see themselves as the middle class, and the “people,” came to be known as the working class. Clearly, the Industrial Revolution had many effects on Britain, and overall these effects were good, however it set the trend for commonly using child labor in factories. Do you agree?