Using Specific examples, Compare/ Contrast the ways that the West and the East industrialized in the 19th century.

How did the Renaissance, Scientific Revolution, and Enlightenment affect European society?

1. What is the “invisible hand” and what role does it play in the economy? The “invisible hand” is the driving force behind an individual preferring the support of the domestic industry and ending up benefiting the society as a whole. When people pursue their own interest and gain, they end up unintentionally promoting domestic and foreign industry in society, and they also end up being more successful than those who affected to trade for the public good.

2. According to Smith, why should government not get involved in the economy? He says that according to the system of natural liberty, every man has the rights to pursue his own interest in his own way and that it is not the sovereign’s duty to take charge of the economy. Also, the position of taking over an economy would be a very dangerous job and it would be impossible to safely trust anyone who would take such a position. Having a position like that would also attract unneccesary attention.

3. The ideas and values of what other enlightenment thinkers are evident in this excerpt? John Locke is definitely evident in this excerpt because Smith makes references to the “system of natural liberty” which Locke promoted was an avid supporter of.  Rousseau’s ideals are also evident because he had an optimistic mindset of people and he was against elites taking control.

4. What is the division of labor and how does it make production more efficient? The division of labor is made up of three things: the increase of dexterity in workmen, the time saved which is usually lost from passing one species of work to another, and the invention of machines that help limit the amount of human labor needed. With more time and more skilled workers, production is much more efficient because it takes less time to produce more.

5. How does Smith illustrate the division of labor through the pin factory? He uses the pin factory as an example to show that much more pins could be produced by men who were educated in this particular field and knew what they were doing rather than from random men who just started working. He also shows how each job that seems insignificant really plays a major role in the making of each pin.

6. How is the pin factory’s increase in productivity evident as a result of the division of labor? With the help of machinery, skilled workers, and more time, much more pins were able to be produced each day.

7. What is the relationship betwen the division of labor and the skill of the worker? The more skilled a worker is, the faster they can complete their job, which quickens the amount of time needed to complete each task.

Industrialization in Europe and North America vs. that of Japan

Europe

-used steam-powered businesses

-city growth equaled and exceeded army growth as a result of industrialization

-majority of Europe switched from agriculture to industry

-depended on coal and iron

-class divisions tended to prevent bosses and workers from developing close partnerships

North America

 USA

-produced raw materials

-high incomes, so more money for investment

-relatively small population, so machinery could make up for labor shortage

-high taxes designed to encourage native industry

 Canada

-became agricultural country rather than industrial one

-less than half of population worked in manufacturing

Japan

-focused on army and navy

-major exports included buttons, cotton textiles, raw silk, and tea

-exploited women for labor to reduce labor costs

-government helped finance industry establishment

-state and industrialists worked together to prioritize strength for war and hold back domestic demand

-cared about long-term success over short-term profits

-regulated consumption for moral reasons rather than because of supply and demand

-firms had strong corporate identities

Armesto mentions many factors that helped start the Industrial Revolution. One cause was the use of fat as a raw energy source, an ingredient in products such as soap and shoe polish, and it also greased many machines. The use of fat is an example of how people in the nineteenth century looked for new ways to exploit the planet’s resources. Another factor that led to the Industrial Revolution was population growth, which caused people to look for new and efficient ways to provide for the increasing population. Other reasons that drove the incentive to find more resources were cities that were ill-planned, food that was polluted and nutritionally inadequate, uneven distribution of food, political neglect, and diseases and droughts. In attempt to balance out the growing population to the amount of food being produced, people practiced forms of population control, such as marrying later. In addition, countries either discovered new ways to produce food or they figured out how to continue their traditional methods but in a more systematic and efficient manner. Some items that played a role in increased food production were the steel plows, railways, fertilizers, canning products, and also the compressed gas cooler. By wanting to incorporate new technologies and exploit new resources for energy, the people of the nineteenth century worked their way into the Industrial Revolution.

The most significant causal factor of the Industrial Revolution was the discovery and exploitation of different resources for energy. People then understood that they needed different more productive resources for energy to produce food and other products for growing populations. The resources that ended up being beneficial also happened to be in great abundance, so that’s also good because then no one had to worry about ever running out of supplies.In addition, with the help of the new resources, people learned methods for making activities such as food packaging much faster and efficient. By discovering and exploiting different natural resources as sources of energy, it became much easier to provide for and manage the increasing populations of the nineteenth century.

The secondary source I read was a section, p.757-761, from the history textbook The World: A History, written by Felipe Fernández-Armesto and published by Pearson Prentice Hall, which is a trademark of Pearson Education, Inc. Usually in history textbooks, the information is hopefully very accurate, and there tend to be broad summaries of the varying topics covered. For the most part, this is the case with Armesto’s writing of the French Revolution and Napoleon. He first talks about the Bastille and the urban myth that is associated with it. Then he says that historians have tried very hard searching for causes in the prerevolutionary old regime, but in reality, the French Revolution didn’t have any true causes and just arose suddenly. He then gives a brief background of the state of France prior to the Revolution, and he names possible causes.  He then discusses revolutionary radicalism and that the King(Louis XVI)’s opposition to it ended up being the reason why he lost his title and the monarchy was overthrown. Also, in the Revolutionary Radicalism section, he goes in great, somewhat disturbing detail about Marquis de Sade and his strange personal beliefs. Lastly Armesto discusses Napoleon and his background and accomplishments as a ruler, and also how he was liked and respected by both the poor and rich people of France. However, Armesto also mentions that critics and historians say that Napoleon “lack[ed] any general principles in his behaivor” (760).

This source does a good job of staying in an objective point of view to create a cohesive narrative. For example, Armesto mentions both opinions of Napoleon so the reader understands that most people at the time liked him, but not everyone was fond of him because critics today say that to Napoleon, “reason was a substitute for morality” (760). In addition, in the eras of the FR that Armesto talked about, he gives a good overview of what happened during those specific periods of time. Armesto also talks about how the FR helped reshape the world both inside and outside of Europe which is good. Although this source had some good qualities to it, there were also some bad qualities.

There were definitely some negative aspects to the source. I felt that some of the information Armesto included wasn’t really necessary. The urban myth about the Bastille was a random topic to include, and it also wasn’t necessary to take up half a page discussing in great detail the beliefs of Marquis de Sade. In addition, parts of it were confusing. For example, at the beginning of the section, Armesto first wrote that “the French Revolution arose suddenly in the particular circumstances of the time and unrolled rapidly in ways previously unseeable” (758), but he then mentioned several events that were occuring in France at the time that could definitely be considered to be causes of the FR. Armesto also never talks about the Liberal Revolution Era of the FR. Because the source was too general in important parts and too specific in insignificant parts of the FR, it was hard to follow at times.

1) According to the economic theory, forced labor is never efficient. How was slavery beneficial economically during the transatlantic slave trade?

I added during the transatlantic slave trade to make the question more specific, rather than it just meaning slavery in general. I plan to talk about multiple centuries throughout the paper, so I didn’t include a certain chronology time in the question. I plan to use databases provided by the school, and I also will use google books and other websites for research. Hopefully I will also be able to find some primary sources too.

1) According to the economic theory, forced labor is never efficient. How was slavery beneficial economically? This topic is meaningful because although forced labor isn’t supposed to be economically efficient, slavery was practiced for such a long time mainly due to its economic benefits.  I think it would be interesting to learn more about why the practice of slavery ended up improving the economy.

2) How did the Africans manage to benefit from slavery when the Europeans were constantly controlling them? Before reading the Morgan and Armesto readings, I would have never thought that slavery benefited the Africans in any way. After reading what Armesto and Morgan said about the African advantages of slave trade, I think it would be an interesting topic to research.

In Ecological Imperialism: The Overseas Migration of Western Europeans as a Biological Phenomenon, Alfred Crosby argues that the Europeans are among the most spectacularly successful overseas migrants of all time. Europeans and their descendants, especially Western European whites, is the most oddly distributed about the world. Unlike most groups of people who tend to stay in one general area or maybe travel to another continent, the Europeans have created settlements in many temperate zones throughout the last few centuries. In the lands of temperate zones, the Europeans acquired what Crosby calls “The Demographic Takeover.” However in more tropical regions, the Europeans were not as successful because of diseases and other factors that prohibited European agricultural techniques, crops, and animals from being able to prosper. In this article, Crosby uses ecological evidence to answer the question: Why were the Europeans most successful at achieving the demographic takeover in temperate zones, and how did other organisms play a role in the takeover and overseas migration?

Although most historians reveal how European culture inspired their massive overseas migration, Crosby takes a different approach by giving ecological evidence. He says that not only did the Europeans conquer temperate zones such as Canada, the United States, Argentina, Uruguay, Australia, and New Zealand militarily, economically, and technologically, but they also conquered and triumphed demographically by controlling the human population of those conquered regions. Another key difference between his argument and others is most primarily focus on the migration of humans, but Crosby brings other organisms such as animals into his claim. The population of many quadrupeds such horses, cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs increased in the lands of the Demographic takeover after the regions were conquered by the Europeans. In these lands European pioneers were accompanied and preceded by their domesticated animals because the animals were a source of food, leather, fiber, power and wealth. More importantly, the animals adapted to new lands more quickly than the people. Domesticated animals such as rabbits, rats, and even honeybees migrated overseas during times of the Demographic takeover. Although animals rarely migrated to Europe from other lands, many animals accompanied the Europeans and increased their population as they spread across new lands.

The approach that Crosby took to reveal the reasons behind the success of the Europeans during their overseas migration is very different, yet it is also quite easy to comprehend. Although he does not mention a time frame for the migration, he does use a lot of specific ecological evidence, making his argument very persuasive. It is also very interesting how Crosby discussed other organisms’ roles in the migration besides humans. I definitely think that Crosby’s argument is valid because he uses a lot of facts and specific evidence to support his claim.

Johanna Wolf (Born June 1, 1900 in Munich; June 5, 1985 in Munich), was one of German dictator Adolf Hitler‘s secretaries. was German dictator Adolf Hitler’s chief secretary.

Career

Born in Munich, Wolf joined Hitler’s personal secretariat in 1929 as a typist, at which time she also became a Nazi Party member. When Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933 she became a senior secretary in his Private Chancellery. Wolf, Hitler’s senior secretary, was one of his older secretaries, and she was also his secretary for the longest amount of time. While he addressed his other secretaries formally as “Frau” or “Fräulein”, he called her “Wölfin” meaning She-Wolf because of his obsession with wolves. She and Hitler had a very close relationship, and she was often thought of as the best possible source for people to go about Hitler.  As the senior secretary and a dedicated Nazi she was a trusted member of Hitler’s entourage, and remained with him when he withdrew to the Führerbunker in central Berlin as the Red Army approached.

On 22 April 1945, however, Hitler, having decided to stay and die in Berlin, sent Wolf and Christa Schroeder to his house at Berchtesgaden in Bavaria. They were tasked with burning his personal papers before the papers could be seized by the Allies.

Capture

Wolf was taken prisoner on 23 May in Bad Tölz when the Americans occupied Berchtesgaden. Together with Schroeder, she remained a prisoner until 14 January 1948. Wolf moved to Kaufbeuren afterwards and died in Munich in 1985.

Refusal to discuss Hitler Loyalty Towards Hitler

Although Wolf served under Hitler for many years, unlike other secretaries such as Traudl Junge, she refused to consent to any interviews or reveal any information, even when, during the 1970s, she was offered a large amount of money to write her memoirs. Whenever asked to do so, she stated that she was a “private” secretary and believed it was her duty to never reveal anything about Hitler. When Wolf was taken prisoner, Leni Riefenstahl, a German filmmaker, eventually got her to reveal a little information about Hitler. Wolf revealed that people close to Hitler were not able to escape his magnetism until his death, even though he was quite emaciated. She was so loyal to Hitler that she wanted to die with him, and she also claims that Hitler was not aware of all the terrible things that were happening in Germany during his reign, but fanatics exerted more and more influence on him and they made orders Hitler knew nothing about. <1>

The Führerbunker

The Führerbunker was located under the Reich Chancellery, and it was where Hitler and company hid during the end of World War II. Wolf also told Leni Riefenstahl she really wanted to stay with Hitler at Führerbunker, but she departed because Hitler urged her to leave the Reich Chancellery for the sake of her 80 year old mother and he forced her and others to leave on the last flight out of Berlin.

(departure chart)

Kershaw, Ian. Hitler: 1936-1945: Nemesis, Vol. 2. N.p.: W. W. Norton & Company , 2001. Google Books. Web. 31 Jan. 2010. <http://books.google.com/‌books?id=B5fJYMxufVcC&pg=PA1023&dq=Johanna+wolf&ei=MTZmS4L6DJaWNZbchN0N&cd=7#v=onepage&q=Johanna%20wolf&f=false&gt;.

<1>Riefenstahl, Leni. Leni Riefenstahl: A Memoir. N.p.: Picador, 1995. Google Books. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. <http://books.google.com/‌books?id=zkAMU-vzXyMC&pg=PA311&dq=Wolf,+Johanna&ei=BcFhS9-8MJ7UNP6TnLgH&cd=3#v=onepage&q=Wolf%2C%20Johanna&f=false&gt;.

Waite, Robert. The Psychopathic God: Adolf Hitler. N.p.: n.p., 1993. Google Books. Web. 31 Jan. 2010. <http://books.google.com/‌books?id=hW-7N2TAca0C&pg=PA27&dq=Johanna+wolf&ei=WjNmS-PBMJXKMveMgZMO&cd=6#v=onepage&q=Johanna%20wolf&f=false&gt;.

Kershaw, Ian. Hitler: 1936-1945: Nemesis, Vol. 2. N.p.: W. W. Norton & Company , 2001. Google Books. Web. 31 Jan. 2010. <http://books.google.com/‌books?id=B5fJYMxufVcC&pg=PA1023&dq=Johanna+wolf&ei=MTZmS4L6DJaWNZbchN0N&cd=7#v=onepage&q=Johanna%20wolf&f=false&gt;.

Riefenstahl, Leni. Leni Riefenstahl: A Memoir. N.p.: Picador, 1995. Google Books. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. <http://books.google.com/‌books?id=zkAMU-vzXyMC&pg=PA311&dq=Wolf,+Johanna&ei=BcFhS9-8MJ7UNP6TnLgH&cd=3#v=onepage&q=Wolf%2C%20Johanna&f=false&gt;.

Waite, Robert. The Psychopathic God: Adolf Hitler. N.p.: n.p., 1993. Google Books. Web. 31 Jan. 2010. <http://books.google.com/‌books?id=hW-7N2TAca0C&pg=PA27&dq=Johanna+wolf&ei=WjNmS-PBMJXKMveMgZMO&cd=6#v=onepage&q=Johanna%20wolf&f=false&gt;.