It seems logical that a wealthy landowner from Virginia would have had nothing in common with a lowly printer from Pennsylvania. The socio-economic barrier and the mindsets of the people in these occupations among other variables created a vast divide between the two. When ignoring these two factors, however, one can observe that the essences of William Byrd and Benjamin Franklin were very similar. But this presents the following query: if these two were similar when ignoring their status, then shouldn’t they be similar if they had the same occupation in the same place? At their core, Benjamin Franklin and William Byrd were similar, and the contrasts between the two resulted from the differences in their respective environments.
Life was way harder and to say it society was better when people did not have half of the things they have in today 's society would be crazy. Back then it was work work work” (Falcon). This shows that people in the 1960’s were only focused on money and not personal interactions. In the 1960’s you couldn 't be who you wanted to be without being judged.
They also feared that if the middle class protestors joined the lower class unrest, they would pose a massively bigger threat. However it was perhaps not as dangerous as these landed classes believed as the violence was mostly handled well by the government, as there were usually not large numbers of protestors, the urban violence was not linked very strongly at all to the middle class political organisation, and few of these riots actually spread to nearby areas. The parallels to the French Revolution are perhaps not accurate as it could be said that the riots were actually closer to the popular riots in the 1700s than the French Revolution. In fact the Hamburger Thesis suggested that threat these protests and riots posed were exaggerated by pro-reform politicians in an attempt to scare those who were still undecided into supporting the reform
B) “Because, in the past, wealthy industrialized countries (like the U.S.) have taken unfair advantage of less developed countries in using the atmosphere as a carbon sink, the people now living in these wealthier countries should bear more of the cost in dealing with climate change problems than the less developed countries (e.g., India).” (i) There is an argument against this that claims that the people of the past were unaware of the science of climate change, and since they acted unintentionally, and in law people have to act intentionally in order to be held responsible, these people and their descendants are not responsible for their actions. Firstly, Garvey makes a counterargument to this by pointing out that the warming effect of greenhouses
He believed that the rich and educated should be the ones that rule. Because of these thoughts he wanted to raise voting qualifications to make sure that only the well-to-do could make the decisions. To Jefferson agriculture should be the backbone of the nation and trade and manufacturing did not deserve government aid. Like every other idea of Jefferson's, Hamiltons were the opposite. Hamilton wanted a balance of agriculture, trade, and manufacturing.
Different groups of colonial families reacted reacted differently to the Stamp Act was the wealthiest of colonial families. The wealthy colonial families also reacted the same as the commoners, but were a lot less violent than the commoners. Wealthy people acted angrily they wrote letters to the British. They were protesting against this law. The wealthy colonial families were angry, but didn 't burn houses down.
Did Paine have a disadvantage or advantage of not being born in the colonies? I think that it depends on how you look at. With not being born in the colony, it would be easier to go in and see what problems need to be fixed. If you are born and raised in the colony this can sometimes be harder as so many different people have their opinions. As being born in the colony you respect those opinions, which makes it hard to get things done.
Immigration is advantageous to our society as it can not only imbue our nation with new ideas, but also brings in workers who will take jobs that many native-born citizens will not. The main drawback of mass immigration is the difficulty of providing citizenship to so many (Wilkinson). The problems caused by birthright citizenship and illegal immigration could be solved through the creation of a North American labor
I believe that Paine had an advantage over Jefferson, because being born poor allowed him to see the world from the common man’s perspective. In Common Sense excerpt chapter 5 it is written in simpler text, therefore easier to read allowing it to reach more people in the colonies. Jefferson on the other hand, was raised by a wealthy family and had a good education. The Declaration of Independence, in Appendix A-2, which he wrote targeted the scholars of the colonies. Jefferson does not mention the slaves in the Declaration, he feared that by doing so could split the young nation, weaken, and divide it.
Ever science the 1629 people have been setting out to come to America. However just because many people came together to live in one place doesn’t mean they lived the same. In fact New England and the southern colonies lived much differently from each other. Even though they might not be many differences does not mean they are very different.
Overall, Thomas Jefferson would be the best choice if he ran for the presidency today when compared to Andrew Jackson. This choice is based singularly on fact, not opinion. Jefferson was more qualified to deal with economic issues considering he consistently paid off national debt so it did not accumulate. Also, while Andrew Jackson was more coordinated and qualified when it came to matters of national defense, it only contributed to his lack of gracefulness when dealing with the economy. Lastly, Jefferson would be much more eligible for office when considering issues of racial controversy since he made more of a stride to equality for all races than Andrew Jackson.
Democracy is where people in a society can enjoy the same rights and opportunities as everyone else. While there were changes within America, they were not democratic. More people had political opportunities near the 1770s but America became less democratic because of the conflicts between different religious groups and the division of upper and lower classes in terms of social
Documents 5 and 7 are examples of the Roman attitudes towards technology as they show how the class dividedness of the society impacts the use and views on technology; upperclassmen believe they are too superior for technology that assists in work, and they