Hardship and Suffering During the Depression

1. What were some of Hoover's key convictions about government?        
Hoover believed in a small, limited government that had little interference with the individual. He supported the idea of "rugged individualism," thus he opposed direct relief and other forms of federal welfare. His solution to the problem of the needy was that individuals, charities, and local organizations should help them, since he didn't believe the government directly should. He also believed that one of the main functions of the government was to foster cooperation between competing groups and interests in society, but not control it. 


2. What did President Herbert Hoover say and do in response to the Great Depression?       
Hoover didn't take much action in response to the Great Depression until the end of his presidency. His initial steps were cautious: he called together key leaders in business, banking, and labor and asked them to look for solutions, and he also created a special organization to help private charities come up with contributions for those in poverty. These actions didn't have much effect. Although, he did propose the construction of the Boulder Dam (Hoover Dam), and that dam created benefits for surrounding states. Eventually, Hoover started to do more in response to the Depression. He support the creation of the Federal Farm Board, encouraged banks to establish the National Credit Corporation, and signed the Federal Home Loan Bank Act. He continued to appeal to Congress to pass various things that he thought would improve the economy, such as banking reform, provided mortgage relief, and more federal money in business investment. The biggest thing Hoover did in response to the Great Depression though, was the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which was passed by Congress in 1932. The RFC could put a maximum of $2 billion into large businesses. A quote from Hoover, "Every time we find solutions outside of government, we have not only strengthened character, but we have preserved out sense of real government," shows how Hoover's belief in a limited government prevented him from intervening to much with the Great Depression. 


3. Why do you think people blamed Hoover for the nation's difficulties?       
People blamed Hoover for the nation's difficulties because he wouldn't provide federal welfare and direct relief, therefore people in poverty who were desperately in need of such things felt the nation's difficulties were indirect consequences of Hoover's government philosophies and hesitance to take the drastic action that was needed in response to the Great Depression. 

4. How did Hoover's belief in "rugged individualism" shape his policies during the Great Depression.

Think About:

• what his belief implies about his view of people

• how that translates into the role of government

• Hoover’s policies (How effective were they?)       
Hoover's belief in "rugged individualism" shaped his policies during the Great Depression by causing him to not want to issue any federal welfare towards individuals during the Depression. He believed that people who got by on their own would have higher self-respect and stronger "moral fiber," therefore he was very hesitant to have the government intervene in individuals' lives; the majority of his actions in response to the Depression involved businesses and the creation of organizations, not aid towards individuals. So, due to Hoover's belief in "rugged individualism," and thus his subtle, for lack of a better word, actions during the Great Depression, his policies weren't very effective at all, and the nation noticed. 

5. What did the Bonus Army want and how did Hoover respond?      
The Bonus Army wanted the financial bonus and life insurance that was guaranteed to be issued to them in 1945, because their fighting in World War 1 needed compensation. So, the Bonus Army was gathered in D.C. to show support for the Patman Bill that was under consideration in Congress, which said that they (WWI veterans) should be paid that bonus immediately. However, Hoover took the Bonus Army for communists and criminals and opposed the legislation. When the bill was voted down by Senate, Hoover order the Bonus Army to leave, but not all left. So Hoover issued an 1000 man force to make the remaining veterans leave. These soldiers threw tear gas bombs, prodded people with bayonets, and set fire to buildings in order to uproot the Bonus Army. 


6. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt heard about the attack on the Bonus Army, why was he so certain that he would defeat Hoover?

Think About:

• the American public’s impression of Hoover (See your answer to No. 3)

• Hoover’s actions to alleviate the Great Depression (see your answer to No. 4)

• how people judged Hoover after the attack.       
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was so certain that he would defeat Hoover when he heard about the attack on the Bonus Army because the public already had a low opinion of Hoover and blamed the nation's problems on him, so when Hoover issued an attack against U.S. veterans, Roosevelt knew that that would not settle well with the public at all, which it didn't. People were shocked that Hoover could treat WWI veterans the way he did.  Also, considering Hoover's actions to alleviate the Great Depression weren't very helpful or effective, Roosevelt had good reason to believe that the public was anxious for a new, more ambitious, leader. 

Hardship and Suffering During the Depression

As you read about how people coped with hard times, use the headings below to summarize the Great Depression’s effects on various aspects of American life.

Employment:
People all over the country were losing their jobs.

Housing:
Because of unemployment, many people were being evicted from their homes, and the amount of homeless people in the country significantly rose. People either lived on the streets or they built little shacks out of scrap materials for shelter. 

 Farming:Although farmers had the advantage of being able to grow their own food, many lost their land due to falling prices and rising debt. Therefore many farmers went to tenant farming to just barely make a living. Farmers were also heavily hit by the drought in the early 1930s, and many moved west because of dust storms and evictions.

 Race relations :African Americans had even higher unemployment rates, and were paid less. During the Depression, due to whites who were also competing for jobs, racism towards African Americans was stronger. In fact, 24 African Americans died by lynching in 1933. 
Latinos also dealt with more intense racism due to job competition with whites. Many wanted them to be deported. Some Latinos voluntarily moved to Mexico, others were forced by the Federal Government.  

Family life :Family was highly valued during the Great Depression, it was a symbol of strength and unity during hard times. Because of the tight budget, many families would stay home and play games together for entertainment. But, due to the stress of the Depression and the struggles to make ends meet, some families did break apart. 

 Physical health :Many were dying of starvation during the Great Depression. There was also a rise in the amount of people with malnutrition and diet-related diseases such as rickets.  

Emotional health :
Many people lost their will to survive during the Great Depression because of how demoralizing the hard times were. Suicide rates rose, and admissions to mental hospitals tripled. People gained saving habits as well, and many gave up their life goals and focused on maintaining financial stability instead. Despite these things, generosity was abundant among communities, and people commonly helped out others in need and shared with neighbors.  

Explain or define each of the following:

 Dust bowl-the region of America that was hardest hit by the drought. It included parts of Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, and Colorado.

Shantytowns-little towns made of shacks. They popped up due to the amount of homeless people during the Depression who made shelters out of scraps.

Direct Relief-cash payments or food provided by the government to the poor.

Causes of the Great Depression

1. What industrial weakness signaled a declining economy in the 1920s?    
The industrial weaknesses that signaled a declining economy in the 1920s were the struggling of important industries, the surplus-without-profit situation of farmers, and the debt that consumers and farmers were going into.


2. What did the experience of farmers and consumers at this time suggest about the health of the economy?    
The experiences of farmers and consumers at this time suggested that the health of the economy was diminishing. Farmers needed federal price-supports in order to keep agriculture from going under since they had an abundance of products but a drop of the annual farm income. Consumers had less money to spend on goods because their incomes had been reduced and prices had been increased. Both farmers and consumers were faced with the effects of the previous years that were full of superficial prosperity in the economy.



3. How did speculation and margin buying cause stock prices to rise?    
Speculation and margin buying caused stock prices to rise because more and more people were mindlessly buying and selling stocks, and with these limitless investments the stock market rose on a steady incline. Also, there was barely any regulation by the government in the stock market, so the speculation and margin buying was a bit relentless.

4. What happened to ordinary workers during the Great Depression?    
Many ordinary workers lost their jobs. For the workers that managed to still have a job, they dealt with pay cuts and less working hours.


5. How did the Great Depression affect the world economy?    
The Great Depression caused Congress to pass the Hawley-Smoot Tariff, which caused other countries to raise their tariffs, and therefore the world trade market fell by more than 40%. Also, Britain and Germany were dealing with big debts from the war, and their problems mixed with America's inability to import European goods, limited trade as a whole in the world economy.


Define: 

a. Price-Supports: When the government would buy products, at a set price, that were in surplus and sell them on the world market; those were called price-supports.

b. Credit: A system in which consumers agreed to "buy now and pay later" for products.

c. Dow Jones Industrial Average: The most popularly used barometer of the stock market's health.

d. Speculation: When people carelessly bought stocks and bonds hoping for a quick profit.


e. Buying on Margin: When a consumer would make a down payment for a small amount of a stock's price, and then take up a loan for the rest.


f. Black Tuesday: October 29, 1929-the day when the stock market truly fell. 


g. Hawley-Smoot Tariff: Passed by Congress in 1930, it is the highest protective tariff in all of U.S. history. It was meant to help protect American farmers and manufacturers from foreign competitors, but it ended up having the opposite, negative, effects. It made unemployment worse in America, and caused other country to raise their tariffs, ultimately hurting world trade.

Schenck v US (Free Speech)

1. What was Justice Holmes’ main argument  in the Court’s opinion in Schenck? Do you agree with the Court’s opinion?   
Justice Holmes' main argument in the Court's opinion in Schenck was that the leaflets Schenck was handing out could've potentially caused a dangerous situation in the country involving panic and distress within the people. Holmes claimed that if the country were in a state of peace, the first amendment may have protected Schenck's right to free speech. But because the country was in a state of war, Holmes claimed that congress had the right to prevent Schenck from distributing leaflets that they believed could severely hurt support of the war within America. No, I do not agree with the court's decision to say Schenck's leaflets weren't under the protection of the right to free speech. No matter the situation, every citizen in the U.S. has the right to free speech. If that depends on the state of the country, such should be indicated in the Constitution within the first amendment itself. 
2. Do you think some limits on the freedom of speech are necessary? Explain. (Use your own opinion and support it using information from the reading.)     
No, I do not think some limits on the freedom of speech are necessary. This is because although there are situations such as Schenck's, where his "speech" threatened moral support of America's participation in the war, people should be allowed to say, write, publish, etc., whatever they want. The government has no right to persecute people for their opinions, whether they pose a threat or not. American supposedly stands on its value of freedom, so limiting the freedom  of speech of citizens because it is inconvenient is never a necessary action. Holmes also made a great point when he said that a free exchange of ideas was necessary in order for truth to win out in the intellectual marketplace; if speech is limited because it's potentially dangerous, which the truth can also be sometimes, then the government will ultimately, albeit indirectly, be gradually encouraging the success of spurious ideas and hyperboles in the intellectual marketplace that Holmes speaks of. 

3. List three examples of the "historical impact" of the Schenck decision. 

1. Prosecution of supporters of Communism and draft resistance: Controversy of when free speech needs to be limited occurred again when there was protest during the Vietnam war, and the Supreme Court was again pressed with these issues. 
2. Tinker vs. Des Moines School District: The question about whether young people are protected by the first amendment popped up when students wore arm bands to protest the war, and he court had to order the readmission of these students. 
3. Texas vs. Johnson: Court invalidated a law concerning the physical desecration of the American flag, and determined if that was an act of free speech. An uproar of outrage followed, and Congress considering the passing of an amendment preventing such desecration, but it did not get passed. 

Imperialism's Bitter Fruit

1. What made the Filipino insurrection "far different than any conflict in which Americans had previously fought"?
The Filipino insurrection was quite different than any conflict the Americans had previously fought because the basic standards of war that the Americans were used to were ignored. It didn't involve an organized army, but quick guerrilla attacks against U.S. forces. The rules of war that the American soldiers were used to were disregarded. Both the Filipino and American soldiers committed horrible acts and tortured and executed prisoners. Filipino insurgents blended with the civilians, and there were many Filipino civilian deaths. This was a bloody war that was lacking in almost all morals. 
2. Why were African-Americans among the strongest critics of the war against the Filipino nationalists?
The African-Americans were among the strongest critics of the war against the Filipino nationalists because they disliked the white American soldiers' racist attitudes toward the Filipinos, which the African-Americans were used to dealing with. The African-Americans felt that the United States was going against its own value of independence by denying it to another people. Also, black soldiers that were in the war were still being discriminated against in the Philippines by Americans.  The rate of desertion with African-American soldiers was high, and many even ended up living in the Philippines. Overall the African-Americans understood the oppression that the Filipinos were going through, and that spurred widespread empathy among them and put many against the war. 
3. Why did the United States lose its appetite for imperialism in the early 1900s?
The United States lost its appetite for imperialism in the early 1900s because it realized that maintaining an empire was difficult, and too much of a burden on the country. The Filipinos were still fighting for independence, and the public began to lose interest in the new overseas colonies. The responsibility of figuring out legal questions concerning the new territories and their inhabitants began to weigh the United States down. Even Roosevelt looked at the newly gained territories that were the result of imperialism as "America's Achilles heel." Basically, America had rushed with its imperialistic desires and didn't realize the responsibilities and burdens that came with doing so, which is why the Filipinos eventually gained independence once the U.S. finally gave up its responsibilities there.  
4. How did the United States contribute to the development of Cuba and Puerto Rico?
Because of the presence of America in Cuba and Puerto Rico, U.S. technology and administrative expertise contributed to the development there. Roads and telegraph lines were built, schools were opened, finances were reorganized, and sanitation was improved. Even yellow fever was rid of there, which I'm sure allowed a steady increase in population, and therefore development on these islands. The people of Puerto Rico gained U.S citizenship in 1917, when Puerto Rico also became a U.S. territory. American presence there really spurred the development of these islands, considering America was still rapidly developing at that time as well. 

5. Why did many Cubans come to resent the U.S. presence on their island?
Many Cubans came to resent the U.S. presence on their island because they had just finally escaped Spain, and were now under the U.S.'s rule. When Cuba called for independence, the U.S. president McKinley tried to slow Cuba's process. He resorted to the Platt Amendment, which greatly angered many Cubans because it limited their independence, but Cuba agreed in order to end the U.S. military occupation there. Then, due to this amendment, America made a large investment into the Cuban economy, practically dominating its large sugar economy. This caused many Cubans to struggle to get a foothold in their own economy, so they continued to detest the U.S. presence  and  the wealthy Cuban plantation owners who had alliances with the big U.S. businesses This resentment towards the U.S. eventually resulted in a strong political revolution against American businesses in Cuba. 

6. Do you believe the United States was imperialist? Why or why not?
I don't believe the United States was ever fully imperialist. This is because although the United States attempted to be an imperialistic nation with the victory of the Spanish-American war, it realized its mistakes after and gave up  most of its responsibilities that came along with trying to start an empire. Besides, the U.S. was almost completely split between imperialistic and anti-imperialistic views the majority of that time, but it just so happened that many of the political leaders were imperialists, and therefore made most of the decisions concerning the actions of the country. The main reason the United States attempted to be imperialist anyway was in order to gain a foothold in big international trade markets, especially China's market; imperialism went against its core values. So, no I don't think that America was imperialist, I think it was a country at the time who was used to constant expansion and was trying to be recognized as a commendable nation in the world (whether or not that was true.)

The Spanish-American War

1. How was the United States connected to Cuba in the 1890s?
In the 1890s, many in the U.S. were eager to gain control of Cuba because it seemed only logical, considering it was 90 miles off the southern tip of Florida. The United States was very involved in the Cuban sugar economy, and funded the majority of it. In this way, U.S. involvement and connections in Cuba greatly benefited both the Cuban and U.S. economies. There were also Cuban immigrants in America, some of which smuggled weapons into Cuba during the first Cuban rebellion against Spain, so there were also racial connections between the U.S. and Cuba. These existing economical and social connections between American and Cuba fueled the U.S. desire to overcome Cuba, therefore extending U.S. political power.
2. What were the main reasons the United States intervened in Cuba? (i.e. went to war) Which reason do you believe was most important? Explain your answer. 
The main reasons the United States intervened in Cuba were: widespread sympathy and understanding for the people of Cuba who were rebelling against an oppressive power such as Spain, the intervention in Cuba could possibly open up benefits for the U.S. to gain trade ports and some control in Cuba and other Spanish territories, resumed peace in Cuba would mean revival of U.S. and Cuban economies, an insult towards President McKinley by a Spanish ambassador, and the destruction of the U.S. warship, the Maine. I believe the most important reason the United States intervened in Cuba was in order to for the U.S. to possibly gain more benefits such as new trade ports and some control in Cuba and other Spanish territories. This is the most important reason because of the fact that it would increase U.S. power and appealed to the American thirst for expansion at the time. Control over Cuba and other territories such as Puerto Rico would greatly benefit the U.S. economy, since they would increase U.S. trade with Asia and add more to the economy as a whole. Considering this reason and the others, going to war and intervening in Cuba didn't seem as if it would result in any hugely negative effects for the United States. 
3. Why were many African-Americans eager to serve in the Spanish-American War?
African-Americans at the time of the Spanish-American War were still facing much discrimination. The Spanish-American War provided a way for them to prove themselves worthy as equal citizens. They hoped to gain more respect and begin to rid of that discrimination. African-American troops ended up being elite, and had lower rates of desertion and disobedience than other troops; it seemed their desire to raise their social status was evident in such results. Also, military service was one of the few choices African-Americans actually had to move forward in society, so this war was an ample opportunity. 
4. How did racial attitudes at the turn of the century shape American perceptions of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines?
Because of racial attitudes at the turn of the century, Americans thought the inhabitants of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines incapable of forming their own stable democracies. Americans didn't think much of these inhabitants, and they even worried that annexing the islands into the U.S. could possibly hurt the American political system.  These low views of the native island people, which stemmed from prior racism to Asian-Americans, African-Americans, and Native Americans, caused the U.S. to think them also incapable of the same level of intelligence and moral that apparently laid within the U.S. political system. That's why when Spain surrendered, the Cubans were not involved in the following conferences, because Americans thought, due to their race, they needed help in managing all their affairs. Also, many Americans saw Filipinos portrayed with similar features to African-Americans in political cartoons and the such, thus the African-American community widely supported their revolt, but white Americans didn't seem to care that much. Unfortunately, racism did manage to sneak its way into the views of America during this war, and the political capabilities of the people of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines were overlooked. 

5. Why did Emilio Aguinaldo feel that the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence? 
Emilio Aguinaldo felt that the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence because the U.S. aided and protected the Filipinos in the war. He interpreted the U.S.'s disinterest towards the Filipino civilians as a disinterest to overcome them and an acceptance of their independence. Aguinaldo seemed to be particularly ignorant as to why the U.S. was actually disinterested, and to the fact that they really didn't regard his people as capable of being civilized or governing themselves. Emilio apparently never realized that the U.S. had many other intentions in taking part in the war. It was this ignorance plus the U.S.'s help in the war that led him to believe the United States supported his campaign for Filipino independence. 
6. Why do you think the Spanish-American War was called "a splendid little war" by an American diplomat at the time? Do you think we could have a "splendid little war" today? Explain your answer.
The Spanish-American War was most likely called "a splendid little war" by an American diplomat at the time because it was a quick war that resulted in many benefits for the United States. Death tolls are always bad, but the death toll of this war was not catastrophic. All around it was just an advancement, in the eyes of the United States. I think it's possible that we could have something that would be able to be called "a splendid little war" today. I mean, no war is particularly "splendid", but with the United States's power right now, I believe that we could get involved in a small, quick war, such as the Spanish-American War, in order to gain whatever benefits we are seeking. I think that while America has undergone many changes from the late 19th century to present day, it still has the capability of taking part in a war that is swift, and almost entirely for its own benefit. 

Origins of America's Global Power

1. Identify five important changes that transformed America in the nineteenth century. 

A. The surplus of immigrants that was flooding in during the nineteenth century caused a rise in population in the united States. This spike in immigration caused more ethnic diversity within the United States, and also spurred urban growth. Industries sometimes depended on immigrant labor as well. 


B. There was much urban growth in the nineteenth century, meaning the number of city dwellers significantly increased as well. Because of the rapid urbanization, the trade agriculture was becoming less and less prominent in society. Also, new inventions in manufacturing and the like kept popping up. 


C. Because of all the immigrant laborers and urban growth, more goods were able to be produced for trade, which was looked at as essential for economic prosperity. The value of American exports and American international trade grew steadily in the nineteenth century. Advances in technology and transportation also increased the number of agricultural exports, but manufactured goods made up the majority of American exports still, and big businesses prospered because of this. 


D. The 1893 Depression really shook America's economy, and the particular groups of people involved in it, such as farmers and laborers. The depression caused labor strikes and country-wide worry about the future of America, and its global economic position.


E. The comparison of social Darwinism and scientific racism to political power around the world caused for racism to be even more prominent, and ignorantly justified in America. It also supported imperialist American beliefs that America should take part in trying to gradually have political control over many foreign nations. This caused America to get involved in foreign nations, like Hawaii, and affairs, like the Brazilian revolution. 


2. How did the economic depression that began in 1893 deepen the divisions in American society? Which groups suffered the most during the depression? 
     The economic depression that began in 1893 deepened the divisions in American Society by causing workers to realize the small amount of power they had over their own jobs, causing city dwellers to worry about insecurity, causing plant owners to worry about profits, and causing farmers to just be in a worse economical condition than before, considering farming was no longer the leading source of national wealth. The depression  was also a cause for concern for the United States as a whole because now the U.S. was worried that they wouldn't be able to compete globally, economically and politically, due to the now seemingly negative effects of the influx of immigrants and the advances in urbanization and industrialization which were believed to have led to the depression. Out of the multiple groups that suffered during the depression (mentioned above), the farmers and laborers of industries seemed to have suffered the most. This is because the laborers had more strikes during the depression, because they had realized their jobs were vulnerable in an economy based on industry and manufacturing, and many of those striking workers lost their jobs due to the strikes. Farmers were already in an economical rut because of industrialization and urbanization, so the depression made their situation more dire as well. 
3. What were the values many Americans attached to the frontier? Why did many Americans fear that the closing of the frontier would harm America's national character?
     Americans that were descendants of the very first immigrants into America identified with the notion of the frontier, and connected their heritage to the western frontier, which symbolized values to them such as resourcefulness, bravery, pragmatism, ingenuity, individualism, egalitarianism, and patriotism. They looked at the frontier as a symbol of American's expansion, and therefore as a symbol of the American identity itself. Americans feared that the closing of the frontier would harm American's national character because it would leave those Americans with a sense of no purpose, now that these original American goals that were sought by the ancestors of these American families, involving expansion and seeking the frontier, had been reached. Also, the majority of U.S. development and growth had stemmed from expansion to the frontier, so Americans were worried that the country couldn't continue to prosper without a surplus of new land and resources for the U.S. to expand upon and explore, they were scared the country had reached it's physical limit, therefore stalling economic, political, and social growth. 
4. Why did some Americans suggest greater involvement overseas? 
    Some Americans suggested greater involvement overseas because they believed that, in a sense, the world was America's frontier. They believed that dealing with other powers overseas, like nations in Europe, would ensure the continued economic prosperity of the U.S. that they thought was at risk. Some, like the historian Alfred Thayer Mahan, thought that controlling land in Central America would aid the United States in trade with China, and western nations in Europe. It was also believed by people called expansionists that involvement overseas would increase political power because the United States could then "catch up" with Britain, France, and other European powers, who had been involved overseas for awhile. Others thought that getting a few strategic ports and providing opportunities to foreign markets would be enough involvement, but then of course there were the radical imperialists who greatly supported the idea of American not only expanding across the continent, but even father abroad. 
5. How did the theories of social Darwinism and scientific racism lend support to the cause of American imperialism? 
     The theories of social Darwinism and scientific racism lent support to the cause of American imperialism because Imperialists believed, using these theories as backup, that social and economic progress differed among different groups of people. Because Imperialists connected social Darwinism to the domination of western European cultures, believing that it was a natural process in the advancement of civilization to slowly take over other territories, they thought that the superiority of white male anglo-saxons (backed up by the conclusions in scientific racism) was natural selection, and that they should be the ones to carry out this domination. African Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans all suffered from racism, and because of scientific racism, were now supposedly proven less intelligent and incapable of participating in these worldly affairs. So, using the conclusions of social Darwinism and scientific racism, imperialists justified their belief that the United States and some European nations were naturally selected to "dominate", or have political control over, the world. This is because they were the supposedly the most intelligent, and therefore most apt to do so, according to scientific racism. 
6. Summarize why the United States became involved in Samoa, Hawaii, and several Latin American nations.

    The United States became involved in Samoa, Hawaii, and several Latin American nations for multiple reasons. One main reason being that islands such as Samoa and Hawaii were in the middle of multiple trade routes, and could provide rest places for American trade ships on their way to other foreign countries. Being involved in this territories also appealed to the country's thirst for expansion at that time. The annexation of Hawaii allowed the United States to, again, become more involved in a (now, previous) foreign territory, be in the middle of trade routes, and it prevented the population of Japanese there from gaining power on the islands and therefore wanting rights and possibly preventing the U.S. from accessing the U.S. Naval base at Pearl Harbor. The United States wanted to be involved in such foreign affairs, like a revolution in Chile, in order to maintain stability and moderate peace for American trade and commerce.