HST 150 Module #5
A History of Mudslinging and Backstabbing
Legal systems or principles have been used throughout history to govern societies. They include codes of laws, systems of governance, and beliefs about the authority of rulers.
Studying these legal systems and principles is important because it helps us understand how societies have been organized and governed throughout history. This can provide insight into the origins of modern legal systems and the evolution of concepts such as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Furthermore, it helps us to understand how different cultures have dealt with similar issues, such as crime and punishment, property rights, and social inequality. This can also allow us to appreciate the diversity of human experience and the various ways societies have attempted to create order and stability. It can also help us understand the challenges that societies have faced and how they have addressed them, which can inform current and future efforts to create just and fair societies.
Legal systems or principles have been used throughout history to govern societies. They include codes of laws, systems of governance, and beliefs about the authority of rulers.
Studying these legal systems and principles is important because it helps us understand how societies have been organized and governed throughout history. This can provide insight into the origins of modern legal systems and the evolution of concepts such as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Furthermore, it helps us to understand how different cultures have dealt with similar issues, such as crime and punishment, property rights, and social inequality. This can also allow us to appreciate the diversity of human experience and the various ways societies have attempted to create order and stability. It can also help us understand the challenges that societies have faced and how they have addressed them, which can inform current and future efforts to create just and fair societies.
Pay attention: this next part is crucial for you to understand the nuances of history. This is most likely my most important rule. Ultimately, I tell my students at the beginning of every semester. Rule Number Five of History is History is not monolithic. It is told through countless eyes and countless lenses. Unfortunately, this is the first thing to go when organizing historical thoughts. When building a timeline of events, the historian must separate the vital from the trivial and mundane. However, this becomes challenging to do objectively. Like it or not, our worldview decides what is important to us. And our worldview is formed from our backgrounds and our values. Knowing this, we tend to have our history spoon-fed from a specific demographic, generally upper-class white Christian men. Before you cancel me, I must stress that this is not an attack but merely an observation. Those stories are important. That history must be preserved and retold. But what about other demographics? When drudging through American history, we spend much of our time dissecting the slave economy of the 19th century, the butchering and abuses against the native Americans, and the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Again, all pivotal moments in time and critical for understanding our past. But there is so much more out there that needs to be addressed.
Asian American history and Latino history are, for the most part, nonexistent. Gay and Trans accounts are forgotten. Who was the first Muslim in the new world? The first Asians? Heck, what about the sports and games people played in the 17th century? All these concepts and stories beg to be addressed. I knew that publishers are limited to what they can include, especially at the hands of special interest groups and federal mandates in a textbook format. I am not tethered to that. This class can be whatever we shaped it into. It can grow and breathe as needed. And it will speak for the voiceless.
You see, history is not like a straight line. It's more like a big ol' plate of spaghetti. All tangled up, and different folks see different things in it. Take the whole colonization thing in America, the settlers saw it as a time of progress and expansion, but for the Native Americans, it was more like a big ol' heap of oppression. The same thing happened with the Civil Rights Movement. It was progress for some folks and a lot of violence and resistance for others. And it isn't just the past; it's the present, too. We keep reinterpreting and reevaluating things as new information comes to light. Like, the history of the women's suffrage movement, we used to see it from one angle, but now we're seeing it from all different perspectives, including the ones that were left out before—the same thing with the history of the transatlantic slave trade. We're seeing it from the point of view of the enslaved people, not just the slave traders.
So, history is not monolithic, it's a big ol' plate of spaghetti, and if we want to understand it, we got to look at it from all different angles. If we do, we'll get all the important stuff.
Asian American history and Latino history are, for the most part, nonexistent. Gay and Trans accounts are forgotten. Who was the first Muslim in the new world? The first Asians? Heck, what about the sports and games people played in the 17th century? All these concepts and stories beg to be addressed. I knew that publishers are limited to what they can include, especially at the hands of special interest groups and federal mandates in a textbook format. I am not tethered to that. This class can be whatever we shaped it into. It can grow and breathe as needed. And it will speak for the voiceless.
You see, history is not like a straight line. It's more like a big ol' plate of spaghetti. All tangled up, and different folks see different things in it. Take the whole colonization thing in America, the settlers saw it as a time of progress and expansion, but for the Native Americans, it was more like a big ol' heap of oppression. The same thing happened with the Civil Rights Movement. It was progress for some folks and a lot of violence and resistance for others. And it isn't just the past; it's the present, too. We keep reinterpreting and reevaluating things as new information comes to light. Like, the history of the women's suffrage movement, we used to see it from one angle, but now we're seeing it from all different perspectives, including the ones that were left out before—the same thing with the history of the transatlantic slave trade. We're seeing it from the point of view of the enslaved people, not just the slave traders.
So, history is not monolithic, it's a big ol' plate of spaghetti, and if we want to understand it, we got to look at it from all different angles. If we do, we'll get all the important stuff.
STATE OF THE WORLD
HIGHLIGHTS
|
|
READING
This class utilizes the following textbook:
Bentley, Jerry. Traditions & Encounter Volume 1 from Beginning to 1500, 7th ed.: McGraw Hill, 2021 .
Jerry H. Bentley was a historian and academic who specialized in world history, with a focus on cultural and economic exchange, comparative history, and the study of empires. He was a professor at the University of Hawaii and served as the President of the American Historical Association. Bentley wrote several books on world history and globalization, including "Old World Encounters" and he made significant contributions to the field. He passed away in 2014.
- Bentley, Chapter 9: State, Society, and the Quest for Salvation in South Asia
- Bentley, Chapter 10: Civilizations of the Mediterranean: The Greeks
This class utilizes the following textbook:
Bentley, Jerry. Traditions & Encounter Volume 1 from Beginning to 1500, 7th ed.: McGraw Hill, 2021 .
Jerry H. Bentley was a historian and academic who specialized in world history, with a focus on cultural and economic exchange, comparative history, and the study of empires. He was a professor at the University of Hawaii and served as the President of the American Historical Association. Bentley wrote several books on world history and globalization, including "Old World Encounters" and he made significant contributions to the field. He passed away in 2014.
Howard Zinn was a historian, writer, and political activist known for his critical analysis of American history. He is particularly well-known for his counter-narrative to traditional American history accounts and highlights marginalized groups' experiences and perspectives. Zinn's work is often associated with social history and is known for his Marxist and socialist views. Larry Schweikart is also a historian, but his work and perspective are often considered more conservative. Schweikart's work is often associated with military history, and he is known for his support of free-market economics and limited government. Overall, Zinn and Schweikart have different perspectives on various historical issues and events and may interpret historical events and phenomena differently. Occasionally, we will also look at Thaddeus Russell, a historian, author, and academic. Russell has written extensively on the history of social and cultural change, and his work focuses on how marginalized and oppressed groups have challenged and transformed mainstream culture. Russell is known for his unconventional and controversial ideas, and his work has been praised for its originality and provocative nature.
My classes utilize both Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States and Larry Schweikart's Patriot's History of the United States, mostly in excerpts posted to the modules. You can access the full text of People's History or Patriot's History by clicking on the links.
My classes utilize both Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States and Larry Schweikart's Patriot's History of the United States, mostly in excerpts posted to the modules. You can access the full text of People's History or Patriot's History by clicking on the links.
Zinn, A People's History of the United States
"... Still, understanding the complexities, this book will be skeptical of governments and their attempts, through politics and culture, to ensnare ordinary people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest. I will try not to overlook the cruelties that victims inflict on one another as they are jammed together in the boxcars of the system. I don't want to romanticize them. But I do remember (in rough paraphrase) a statement I once read: "The cry of the poor is not always just, but if you don't listen to it, you will never know what justice is...
...We have here a forecast of the long history of American politics, the mobilization of lower-class energy by upper-class politicians, for their own purposes. This was not purely deception; it involved, in part, a genuine recognition of lower-class grievances, which helps to account for its effectiveness as a tactic over the centuries...
...The laws .. . have deprived nine tenths of the members of the body politics, who are not wealthy, of the equal means to enjoy "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." ... The lien law in favor of the landlords against tenants ... is one illustration among innumerable others."
"... Still, understanding the complexities, this book will be skeptical of governments and their attempts, through politics and culture, to ensnare ordinary people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest. I will try not to overlook the cruelties that victims inflict on one another as they are jammed together in the boxcars of the system. I don't want to romanticize them. But I do remember (in rough paraphrase) a statement I once read: "The cry of the poor is not always just, but if you don't listen to it, you will never know what justice is...
...We have here a forecast of the long history of American politics, the mobilization of lower-class energy by upper-class politicians, for their own purposes. This was not purely deception; it involved, in part, a genuine recognition of lower-class grievances, which helps to account for its effectiveness as a tactic over the centuries...
...The laws .. . have deprived nine tenths of the members of the body politics, who are not wealthy, of the equal means to enjoy "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." ... The lien law in favor of the landlords against tenants ... is one illustration among innumerable others."
Larry Schweikart, A Patriot's History of the United States
"...As colonies became independent and as the nation grew, these ideas permeated the fabric of the founding documents. Despite pits of corruption that have pockmarked federal and state politics— some of them quite deep—and despite abuses of civil rights that were shocking, to say the least, the concept was deeply imbedded that only a virtuous nation could achieve the lofty goals set by the Founders. Over the long haul, the Republic required virtuous leaders to prosper...
..Far more than today, though, politics—and not the family—absorbed the attention of colonial men. Virtually anyone who either paid taxes or owned a minimum of property could vote for representation in both the upper and lower houses of the legislature, although in some colonies (Pennsylvania and New York) there was a higher property qualification required for the upper house than for the lower house. When it came to holding office, most districts required a candidate to have at least one hundred pounds in wealth or one hundred acres, but several colonies had no requirements for holding office. Put another way, American colonials took politics seriously and believed that virtually everyone could participate. Two colonies stand out as examples of the trends in North American politics by the late 1700s—Virginia and Maryland...
...Politicians had also started to become permanent Washington fixtures. Far from the Jeffersonian ideal of citizen legislators, many of the people who ran the nation had never lived or worked outside of Washington; most of the members of Congress were lawyers who had gone straight from
law school to government work. Few had ever run a business or had had to show a profit or meet a payroll. In contrast, as legislators, when government ran short of money, they either ran a deficit or hiked taxes. There was never any talk of actually cutting back, or belt tightening. Gradually, popular resentment built up against 'politics as usual.'"
"...As colonies became independent and as the nation grew, these ideas permeated the fabric of the founding documents. Despite pits of corruption that have pockmarked federal and state politics— some of them quite deep—and despite abuses of civil rights that were shocking, to say the least, the concept was deeply imbedded that only a virtuous nation could achieve the lofty goals set by the Founders. Over the long haul, the Republic required virtuous leaders to prosper...
..Far more than today, though, politics—and not the family—absorbed the attention of colonial men. Virtually anyone who either paid taxes or owned a minimum of property could vote for representation in both the upper and lower houses of the legislature, although in some colonies (Pennsylvania and New York) there was a higher property qualification required for the upper house than for the lower house. When it came to holding office, most districts required a candidate to have at least one hundred pounds in wealth or one hundred acres, but several colonies had no requirements for holding office. Put another way, American colonials took politics seriously and believed that virtually everyone could participate. Two colonies stand out as examples of the trends in North American politics by the late 1700s—Virginia and Maryland...
...Politicians had also started to become permanent Washington fixtures. Far from the Jeffersonian ideal of citizen legislators, many of the people who ran the nation had never lived or worked outside of Washington; most of the members of Congress were lawyers who had gone straight from
law school to government work. Few had ever run a business or had had to show a profit or meet a payroll. In contrast, as legislators, when government ran short of money, they either ran a deficit or hiked taxes. There was never any talk of actually cutting back, or belt tightening. Gradually, popular resentment built up against 'politics as usual.'"
Thaddeus Russell, A Renegade History of the United States
"...On nearly every block in every eighteenth-century American city, there was a public place where one could drink, sing, dance, have sex, argue politics, gamble, play games, or generally carouse with men, women, children, whites, blacks, Indians, the rich, the poor, and the middling. The Founding Fathers were keenly, painfully aware of this..."
"...On nearly every block in every eighteenth-century American city, there was a public place where one could drink, sing, dance, have sex, argue politics, gamble, play games, or generally carouse with men, women, children, whites, blacks, Indians, the rich, the poor, and the middling. The Founding Fathers were keenly, painfully aware of this..."
What Does Professor Lancaster Think?
Listen, the founding of this great nation was supposed to be about virtue, about the people having a say. But let's be honest, as time passed; those lofty ideals were pushed aside for personal gain and power. Corruption and civil rights abuses ran rampant. The Republic was built on the backs of virtuous leaders, but instead, we got a bunch of suits in D.C. who couldn't give two shits about the struggles of Joe Schmoe on Main Street. But as the years passed and the elite took control, the lien law became a prime example of our twisted world. The landlords, the fat cats, and the wealthy elite all had the power, and they used it to screw over the little guy. The tenants, the working class, and the poor were getting shafted. It was a damn travesty, a sickening display of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
Back in the days of yore, the streets were alive with the sound of revolution. Every corner was a hotbed of political discourse, where the common person could vent his frustrations and rage against the machine. But as the years went by, the fire of rebellion flickered and died, smothered by the suffocating grip of the elite. The Founding Fathers may have had noble intentions, but they didn't do much to stop the rot. And so we find ourselves in a world where the lien law is just one more way for the wealthy to screw over the rest of us. A world where the powerful prey on the weak and the rules are rigged in their favor. It's a cruel and twisted reality, but it's the only one we've got. So we'll keep fighting, pushing, and trying to make a better world for ourselves and future generations. Because even in the darkest of times, there's always hope.
It is important to remember that the cries of the oppressed may not always be, but we will never truly understand justice if we do not listen to them. The Founding Fathers were aware of this, which played a significant role in their understanding and approach to politics. However, as time passed and politicians became more disconnected from the struggles of everyday citizens, the government struggled with financial issues, and legislators would either run a deficit or increase taxes instead of cutting back or tightening their belts. This led to a growing resentment towards "politics as usual" among the lower classes. It's a damn shame, but those in power often ignore the cries of the oppressed. And if we don't start paying attention, we'll never know what true justice is. Now, the Founding Fathers understood this. They knew the government had to listen to the people, not just the wealthy elite. But as time went on, things started to go downhill. Politicians became increasingly disconnected from the everyday struggles of the average Joe. And when the government got into financial trouble, it just ran a deficit or raised taxes instead of tightening its belts. No wonder the lower classes started to get fed up with "politics as usual."
As the United States was founded upon the principles of virtue and participatory democracy, the reality of the nation's development has been a far cry from these ideals. Instead of virtuous leaders, the Republic has seen the rise of politicians who have become entrenched in the halls of power in Washington, disconnected from the struggles and concerns of the people they were elected to serve. It is crucial that we understand how the laws and government can perpetuate inequality, for true justice can only be achieved by listening to the cries of the oppressed. The founding principles of the United States must be remembered. We must strive towards a society where virtue and participation are the foundation upon which our government is built. Only by recognizing and addressing how our current system falls short can we hope to create a nation that lives up to its founding ideals.
Listen, the founding of this great nation was supposed to be about virtue, about the people having a say. But let's be honest, as time passed; those lofty ideals were pushed aside for personal gain and power. Corruption and civil rights abuses ran rampant. The Republic was built on the backs of virtuous leaders, but instead, we got a bunch of suits in D.C. who couldn't give two shits about the struggles of Joe Schmoe on Main Street. But as the years passed and the elite took control, the lien law became a prime example of our twisted world. The landlords, the fat cats, and the wealthy elite all had the power, and they used it to screw over the little guy. The tenants, the working class, and the poor were getting shafted. It was a damn travesty, a sickening display of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
Back in the days of yore, the streets were alive with the sound of revolution. Every corner was a hotbed of political discourse, where the common person could vent his frustrations and rage against the machine. But as the years went by, the fire of rebellion flickered and died, smothered by the suffocating grip of the elite. The Founding Fathers may have had noble intentions, but they didn't do much to stop the rot. And so we find ourselves in a world where the lien law is just one more way for the wealthy to screw over the rest of us. A world where the powerful prey on the weak and the rules are rigged in their favor. It's a cruel and twisted reality, but it's the only one we've got. So we'll keep fighting, pushing, and trying to make a better world for ourselves and future generations. Because even in the darkest of times, there's always hope.
It is important to remember that the cries of the oppressed may not always be, but we will never truly understand justice if we do not listen to them. The Founding Fathers were aware of this, which played a significant role in their understanding and approach to politics. However, as time passed and politicians became more disconnected from the struggles of everyday citizens, the government struggled with financial issues, and legislators would either run a deficit or increase taxes instead of cutting back or tightening their belts. This led to a growing resentment towards "politics as usual" among the lower classes. It's a damn shame, but those in power often ignore the cries of the oppressed. And if we don't start paying attention, we'll never know what true justice is. Now, the Founding Fathers understood this. They knew the government had to listen to the people, not just the wealthy elite. But as time went on, things started to go downhill. Politicians became increasingly disconnected from the everyday struggles of the average Joe. And when the government got into financial trouble, it just ran a deficit or raised taxes instead of tightening its belts. No wonder the lower classes started to get fed up with "politics as usual."
As the United States was founded upon the principles of virtue and participatory democracy, the reality of the nation's development has been a far cry from these ideals. Instead of virtuous leaders, the Republic has seen the rise of politicians who have become entrenched in the halls of power in Washington, disconnected from the struggles and concerns of the people they were elected to serve. It is crucial that we understand how the laws and government can perpetuate inequality, for true justice can only be achieved by listening to the cries of the oppressed. The founding principles of the United States must be remembered. We must strive towards a society where virtue and participation are the foundation upon which our government is built. Only by recognizing and addressing how our current system falls short can we hope to create a nation that lives up to its founding ideals.
Pope Leo III crowning Charlemagne emperor, December 25, 800.
KEY TERMS
ASSIGNMENTS
Remember all assignments, tests and quizzes must be submitted official via BLACKBOARD
- Legal codes of ancient Egyptians (3000 BCE - 332 BCE)
- Caste system in ancient India (2000 BCE - 600 CE)
- Mayan legal system (2000 BCE - 900 CE)
- Legal system of ancient Greeks (800 BCE - 600 BCE)
- Persian legal system (550 BCE - 330 BCE)
- Code of Hammurabi in Mesopotamia (18th century BCE)
- Mandate of Heaven in ancient China (1046 BCE - 256 BCE)
- The Edicts of Ashoka (3rd century BCE)
- Divine Right of Kings (dates vary)
- Guilds (dates vary)
- Sumptuary Laws (dates vary)
- The Law of the Twelve Tables in ancient Rome (5th century BCE)
- Roman Republic's system of checks and balances (509 BCE - 27 BCE)
- Athenian democracy (508 BCE - 322 BCE)
- The Inquisition (dates vary)
- Divine Right of Popes (dates vary)
- Canon law (dates vary)
- Magna Carta (1215 CE)
- Feudalism (dates vary)
- Legal system of ancient Aztecs (1325 CE - 1521 CE)
- The Code of Justinian (6th century CE)
- Divine Right of Emperors (dates vary)
ASSIGNMENTS
- Forum Discussion #6
Remember all assignments, tests and quizzes must be submitted official via BLACKBOARD
Forum Discussion #6
Professor Louise D'Arcens is a historian and academic who specializes in the Middle Ages. She is a respected expert in the field, known for her scholarship and research in medieval literature, culture, and history. Watch this video and answer the following question:
Professor Louise D'Arcens is a historian and academic who specializes in the Middle Ages. She is a respected expert in the field, known for her scholarship and research in medieval literature, culture, and history. Watch this video and answer the following question:
What do you think is the significance of the use of the term 'medieval' in contemporary politics and media? How does the historical Middle Ages influence our perceptions of the modern world? Do you think the comparison between medieval and modern politics is accurate or does it perpetuate stereotypes and misconceptions?
Need help? Remember the Discussion Board Rubric.
LEGAL MUMBO JUMBO
Need help? Remember the Discussion Board Rubric.
LEGAL MUMBO JUMBO
- (Disclaimer: This is not professional or legal advice. If it were, the article would be followed with an invoice. Do not expect to win any social media arguments by hyperlinking my articles. Chances are, we are both wrong).
- (Trigger Warning: This article or section, or pages it links to, contains antiquated language or disturbing images which may be triggering to some.)
- (Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is granted, provided that the author (or authors) and www.ryanglancaster.com are appropriately cited.)
- This site is for educational purposes only.
- Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
- Fair Use Definition: Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author’s work under a four-factor balancing test.