Henry Flagler, as a child, growing-up in upstate New York, knew the face of poverty and at the age of 14 left home with 19 cents in his pocket to work as a clerk in a relative’s general store in Ohio. Through hard work, boundless energy and a developing keen business sense, Flagler became the store owner’s partner and later sold his interest to pursue an opportunity in the grain business.

It was while merchandising grain that Flagler met and later became a partner of another young man who foresaw the money making potential of the oil production business. That entrepreneur’s name was John D. Rockefeller and the partnership became known as the Standard Oil Company. At age 52 and now one of the wealthiest men in the world, Henry Flagler relinquished the daily responsibilities of corporate life to fulfill another dream that had come to him after a business trip to Florida many years prior. He recognized an opportunity to establish a winter haven for his friends and business associates and open Florida to development by building a railroad all the way down the state to Key West.

This dynamic, farsighted and innovative figure was destined to do for Florida’s east coast what, seventy years later, another larger than life dreamer and risk-taker would do for central Florida. Both Henry Flagler and Walt Disney used their fortunes to create entertainment empires and build new communities that brought thousands of people to experience and enjoy the riches of this newly discovered paradise. 

Men like Flagler, Rockefeller, Disney, Vanderbilt and Morgan all lived luxuriously extravagant lives that sometimes overshadows their enormous contributions to the economic wealth of our nation that we all benefit from today. Beneath the veneer of pomp, lavish parties and frivolous extreme lies a bedrock of grit, determination and adventure that formed the characters of the men and women who built the economic powerhouse of this nation. Much can be learned from a study of the lives of these iconic figures that can give hope and direction to us all.

Walking through the ornate splendor of Whitehall, one can almost hear the distant sound of a steam locomotive approaching from the west with the Flagler’s new weekend guests.

I have been in your country only a short time; yet you already have made a strong and deep impression. I have flown from Pretoria to Cape Town; going back in three hours over the road which was first covered with great difficulty over many years. I went up the Indian Ocean coast to Durban: and now I return to Johannesburg.

        Everywhere I have been impressed with the warmth and the interest of all of the people of South Africa, of all political persuasions and races. Everywhere I have been impressed by your achievements, the wealth you have created in this continent which so sorely needs the blessings of progress.
        Above all, I have been impressed with South African youth: not just those young in years, but those of every age who are young in a spirit of imagination and courage and an appetite for the adventure of life.
        President Kennedy once said that Averill Harriman, who negotiated the Test-Ban treaty at the age of 72 was the youngest man in Washington. There are many like him here in South Africa.
        These young-spirited people are like young people in my country, and all over the world, seeking to build a better future – to make their mark on the tablets of history. They are restless, impatient with the past, with the vain quarrels of a day that is gone; and in this too they are more closely joined with their fellow young people than to the older generation anywhere.
        And those who seek change and progress in South Africa are very special.
        So many of these I have seen, so many who are in this hall, are standing with their brothers around the globe for liberty and equality and human dignity; not in the ease and comfort and approbation of society, but in midst of controversy and difficulty and risk.
        Your fellow students, and men all over the world, will take heart and example from your stand. And that is why your work is so important; for men will flock to the banners of the courageous and the right; but as the Bible tells us: “If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?”
        What is the battle to which we are all summoned?
        It is first a battle for the future. The day is long past when any nation could retreat behind walls of stone or curtains of iron or bamboo. The winds of freedom and progress and justice blow across the highest battlements, enter at every crevice, are carried by jet planes and communications satellites and by the very air we breathe.
        So tomorrow’s South Africa will be different from today’s – just as tomorrow’s America will be different from the country I left these few short days ago. Our choice is not whether change will come, but whether we can guide that change in the service of our ideals and toward a social order shaped to the needs of all our people. In the long run we can master change not through force or fear, but only through the free work of an understanding mind – through an openness to new knowledge and fresh outlooks which can only strengthen the most fragile and the most powerful human gifts – the gift of reason.
        Thus those who cut themselves off from ideas and clashing convictions not only display fear and enormous uncertainty about the strength of their own views; they also guarantee that when change comes, it will not be to their liking. And they encourage the forces of violence and passion which are the only alternatives to reason and the acts of minds freely open to the demands of justice.
        Justice – a demand which has echoed down through all the ages of man – this is the second battle to which we are summoned. And let no man think that he fights this battle for others; he fights for himself, and so do we all. The Golden Rule is not sentimentality, but the deepest practical wisdom. For the teaching of our time is that cruelty is contagious, and its disease knows no bounds of race or nation. Where men can be deprived because their skin is black, others may suffer because they believe that men should not be so deprived; and in the fullness of time others will be deprived because their skin is white. If men can suffer because they hold one belief, then others may suffer for the holding of other beliefs.
        Freedom is not money, that I could enlarge mine by taking yours. Our liberty can grow only when the liberties of all our fellow men are secure; and he who would enslave others ends only by chaining himself, for chains have two ends, and he who holds the chain is as securely bound as he whom it holds. And as President Kennedy said at the Berlin Wall in 1963, “Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.”
        In the last analysis, as President Kennedy told the American people in 1963, “The heart of the question is whether all men are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow-men as we want to treated.”
        “If an American”–or, I would add, any man–if a man, he said “because his skin is dark, cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public, if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who represent him, if in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to change the colour of his skin and stand in his place?
        Who among us would then be content with the counsels of patience and delay?”
        It is the question before us in the United States; it is the question before you in South Africa; it is the question before all of us in every corner of the globe.
        Will we – within our own countries, and among the mass of struggling humanity –use our advantages to bring help and hope to their outstretched hands?
        South Africa is the pre-eminent repository of the skill and knowledge and wealth of this continent.
        If you can answer the great questions – if you can sweep unjust privilege into the dead past, if you can show the dispossessed and the diseased, the hungry and the untaught, that there is a better life for them and a fair place in the sun for their children – if you can do these things, then all of us will take heart from your example, and this continent can take its place in the modern world.
        But if you cannot do these things, then your shadow will fall long across this continent – and the common cause of men everywhere. in the United States and in South Africa, will be sorely tried and deeply injured.
        There are those who say that the game is not worth the candle – that Africa is too primitive to develop, that its peoples are not ready for freedom and self-government, that violence and chaos are unchangeable. But those who say these things should look to the history of every part and parcel of the human race. It was not the black man of Africa who invented and used poison gas or the atomic bomb, who sent six million men and women and children to the gas ovens, and used their bodies as fertilizer. Hitler and Stalin and Tojo were not black men of Africa. And it was not the black men of Africa who bombed and obliterated Rotterdam and Shanghai and Dresden and Hiroshima.
        We all struggle to transcend the cruelties and the follies of mankind. That struggle will not be won by standing aloof and pointing a finger; it will be won by action, by men who commit their every resource of mind and body to the education and improvement and help of their fellow man.
        And this is the third aspect of our battle: to fight for ourselves as individuals, and for the individuality of all.
        We are patriots. We believe in our countries and wish to see them flourish. But the countries we love are not abstractions. They are not frozen in yellowed parchment and constitutions. They are not the sum total of their buildings and shops, wealth and power. We are our nations – you and me and millions like us.
        A great American writer, Mark Twain, once answered that question by saying:
        “What is the country? It is the common voice of the people. Each – by himself and on his own responsibility – must speak. Each must for himself decide what is right and what is wrong, and which course is patriotic and which is not. Otherwise is to be a traitor, both to yourself and to your country.”
        This is the heaviest responsibility of all – a burden men have often refused by turning rule and ideology, belief and power, over to an all-powerful state. History is full of peoples who have discovered it is easier to fight than think, easier to have enemies and friends selected by authority than to make their own painful choices, easier to follow blindly than to lead, even if that leadership must be the private choice of a single man alone with a free and skeptical mind. But in the final telling it is that leadership, the impregnable skepticism of the free spirit, untouchable by guns or police, which feeds the whirlwind of change and hope and progress in every land and time.
        So what President Kennedy said to the youth of America, I now say to you:
        That it is you who have to decide – you “who have the longest stake, you who are the most concerned for truth, who have the least ties to the present and the greatest ties to the future.”
        Here among you, at this great university, I know what your decision will be.

  It was a shock to me and as an amateur historian, I knew this would forever change the world. I knew this would be an event I would tell my children and grandchildren as the years went by. This would also become something forever recorded in the pages of History.

  I was among those angry over the attacks. Who were these nutjobs thinking they could attack America like they did! All under the assumption they were doing to “please” their God, Allah in the name of Terrorism. I was among those who wanted to nuke the Terrorists into oblivion.

  I recall the tears, the anger, the fear. But I recall most of all the patriotism, the tributes, the courage and the congratulations of those who were police, firefighters or Military. People soon joined together waving flags and chating “USA!” loudly and proudly. People began recalling the unity America felt when it was attacked seventy years earlier at Pearl Harbor. I remember the fact we (and by we I mean America) made war on the terrorists.

  The events in September also brought forth Islam to the mainstream public. It made us aware of another religion that was big in Indonesia, the Middle East and other parts of the world. However, we must not use the Islamic Terrorists as a catalyst to judge ever Muslim. Being Muslim, or Arab for that matter, DOES NOT make one a Terrorist. Much like being German does not make one a Nazi or being Russian does not make one a communist. The same could be said that being Jewish does not make one greedy or being Christian does not make one intolerant. I am sure not everyone in India works at a call center. I doubt the French are all cowards as I’m sure there are some brave French people who were willing to help America in those dark days.

  September the Eleventh changed how I felt about America.  I was of the mentality that America was pure garbage because of the decline in morality, intellect, and how our government was swimming in corruption. When the attacks occurred, I was proud to be American. Despite its problems, America was home to me. It was OUR LAND and OUR NATION. I soon became one of those that believe even though America has its problems and its short comings, It is STILL the land of the free and the home of the Brave. I was also in amazement at how the world reacted in praying for America. I will never forget the British sending their condolences to America for the attacks. Being 1/4 British, It was great to see England standing shoulder to shoulder with America ready to defend the world once again as they always have. The same could be said for the rest of our Allies in this war on Terror. Unlike most other nations that would have cowarded in fear, America was not willing to let this attack go by unnoticed. America for the first time since Pearl Harbor united to take down a common threat.
 
  9/11 also changed my opinion of how I felt about people. Especially my friend Nurija (pronounced New Ree Ah). For those who don’t know, Nurija is an old high school friend of mine. He was also one of the first Muslims I ever met.He is one of the most friendly individuals I have ever met and I am proud to call him my friend.

  Before 9/11, I saw him as a Bosnian. When 9/11 happened, I no longer saw him as a Bosnian, I saw him from that day forward as an American much like me. An American who had every right to worship Allah in any Mosque of his choosing much like I have every right to worship Jesus in any Church of my choosing. Sure, he may have learned English as a second (or third) language, but when ever I spoke with him, he spoke much better than any natural born Americans I knew.

  From the look on his face, I knew he was upset about the whole thing as he had told me that he had been in Bosnia during the Civil War there and it was upsetting the ordeal he had left behind had come back. I bet he had memories of the ordeal replaying in his mind. I say this because for the rest of the day he was quiet.

  Since he was Muslim, I worried that people would have given him a hard time because of his faith simply because the hijackers were Muslim as well. Therefore, for the rest of the day, I looked out for him. The reason being that should had anyone  given him problems for his Muslim faith, I would have been there to defend Nurija from those people. I was prepared to say things like,”What does him being a Muslim have to do with the attacks!? He didn’t cause them! He’s not at fault! How dare you accuse him of such things because of what he believes in!” Thank God we both had the same Language Arts Class, the same Lunch Break and the same Math Class at the time. I was able to watch out and protect my friend.

  So Nurijia if you are reading this, I am proud to call you my friend. Should anyone have anything bad to say about you, they will have to get through me first because you mean a lot to me. I will never forget the times we spent together sitting together in our High School classes working together and even speaking together about whatever came to our minds. 

  Getting back to the topic at hand, 9/11 has forever become ingrained into our culture. Now as a result of the attacks, Americans have began to discuss it, debate it and even disect it. Movies of this historic event are being filmed and shown to the world in the hopes of teaching and entertaining succeeding generations about the circumstances of this historic event and its affect on American History, society and culture.

  Now ten years have past since the attacks on America. We are still at war with the terrorists. We managed to FINALLY get that bastard Bin Laden for his atrocious attacks on our nation. The troops are still defending America regardless of who or what it may be and they still remember what they are fighting for. As long as there is terror, we will be the ones to fight it.

When you think of slavery you automatically think of harsh living conditions, long working hours and psychical abuse, this however was not the reality for all slaves. Those who belonged to smaller, family run farms did not typically suffer such a horrible fate. As part of Roosevelt’s New Deal records were collected from former slaves on their experiences and lives as slaves, this was done in the form of music, diaries and interviews. From this a new picture of what life was really like came to light. (Web ref 1)

 From these new found records we were able to understand more about how slaves coped and how they were treated. For example it had always been assumed that families would be split up, this was not the case though the majority of the time families were kept together, this was for two reasons it kept the moral up so that would work better and have less hatred towards their owners. The other reason being that there was the chance of freed slaves in the form of their offspring. “State laws gave slave marriages no legal protection and in these transactions husbands could be separated from their wives and children from their mothers.” (Web ref 2) This meant that of course there were cases where families were split up but this mostly happened on large plantations were large numbers of slaves were kept. 

 Some slave owner honestly believed they were being good Christian people by keeping slaves, these were people that had no means to look after themselves. But by having an owner they were being given shelter and food in exchange for their services. There were even books published on how to be a good slave owner. Small, family farms were known to have treated their slaves just like part of the family and really care for them. At this time in the south being a slave owner was something to be proud of since, slavery was something the north no longer had and therefore made those from the south feel much stronger about the issue.

 All of the new information that has come to light over the last hundred years has painted a very different picture of slavery than we once thought. There were of course cases of real suffering but also stories of care and community. Slaves managed to build their own communities and find their own unique ways of copping and in some cases escaping through underground railways. The railways system especially showed great strength and courage in slaves, as well as showing us just how large and structured their community was.  

Bibliography

Websites: 

Web Ref 1: http://www.hearthevoicesring.com/3/miscellaneous5.htm (3rd March 2011)

Web Ref 2: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USASseparation.htm (3rd March 2011)

 Andrew Jackson became the 7th American President in 1829 (Web ref 1), one of the issues that he faced in his new role was what should be done about Native Americans. America was a constantly expanding west, the one obstacle in their way was the Native Americans. At this point in time it was not thought that the expansion would ever go any further west than the Mississippi river, for this reason Jackson thought that the solution to the problem would be to negotiate with the Indians so that they could have the land to the west and America could have their land to the east. “Jackson was instrumental in negotiating nine out of eleven treaties which divested the southern tribes of their eastern lands in exchange for lands in the west.” (Web ref 2) He could however reach a deal with the two other tribes; the tribes that agreed did so as it was believed that voluntary migration would be best for them in the long run, and meant they still had land just in the west. This was not completely successful for Jackson though as only a small number of Choctaws, Creeks and Cherokees moved.

 On 26th May 1830 Jackson signed The Indian Removal Act, which set out to relocate Native Americans living east of the Mississippi River to the west. This was to be done by negotiating with them giving them the promise of land in the west that would not be under threat from America, if they gave up their land in the east. The policy worked in some cases, the tribes that were willing to take part in the deal gave up their land and moved west with the understanding they would be left to live in peace.

 The story for those who were not willing to go along with Jackson’s deal suffered a different fate. It was stated that if they were unwilling to go ahead with the treaty, their only other choice was to adopt an American way of life. Some natives did this as it seemed like a better option than being forced to move. “Removal efforts were cantered on the so-called “Five Civilized Tribes,” the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Chickasaw and Seminole” (Web ref 3) This tribes unlike others were much more what Americans saw as civilized, their life style was not all that different from other Americans. They were mostly farmers, they set up their own constitution, set up their own road systems and some even kept slaves. The Cherokee epically were unwilling to give up their fertile land, that they had worked on and built up.

 By 1838 Jackson’s policy to relocate native Americans was looking to have been successful, all south-eastern land was now free from an native tribes. Of all the tribes the Cherokee was the one that put up the most of a fight, they were however unsuccessful in their fight and ended up being forced from their land by an army of 7000 men. (Web ref 3) In the process 4000 tribe members died out of 15000, they also lost the majority of their possession and livestock.

Bibliography

Websites: 

Web Ref 1: http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/andrewjackson  (26th February 2011)

Web Ref 2: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html  (26th February 2011)

Web Ref 3: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h335.html (26th February 2011)

Slavery has always been part of American culture, with the first slaves arriving in Virginia as early as 1619 (Web Ref 6) It was not until the American Revolution that people started to question and debate the issue of slavery. 1820 saw the Missouri Compromise which made slavery illegal north of the southern boundary of Missouri, from this point onwards the South faced a battle to keep slavery legal. Everybody had their own reason for wanting to keep slavery legal; some simply just feared the change, while others had much stronger economic reasons. With the South being such a religious area many found answers in the bible that defended slavery and many made up arguments accordingly.

 The first slaves arrived in America back in 1619; those 20 slaves were brought on a Dutch ship to the British colony of Virginia. From this point onwards the number of slaves grew as the colonies expanded, slaves played an important role in the growth of the colonies as there was no way that paid labour would have been able to keep up with the demands of the economy. While America grew so did the slave population, however after the American Revolution many Northern states started to question slavery and with time they began to abolish slavery. Until the point when only 15 states – all of which were in the south -permitted slavery. Slavery became a south phenomenon, with groups forming in the north that wanted a complete ban on slavery throughout the whole of America. It was not long before the south found themselves having to defend what they saw as their right to have slaves and the freedom to decide how their states should be run. (Web ref 5)

 Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there had been wide spread debate among church leader as to whether or not slavery was God’s will. In the south it was felt that it was, as the bible never once condemned it. In a debate, Rev. J. Blanchard explains the question of slavery, coming to the conclusion that: “God could not recognize a relation in itself wrong, or give men permission to form such a relation. Therefore the relation of master and slave is not in itself sinful” (Blanchard P 259, 1969). Therefore slavery should not be banned as it is simply doing as God instructed them to do.

 One part of the bible that serves as a justification for this comes from Geneses 9:25-27 wherein Noah curses the descendents of his son Ham for seeing him naked. “Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.”(Geneses 9:25-27)  Ham’s son, Canaan, was said to have settled in Africa thus meaning that his descendents would be the black residents of the continent. Allowing white people to feel justified in that they were simply performing God’s will, as he had stated that Canaan and is ancestors were to forever be slaves. (Web Ref 1) This argument could only be understood by those who believed in the bible, but even by these people the argument was invalid. Logically, it is unreasonable to think that every black African was an ancestor of Canaan. 

 Southern economy was very different to the northern economy, due to extreme differences in climate between the two. The south, having a much hotter climate, meant that farmlands made up a large proportion of the economy, whereas in the north the climate was much milder. White Americans struggled to cope with the large amounts of farming in the south and the huge amounts of land to be covered; they were not used to working in such hot conditions. “The American South felt, rather uniquely, that slavery was vital to the continuation of its livelihood and, therefore, Southerners became the defenders of the institution of slavery.” (Web Ref 2) The original colony of Georgia is an example of how important slavery was to the growing economy and the negative effects not having slaves could have. This was an argument used by many in the south; Georgia had intended to build up a successful economy free from slavery. However the colony ran into difficulties financially and was falling behind surrounding colonies that had slavery in force. This showed that because of the set up of the southern half of America slavery was an important part of the economy. As Eugene D. Genovese points out, “the proslavery theorists never tired of proclaiming that the greatness of ancient Egypt, Israel, Greece, and Rome had been based on slavery” (Genovese, P 5, 1992) So why should America be any different, it was a much newer country and therefore needed every benefit it could to help built the country.

 The issue of climate was key to the southern argument when it came to economics, as many realised that they could not argue that the northern economy was not successful. How could they argue that slaves were needed to keep the economy growing when it was recognised that the reason the success of the Industrial Revolution in the north was largely because of freedom of labour. Yes the northern system was better and could not be argued much farther. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney however put this argument forward “I am . . . thoroughly convinced . . . that the nature of our climate, and the flat, swampy situation of our country, obliges us to cultivate our lands with Negroes, and that without them South Carolina would soon be desert waste” (Garraty and Gay, P 897, 1972).The climate was so hot in the south many white farmer would not be able to cope with the conditions in the same way that black Africans could, he may have exaggerated when saying the south would become a desert waste land but he still manages to get his point across.

 It was even argued that because 60 percent of America’s exports were cotton (Web Ref 4) if slavery was to be made illegal it would not just be the south that would suffer but also the north as factories relied on cotton supplies. It would not just be the cotton industry that would suffer but also tobacco and rice; these were the three main crops for southern farmer. Without the huge number of slave workers the tobacco fields would dry up and rice crops would no longer be profitable as it would cost too much to pay the number of workers needed to maintain it. (Web Ref 3) In the south the economy had grown parallel to the slave population, with the national production of cotton increasing by 921 percent between 1819 and 1855. (Web Ref 5) This was argument enough for many that without slaves the whole of America’s economy would suffer.

 There was fear in the south over slavery being made illegal not just for economic or religious reasons but also because slavery was a southern tradition. How could anyone argue that slaves were not part of American culture when the first five American presidents had been slave owners themselves? (Web Ref 5)  For many in the south they could not bear the thought of tradition being broken and their life styles having to change. They failed to see that this was people’s lives in question rather than possessions that could be traded and used. It had become one of the biggest divides between the north and south, with the north having a complete ban on slavery. Slavery was something that made the south different. Southern states were greatly held together by their tradition and values; the prospect of having one of its traditions taken away was daunting. It was slaves that had helped built the southern economy and formed a part of the southern life style. Politics in the south was also different than in the north and to become a strong political figure you generally needed to be seen to have authority, social hierarchy and wealth, having slaves gave you this. The majority of governors in the south were “New money” aristocrats; they were landowners who relied on their slaves to work the land. As wealth determined your political power the prospect of slavery being abolished was not just a threat to your society but also your position within that society. Many saw slaves as part of the family just how today we see pets as part of our family, so the abolitionist movement represented a radical attack on the traditional southern family. (Web Ref 5)

 Another reason for fearing an end to slavery was that most slave owner was aware that their treatment towards slaves was wrong. If slaves were to be freed what would they do to their previous owners given the chance? This shows that most people in the south knew that they were wrong in having slaves, but it had become a way of life for most and the prospect of change was feared. Many slaves were beaten, made to work long hours and perform jobs owners would not dream of doing themselves. This gave them every reason once free to turn against their owners, as for the first time in their lives they would be free to do as they wished. It was feared that freedom could lead to a black uprising, and national chaos. (Web Ref 3)  It was felt that it was best to keep the status quo, rather than to risk the stability of the slaveholding class. This though did not happen in 1863 when slavery was made illegal for this very reason, slaves wanted to prove their owners wrong and show that they were better than that.

 Some truly believed that slavery was a good thing for the slaves, as they were given food, shelter and religious guidance in exchange for they labour. The life style they were given was thought to be of a much higher quality than those immigrants who worked in factories in the north. “Southern slaves are better off than many of the immigrant workers in Northern factories who are confined in unhealthy workplaces for long hours.” (Web Ref 5) It was true that conditions for the poor in northern states were dreadful but they still had their own freedom, whereas slaves were to the most part treated like property. Working conditions and living conditions were for some better than those of immigrants in the north but this was not the case for all; slaves on larger plantations were normally treated the worse. (Web Ref 4) 

 North Americans felt that slavery was wrong on a basic level and that it contradicted the Declaration of Independence, a document that is meant to set out freedom for all men. How could it be right to keep slaves when America was meant to be the land of the free and equal?  John Adger, a Presbyterian minister, was a strong supporter of slavery and opposed this argument, even challenging the validity of the Declaration. He put forward the view that “it is a mistake to believe that because rights are natural they must be accorded to all human beings” (Genovese, P 53, 1992) He went on to explain this “the rights of a father are natural, but they belong only to the fathers. Rights of property are natural, but they belong only to those who have property” (Genovese, P 53, 1992) Therefore the Declaration may set out the pursuit of happiness, freedom and the right to be equal but this only applies to those that it was written for white American men. For those who fought for slavery from a philosophical point, they faced the challenge of not just the Declaration of Independence but also the ideas that had come out of the Enlightenment period, ideas that were strongly believed and had a great affect on politics. For most southern philosophers “The Declaration of Independence and the enlightened tradition on which it stood were precarious doctrines at best and complete heresy at worst.” (Web Ref 2)

 The abolitionist movement began to grow in the north in the nineteenth century. Their mission was to end slavery and bring about racial justice for all Americans.  The structure of northern states was very different with it being a much more densely populated area in the form of large cities; the economy did not rely so much on farm land. For these reasons it was much harder for those in the north to understand slavery let alone defend it. Without the support of the north, slaves would not have had the power or voices to fight for their own freedom. The movement had support from the blacks in the south, and also provided help for the lucky ones who managed to escape their owners and travel to the north, by the underground rail system. The most famous of these men is Frederick Douglass, who after many attempts managed to escape and become a voice for the abolitionist movement. (Harrold, 2001)

 In 1863 the Emancipation Proclamation made slavery illegal in the south. What the south had feared and fought against had now become a reality, and slaves by law had to be set free. Not every state was quick to enforce this, with some states not fully enforcing the change in law. Black Americas still had a long fight ahead of them until they would have the same equal rights as white Americans but they had got past the biggest hurdle.

 Everybody seemed to have their own argument for slavery in the south in the early and mid nineteenth century, some more reasonable than others. For many their arguments were merely to keep the way of life that they knew, tradition and hierarchy were important and a ban on slavery threatened that. For others they really believed that slavery was a good thing, a way of looking after blacks who they felt were unable to look after themselves, even treating them as family. Slaves were even a way for some of holding power and social status. Whatever their reason slavery will always be wrong and no argument can feasibly justify slavery.

Bibliography

Books:

Blanchard. J. A debate on slavery, held in the city of Cincinnati on the first, second

third, and sixth days of October 1845 upon the question: Is slave-holding in itself sinful, and

the relation between master and slave, a sinful relation?  Negro History Press 1969.

Garraty.J. A. and Gay.P. The Columbia History of the World. New York, New York:

 Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1972.

Genovese.E. D. The Slaveholders’ Dilemma: Freedom and Progress in Southern Conservative Thought, 1820 – 1860. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press, 1992.

Harrol.S.  American Abolitionists, Longman first edition 2001

Websites:

WEB REF 1: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav1.htm  (18th April 2011)

WEB REF 2: http://anduril.ca/bible/essays/ce_his120.html (18th April 2011)

WEB REF 3: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h244.html (18th April 2011)

WEB REF 4: http://www.ushistory.org/us/27f.asp (18th April 2011)

WEB REF 5: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/features/freedom/story.html?id=9b658aef-5161-465b-bbac-88be5bd43aad&k=22326 (18th April 2011)

WEB REF 6: http://www.infoplease.com/spot/bhmtimeline.html (18th April 2011) 

As a writer I feel it is my job to report my findings and as a human being to express my opinion of those findings. Do I always believe each one is absolute truth? No, but I do believe that each one has some basic form of truth in them.

Do I believe that the Government of the United States of America is planning a world take over? No, but I believe there is a possibility that someone with a great deal more power might be. The rule is “absolute power corrupts absolutely;” and I have found multitudes of evidence to support that fact all through the history of this world.

 I do believe that there are those within the Government of the USA as well as other national governments and even businesses that are working together with these devious planning people; and it is not just one party or another. In my experiences there are good and bad in all parties and peoples which is why it is wrong to condemn an entire race for a certain few; and before anyone else asks me, yes I believe J.F.K. was assassinated by orders of the same people simply referred to as “The Powers That Be;” and I’m not referring to God.

Do I believe in competition? Yes, but I believe in a competition between actual true abilities without outside interferences and dirty dealings or cheating. I believe in true competition the way it is meant to be. I also believe that there are no such thing as a looser in competition except those that could compete and won’t; not can’t mind you, but won’t.

I believe that every conspiracy theory has some basic truth for its existence and we do know for a fact that the Government does not tell the entire truth to the people. If you haven’t figured that out by now listen to President Obama’s past speeches and look at what he has actually put effort into doing.

If families of the past kept secrets within their homes and away from other family members it is also reasonable to assume that the past President’s made agreements that we the people of the USA know nothing about as well.

Do I believe it was done maliciously or to create more problems? No, but I don’t think even they knew what they were getting into or getting us into today. Those making all of the profits now knew though because it was their plan all along. Other thing I believe the Government keeps a secret because they were mistakes made whether in calculations, bad timing or whatever and out of shame kept them a secret, but there are also things kept a secret because if the truth were ever really known the people would be roaring mad.

If there is one thing that I am absolutely sure of though, that is, the average human being within America is nothing more than just a number to the Government as well as “The Powers That Be.” To me my fellow human beings are much, much more than a number and since President Obama has seen fit to condemn everyone except his followers for being ignorant I felt that as a writer that loves my fellow human beings I would use my talents to show what some are saying and what the possibilities actually are.

For many years everyone believed that J.F.K. was assassinated by a lone gunman. Later it has been said there were actually two; one caught and sentenced to death and the other to this day remains unknown. J.F.K. was the people’s choice and everybody knew that fact. I was among the millions of people watching him as he was shot. I have never forgotten the reactions of all of those around me and in our neighborhood that entire week; my own mother seemed to be functioning on auto pilot with her eyes filled with tears every time I looked at her.

One by one J.F.K.’s brothers were either killed or miraculously died in some sort of an accident. What a convenience that any and all Kennedy’s that could have run for office just happened to die? I’m sorry, I don’t believe in coincidences, but I also know that nothing will ever be proven because in order to do that “The Powers That Be” would be imprisoned for life or be terminated themselves.

 In some small way Ron Paul reminds me of J.F.K. in the fact that he is for the people of the United States of America; and I believe that is one reason why the media and the main line parties have kept Ron Paul stone walled for so many years. While one part of me hopes and prays Ron Paul wins this election another part asks me if I can handle watching another assassination like J.F.K.’s again. I truthfully can’t say anyone could answer that question without having to go through it; yet I hope I’m wrong.

The actual American cowboy was indeed a unique individual.  While probably not as noble and ruggedly handsome as the images created of him in the movies, they were unique types of men who carved out a civilization from the rugged wilderness that was the American west in the years before the turn of the last century.

Some of the reasons that the image of the cowboy sometimes includes elements of the outlaw and the loner is that much of the legend of the cowboy came from stories of refugees from the broken southern army who took to the life of the cowboy rather than attempt to integrate into a society that included making peace with “the Yankee”.  And that type of individual certainly did account for many of the outlaws who went on to become the stuff of legend and stories even to this day.

The renegade and loner image combined with the rough life of an actual cowboy whose job it was to guide those huge herds of cattle along trails such as the historic Cumberland trail where they could be sold to become the steaks, leather and other goods that were sold in rustic American stores of the time.  This was a difficult life and the stories of the trail make up many history books for sure.  But far more of the stories of the trail are glorifications of that lifestyle that must have been difficult indeed.

But the image of the cowboy was also something that grew larger than what the actual lifestyle of those simple but rugged men must have lived in the American west.  It was an image that pulled together heroes as far flung as the Australian Gaucho cowboy, the Japanese Samurai and a knight in King Arthur’s court.  It was an image of a man who demonstrated the rugged individualism that all Americans consider to be one of the central unifying traits that makes America great. 

The cowboy image is one that even has its influence as high in the social strata of America that it influences the presidency.  It is said that there is a tradition for any president when he first is elected and comes to Washington to begin learning this big new job.  Tradition h olds that each president has as part of their early duties to sit down and watch the movie High Noon.  They say that President Clinton watched it dozens of times in his early years.  If this is true, it accounts for how often a new president seems to grow and change in the office and becomes his own version of the great American hero that is depicted in that movie.  The American cowboy defends the virtue of the weak and helpless.  He is a staunch defender of families and those in society who are trying to carve out a home in a difficult world.  As such, the American cowboy fits with the “superhero” image that also appeals to the American system of justice and morality and values.

Even the star wars epic films were fundamentally grounded in the legend of the cowboy.  The cowboy concept grew up from a history of our country that included the settling of a big land and the settling of a wilderness that pit the god given will and intellect of man against God’s creation.  And it was the will of man that prevailed.  That is why American’s admire the cowboy because he represents their own struggles for greatness, for success and to be a heroic figure at least for their families, home towns and churches.  And that desire so deeply rooted in the culture of American history will always be what makes America and Americans great.

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

The limitation of service as President of the United States to two terms was one that up until the 22nd amendment was more a matter of custom than law.  It began when George Washington refused to run for a third term.  But by making the limitation of power in the presidency in the 22nd amendment, the American people made a bold statement about how their government would be run.

One of the most unique aspects to how the United States of America organized its government was the concept of citizen rulers.  This concept was born in the very halls and pubs where the founding fathers gathered to discuss this new country that was just getting started.  By reducing the idea of a “career politician”, especially at the presidential level, the 22nd amendment dealt a deadly blow to the concept that America would ever be ruled by a king or a “president for life.”

This was clearly a reaction by America to the abuses that had witnessed by the pilgrims and immigrants that make up this great country in their homelands.  They reacted strongly and negatively to the deification of kings and the virtually unlimited powers that too many times systems of royalty tended to give to their leadership.  This was one of the central themes that caused so many to flee Europe, Central Asia and other parts of the world to seek a land where it was the people who were the center of the governments will, not the arbitrary ideas of a king who was cut off from the real needs of the people he served.

The way America set up its presidency was in every way an attempt to “fix” the flaws and abuses of the European models and refocus the center of power in government on the electorate rather than on the elected.  Another aspect of the American federal system that was put in place deliberately to limit the ability of those in power to abuse that power is the system of checks and balances.  This system assures that none of the branches of government, The Congress, the Presidency or the Supreme Court could dominate the other or take complete power and rule without challenge.  By insuring that all in power had to answer to the opposing party and be prepared to answer to the American people for what they did and even said, this completely eliminated that chances that one part of the government would stage a “coup” over the other.

Accountability is a word that is not very exciting but it is the concept that has kept the American system of government healthy and in service to its people rather than putting them in service for over 200 years.  

In addition to these several highly innovative methods the founding fathers gave to this young country to eliminate the abuses of past governmental systems, they also put a system in place that assured the orderly transition of power.  The system of elections every two years stopped two evils, the occurrence of a politician who served for life without accountability and a system wherein the only way to loose your job in government was by violent overthrow.  As a result the American system, albeit contentious and argumentative, has been and continues to be one of the most peaceful and orderly systems of federal administration in the world and indeed in the history of the world.

The project had been in the works for years to be sure.  You have to wonder with the phenomenal amount of work, expert engineering and the amazing genius that created the rocket ships and everything that would be needed to make the flight possible, if even those in NASA sat in mute wonder and had goosebumps when “Buzz” Aldren was the first man in history to put his foot on another world and pronounce those famous words –

“That’s one small step for man; one giant leap for mankind.”

That phrase, which itself was carefully prepared, has a lot of wisdom in it.  Sure, touching another world for the first time in human history was a tremendous accomplishment for America.  But more than that, it signaled a new era for humankind everywhere.  All of a sudden, the moon wasn’t a far away myth, full of mystery and magic.  All of a sudden, people everywhere felt like they too could touch the stars if they put out their best efforts too.  

It was also a huge moment for the unity of all people.  Few things cause the world population to come together and link arms and be one people, not separate countries.  Most of the time, it’s a terrible global disaster that makes us all bond together.  But this time was different.  This time is was a moment so phenomenal that everybody stopped and watched and everybody knew that this was not just a great accomplishment for three astronauts and scientists that put them there.  This was a great accomplishment for mankind.

American history is populated with tremendous events, both bad and good.  But it’s worth a moment to sit back and reflect on what the first moon landing meant and continues to mean for Americans and the American spirit.  You have to wonder if any other nation would have had the ability, the creative powers, the powerful minds and the collective will to see this kind of amazing accomplishment through to success.  

It’s even more amazing when you remember that just a few years earlier, on September 12, 1962 that President Kennedy challenged American to rise to this challenge in a speech at Rice University.  It takes a lot to make something as historic and earth shaking as landing on the moon a reality and visionary leadership such as Kennedy showed that day was a big part of why this landing made history.

This amazing achievement points out something outstanding about the American spirit.  Americans are a people who dream big.  And to land a man on the moon took big dreams.  But we didn’t just dream to put a man up there, it was not acceptable unless we got everybody home safely as well.  

For the most part the American space program has had a phenomenal history of success in breaking through barriers that nobody had every done before.  Yes, there have been set backs and tragedies along the way.  But Americans are not quitters and through all the struggles we face, we face them together.  But we never forget to look up at the stars and dream of the day that yet again we see an American set foot on another world and plant out flag in that soil to be signal forever that America was here!