Pro - slavery arguments

The two lectures given by Professor Blight were not only highly educational but quite interesting as well . Living in the present rather than the past has it's disadvantages, for example not having the ability to see the events that took place that were learning about. One of the interesting things that Professor Blight offered to us was the understanding and thought process of the people that had a main effect on the events that took place. Southern Slave owners were the main focal point of this lecture. Professor Blight really helped the audience to understand what exactly the Southerns thought of the choices they were making. The eight different points used in his lecture were; biblical, historical, natural rights, economic, necessary evil, harder on whites than blacks, and creating a Utopia. By talking through those eight different reasons Professor Blight helped to explain the reasoning behind slavery.

Using religion was a great way for slave owners as well as all Southern states to convince the North and non slave owners that slavery really was a good thing. Stating that slavery was created by god is a very powerful statement to make, however is was used often in the South. By convincing others that slavery was politically and morally correct allowed slave owners to convince themselves that what they were doing was not all bad. Biblical goes hand and hand with the point of historical seeing as both have to do with following in ones footsteps. For most living in that time period whatever their ancestors did was what they were striving for, so if slavery was acceptable back then, then why would it not be in the time period they were living in. In my opinion these were his two best arguments seeing as they are still relatable to people now. Also, they were based upon truth and not opinions that people had.

Another statement that Professor Blight made was the by participating in slavery the South was creating a utopia. A utopia being the perfect life, home, and community is something that I feel does not involve slavery. Southerns living during this time felt that the whites were above blacks, and that by having someone do the dirty work for them aloud the whites do get done everything the needed to. However stating that slavery was harder on the white man than the black man is in my point of view is completely false and not true what so ever. Professor Blight explained that for a slave everything was taken care of; housing, clothing, food, religion, bills, but freedom is clearly something that is far more valuable than anything that the slaves had given to them. Saying that a white man has more worries and far more to stress about than black man is border line a ridiculous statement. Sure all their living expenses were free but waking up every morning to find yourself in hell, working for the sake of your own life, being separated from your family, being put on display and treated like nothing more than a useless item is an awful way to live. It's crazy to think that a person could ever agree with that statement.

Though, yes Professor Blight made some great points, and offered another point of view I still do not agree with slavery. What they were put through, what the saw heard lived is something that never should have been aloud to happen. It's awful to think about all the people that lost there lives working to escape what they were living. Slavery is something that I could never agree with. The two statements that I somewhat agree with were the biblical and historical, seeing as they were based off fact. The two that I did not agree with at all were the creation of a utopia and stating that it was harder on the white man than the black man. Seeing as both those arguments were based on opinion and not true facts.

Justification for Mexican American War !

The Mexican American War was something caused by reactions to the issue of freedom. When Mexico gained it's freedom along with Texas they were both free states however, left on their own without the comfort of a support system from fellow states. However, America took unjust actions against these two newly free states and attempted to take total control of their land. By not only tricking them into singing unfair treaties but using the upper hand they gained to take control over weaker states.

Gregory Hospodor, a American citizen brought the argument of America's unjust actions into play by stating his thoughts and opinions on the situation. Hospodor felt what America did was unjust seeing as they took something that did not belong to them. James Polk, the president of America at the time being felt that America needed to expand their land for the sake of the overpopulation issues that were taking place. Therefor, when Mexico and Texas became free yet vulnerable states America jumped at the opportunity, taking advantage of whatever they could. These actions were clearly unjust if not unfair, which had great repercussions some of which leading to war. With war now in the cards America basically didn't want to deal with the drama that war would have entailed which resulted in treaties, Americas main way of fixing things.

Lee Eysturlid sided with America in this argument claiming that their actions were not only respectful but the farthest thing from unjust. Eysturlid, unlike Hospodor felt that the actions America took were not only helpful to America but helpful to the other countries surrounding them. The main reasoning behind the attempted land claim was due to America's need for extra space. The population was getting larger and larger at a faster speed than America was ready to handle, hence why large amounts of cheap land were needed. This is why Eysturlid felt that Americas actions showed helpful behavior because what they did was not only helping others but solving a huge issue for America at the time.

Personally, I feel that the actions the America took illustrated very disrespectful and unjust behavior. Not only did we use our power to take the upper hand, but we used our former knowledge and our resources to take advantage of Mexico and Texas. Yes, we were trying to solve some of the problems that our country was facing, however we exerted greedy behavior by doing things that were for our benefit only. I agree one hundred percent with Gregory Hospodor's argument, though I feel that Lee Eysturdild proved some good points what we did was rude and but innocent citizens in danger.

Though I've mentioned it before if not several times America's actions were unjust. Yes, that's my personally opinion but you being the reader really have to think about the repercussions from our actions. We kicked innocent people out of their homes for purely our own benefit. Not only leaving many homeless, but some scared and others killed.

Jackson Turner Frontier Thesis Statement

The Jackson Turner thesis was basically Turner's thoughts and feelings on the frontier line that had been created by Americans. By reading his thesis he makes it clear that he doesn't agree with the boundary lines that have been set by America. Turner felt that the frontier line symbolized at boundary that you couldn't pass, rather than a symbol of freedom. Most citizens saw the frontier as freedom, that having their own land allowed them to not only be their own person, but make their own decisions. Instead of accepting what the frontier was doing for America, Turner went on to fight that it was a cap on America's freedom stating: "The frontier has meant that every American generation returned to primitive conditions on a meeting point between savagery and civilization". The points that Turner was making were very pessimistic and negative.

The main arguments against Turner's thesis statement pretty much all state the same thing. That the land earned by gaining a Frontier was very useful for all people living on the Western side. Turner continually talks about the frontier land being "free and useless" land that could be benefited somewhere else. However, people like the Indians who have been kicked out of their homes multiple times looked to the frontier with hope and joy, seeing as it offered them a home. The main argument which is constantly reused is that the land earned through the frontier was useful and used to help unite America.

Personally, I disagree with Jackson Turner and agree with those who fight against him. I feel that the frontier offered people a home who didn't have nothing else and gave America the freedom that they dissevered. The frontier gave America a much needed boarder which allowed them space and separation to become their own nation. I think that the frontier was not only a good thing but a needed thing that gave them the confidence they needed to begin making their own decisions and taking their own direction as a separate nation.