Wednesday, September 30, 2009

WH II: 1 October 2009

Prayer:


Current events:




Jane Burgermeister, a medical journalist, has filed a series of criminal charges against pharmaceutical company Baxter, WHO (World Health Organization) and other organizations alleging that they have committed bio-terrorism following the outbreak of this latest swine flu.


"Say No to the Vaccine," Trillion




Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


The online version of the Textbook is available.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.



Enlightened Despots Embrace New Ideas


The courts of Europe became enlivened as philosophes tried to persuade rulers to adopt their ideas. The philosophes hoped to convince the ruling classes that reform was necessary. Some monarchs did accept Enlightenment ideas. Others still practiced absolutism, a political doctrine in which a monarch had seemingly unlimited power. Those that did accept these new ideas became enlightened despots, or absolute rulers who used their power to bring about political and social change.


Map


Enlightened Rulers in the Eighteenth Century


Go online to, PHSchool.com, for an audio guided tour and related questions. The text in the audio is on the page as well. Enter web Code: nap-1721, in each of the two boxes listed there.


Easy-to-Use Web Codes


Summary:


To use a Web Code:

1. Go to PHSchool.com.
2. Enter a particular Web Code.
3. Click on GO!


There are three questions there, listed below:


Map Skills: Map of Eastern Europe


Although the center of the Enlightenment was in France, the ideas of reform spread to the rulers of Austria, Prussia, and Russia.

1. Locate

(a) Paris (b) Prussia (c) Austria

2. Location

Which enlightened despot ruled farthest from Paris?

3. Draw Conclusions

According to the map, approximately how much of Europe was affected by the Enlightenment?


Frederick II Attempts Reform


Frederick II, known as Frederick the Great, exerted extremely tight control over his subjects during his reign as king of Prussia from 1740 to 1786. Still, he saw himself as the “first servant of the state,” with a duty to work for the common good.


Frederick openly praised Voltaire’s work and invited several of the French intellectuals of the age to Prussia. Some of his first acts as king were to reduce the use of torture and allow a free press. Most of Frederick’s reforms were directed at making the Prussian government more efficient.


To do this, he reorganized the government’s civil service and simplified laws. Frederick also tolerated religious differences, welcoming victims of religious persecution.


“In my kingdom,” he said, “everyone can go to heaven in his own fashion.” His religious tolerance and also his disdain for torture showed Frederick’s genuine belief in enlightened reform. In the end, however, Frederick desired a stronger monarchy and more power for himself.


Frederick II and the Military




Hohenfriedeberg, Attack of Prussian Infantry, This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Commons is a freely licensed media file repository.


A grenadier (derived from the word grenade) was originally a specialized soldier, first established as a distinct role in the mid to late 17th century, for the throwing of grenades and sometimes assault operations.


At this time grenadiers were chosen from the strongest and largest soldiers. By the nineteenth century, the throwing of grenades was no longer relevant, but grenadiers were still chosen for being the most physically powerful soldiers and would lead assaults in the field of battle.


Grenadiers would also often lead the storming of breaches in siege warfare, although this role was more usually fulfilled by all-arm units of volunteers called forlorn hopes, and might also be fulfilled by sappers or pioneers.

In the nineteenth century, certain countries such as France and Argentina established units of "Horse Grenadiers". Like their infantry grenadier counterparts, these horse-mounted soldiers were chosen for their size and strength (i.e. heavy cavalry).


The British adopted this type of unit in their war against the colonists whom few granted could beat the finest army of its day by that time.


This is an illustration of the distinctive Prussian Grenadier cap which would be obvious on a battlefield; this is a file from the Wikimedia Commons.




Cf. The Encyclopedia of Warfare: The Changing Nature of Warfare From Prehistory to Modern-day Armed Conflicts, Robin Cross, pp.


Catherine the Great Studies Philosophes’ Works


Catherine II, or Catherine the Great, empress of Russia, read the works of the philosophes and exchanged letters with Voltaire and Diderot. She praised Voltaire as someone who had “fought the united enemies of humankind: superstition, fanaticism, ignorance, trickery.” Catherine believed in the Enlightenment ideas of equality and liberty.


Catherine, who became empress in 1762, toyed with implementing Enlightenment ideas. Early in her reign, she made some limited reforms in law and government. Catherine abolished torture and established religious tolerance in her lands. She granted nobles a charter of rights and criticized the institution of serfdom. Still, like Frederick in Prussia, Catherine did not intend to give up power. In the end, her main political contribution to Russia proved to be an expanded empire.


Joseph II Continues Reform


In Austria, Hapsburg empress Maria Theresa ruled as an absolute monarch. Although she did not push for reforms, she is considered to be an enlightened despot by some historians because she worked to improve peasants’ way of life. The most radical of the enlightened despots was her son and successor, Joseph II. Joseph was an eager student of the Enlightenment, and he traveled in disguise among his subjects to learn of their problems.


Joseph continued the work of Maria Theresa, who had begun to modernize Austria’s government. Despite opposition, Joseph supported religious equality for Protestants and Jews in his Catholic empire. He ended censorship by allowing a free press and attempted to bring the Catholic Church under royal control. He sold the property of many monasteries that were not involved in education or care of the sick and used the proceeds to support those that were. Joseph even abolished serfdom. Like many of his other reforms, however, this measure was canceled after his death.


Checkpoint


Why were the philosophes interested in sharing their beliefs with European rulers?


Post detailed, specific examples on our Shanawiki page.


Lives of the Majority Change Slowly


Most Europeans were untouched by either courtly or middle-class culture. They remained what they had always been—peasants living in small rural villages. Echoes of serfdom still remained throughout Europe despite advances in Western Europe. Their culture, based on centuries-old traditions, changed slowly.


By the late 1700s, however, radical ideas about equality and social justice finally seeped into peasant villages. While some peasants eagerly sought to topple the old order, others resisted efforts to bring about change. In the 1800s, war and political upheaval, as well as changing economic conditions, would transform peasant life in Europe.


Important Composers included in this section: Bach, Handel, and Haydn, among others. Music is available on Songza.


Bach, Air on the G String (5:21)




Haydn, Deutschland Ueber Alles (3:35), and a bit of trivia about this composition. Do you know which 20th century German political group adopted this song to represent their movement and point of view? Traditional German music was transformed for political and propaganda purposes.




Checkpoint


During this time, why did change occur slowly for most Europeans?


Post a detailed answer with specifics on our Shanawiki page.




Think Thin



Dazed and confused




Poseur






HW: email me at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


There are three questions online on PHSchool.com.


Although the center of the Enlightenment was in France, the ideas of reform spread to the rulers of Austria, Prussia, and Russia.

1. Locate

(a) Paris (b) Prussia (c) Austria

2. Location

Which enlightened despot ruled farthest from Paris?

3. Draw Conclusions

According to the map, approximately how much of Europe was affected by the Enlightenment?

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

AP Economics: 30 September 2009

Prayer


Current Events:


Keynesian Economics According to the Center for Freedom and Prosperity




Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


We are addressing Chapter 2 in particular for the parts not covered in the Quiz. We will cover the non-Quiz material in Chapter 2 for a Test on Chapter 2.


References


Cf. Absolute Advantage: "NAFTA: Are Jobs Being Sucked Out of the United States?"


Cf. Basic Concepts Graphs


Cf. Comparative Advantage


HW should be sent to gmsmith@shanahan.org


1. What did Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage suggest?

2. Use the web AmosWEB (http://www.amosweb.com/cgi-bin/awb_nav.pl) to define the following terms for HW:

production
resources
allocative efficiency
productive efficiency
purchasing power
factors of production
economic growth
standard of living
absolute advantage
comparative advantage

WH II: 30 September 2009

Prayer:


Current events:




We can review the results of the Quiz; I should have my GradeConnect set up soon where grades will be posted.


Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


The online version of the Textbook is available.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


Introduction


Rococo art was an important element of French culture during the ancien regime. The style is highly suggestive of the attitudes and atmosphere in the royal court during the period leading up to the French Revolution. In this activity you will read about four rococo painters and how they experienced the shift from rococo to neoclassicism, and from the ancien regime to the era of the French Revolution.


You can continue to use the "Ancien Regime Rococo" site as a reference.


In particular, consider Fragonard's, "The Good Mother" can be contrasted with an earlier related painting, Rembrandt's, "Holy Family."


Rembrandt's, "Holy Family," is an excellent portrayal of an earlier time.




After considering the link, "Ancien Regime Rococo," we can pick up the lesson from the previous material.


Furniture and tapestries featured delicate shells and flowers, and more pastel colors were used. Portrait painters showed noble subjects in charming rural settings, surrounded by happy servants and pets. Although this style was criticized by the philosophes for its superficiality, it had a vast audience in the upper class and with the growing middle class as well.


The Enlightenment Inspires Composers


The new Enlightenment ideals led composers and musicians to develop new forms of music. There was a transition in music, as well as art, from the baroque style to rococo. An elegant style of music known as “classical” followed. Ballets and opera—plays set to music—were performed at royal courts, and opera houses sprang up from Italy to England. Before this era, only the social elite could afford to commission musicians to play for them. In the early to mid-1700s, however, the growing middle class could afford to pay for concerts to be performed publicly.


Among the towering musical figures of the era was Johann Sebastian Bach. A devout German Lutheran, Bach wrote beautiful religious works for organ and choirs. He also wrote sonatas for violin and harpsichord. Another German-born composer, George Frideric Handel, spent much of his life in England. There, he wrote Water Music and other pieces for King George I, as well as more than 30 operas. His most celebrated work, the Messiah, combines instruments and voices and is often performed at Christmas and Easter.


Handel, Hallelujah (4:07)




Composer Franz Joseph Haydn




Haydn, The Bird, 4th movement, (3:34)


was one of the most important figures in the development of classical music. He helped develop forms for the string quartet and the symphony. Haydn had a close friendship with another famous composer, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.


Mozart was a child prodigy who gained instant celebrity status as a composer and performer. His brilliant operas, graceful symphonies, and moving religious music helped define the new style of composition. Although he died in poverty at age 35, he produced an enormous amount of music during his lifetime. Mozart’s musical legacy thrives today.


Infographic


Rococo Reaction


The Novel Takes Shape


By the 1700s, literature developed new forms and a wider audience. Middle-class readers, for example, liked stories about their own times told in straightforward prose. One result was an outpouring of novels, or long works of prose fiction. English novelists wrote many popular stories. Daniel Defoe wrote Robinson Crusoe, an exciting tale about a sailor shipwrecked on a tropical island. This novel is still well known today. In a novel called Pamela, Samuel Richardson used a series of letters to tell a story about a servant girl. This technique was adopted by other authors of the period.


Checkpoint


How did the arts and literature change as Enlightenment ideas spread?


Post detailed, specific examples on our Shanawiki page.


Enlightened Despots Embrace New Ideas


The courts of Europe became enlivened as philosophes tried to persuade rulers to adopt their ideas. The philosophes hoped to convince the ruling classes that reform was necessary. Some monarchs did accept Enlightenment ideas. Others still practiced absolutism, a political doctrine in which a monarch had seemingly unlimited power. Those that did accept these new ideas became enlightened despots, or absolute rulers who used their power to bring about political and social change.


Map


Enlightened Rulers in the Eighteenth Century


Go online to, PHSchool.com, for an audio guided tour and related questions. The text in the audio is on the page as well. Enter web Code: nap-1721, in each of the two boxes listed there.


Easy-to-Use Web Codes


Summary:


To use a Web Code:

1. Go to PHSchool.com.
2. Enter a particular Web Code.
3. Click on GO!


There are three questions there, listed below:


Map Skills: Map of Eastern Europe


Although the center of the Enlightenment was in France, the ideas of reform spread to the rulers of Austria, Prussia, and Russia.

1. Locate

(a) Paris (b) Prussia (c) Austria

2. Location

Which enlightened despot ruled farthest from Paris?

3. Draw Conclusions

According to the map, approximately how much of Europe was affected by the Enlightenment?


Frederick II Attempts Reform


Frederick II, known as Frederick the Great, exerted extremely tight control over his subjects during his reign as king of Prussia from 1740 to 1786. Still, he saw himself as the “first servant of the state,” with a duty to work for the common good.


Frederick openly praised Voltaire’s work and invited several of the French intellectuals of the age to Prussia. Some of his first acts as king were to reduce the use of torture and allow a free press. Most of Frederick’s reforms were directed at making the Prussian government more efficient.


To do this, he reorganized the government’s civil service and simplified laws. Frederick also tolerated religious differences, welcoming victims of religious persecution.


“In my kingdom,” he said, “everyone can go to heaven in his own fashion.” His religious tolerance and also his disdain for torture showed Frederick’s genuine belief in enlightened reform. In the end, however, Frederick desired a stronger monarchy and more power for himself.


Catherine the Great Studies Philosophes’ Works


Catherine II, or Catherine the Great, empress of Russia, read the works of the philosophes and exchanged letters with Voltaire and Diderot. She praised Voltaire as someone who had “fought the united enemies of humankind: superstition, fanaticism, ignorance, trickery.” Catherine believed in the Enlightenment ideas of equality and liberty.


Catherine, who became empress in 1762, toyed with implementing Enlightenment ideas. Early in her reign, she made some limited reforms in law and government. Catherine abolished torture and established religious tolerance in her lands. She granted nobles a charter of rights and criticized the institution of serfdom. Still, like Frederick in Prussia, Catherine did not intend to give up power. In the end, her main political contribution to Russia proved to be an expanded empire.


Joseph II Continues Reform


In Austria, Hapsburg empress Maria Theresa ruled as an absolute monarch. Although she did not push for reforms, she is considered to be an enlightened despot by some historians because she worked to improve peasants’ way of life. The most radical of the enlightened despots was her son and successor, Joseph II. Joseph was an eager student of the Enlightenment, and he traveled in disguise among his subjects to learn of their problems.


Joseph continued the work of Maria Theresa, who had begun to modernize Austria’s government. Despite opposition, Joseph supported religious equality for Protestants and Jews in his Catholic empire. He ended censorship by allowing a free press and attempted to bring the Catholic Church under royal control. He sold the property of many monasteries that were not involved in education or care of the sick and used the proceeds to support those that were. Joseph even abolished serfdom. Like many of his other reforms, however, this measure was canceled after his death.


Checkpoint


Why were the philosophes interested in sharing their beliefs with European rulers?


Post detailed, specific examples on our Shanawiki page.


Lives of the Majority Change Slowly


Most Europeans were untouched by either courtly or middle-class culture. They remained what they had always been—peasants living in small rural villages. Echoes of serfdom still remained throughout Europe despite advances in Western Europe. Their culture, based on centuries-old traditions, changed slowly.


By the late 1700s, however, radical ideas about equality and social justice finally seeped into peasant villages. While some peasants eagerly sought to topple the old order, others resisted efforts to bring about change. In the 1800s, war and political upheaval, as well as changing economic conditions, would transform peasant life in Europe.


Important Composers included in this section: Bach, Handel, and Haydn, among others. Music is available on Songza.


Bach, Air on the G String (5:21)




Haydn, Deutschland Ueber Alles (3:35), and a bit of trivia about this composition. Do you know which 20th century German political group adopted this song to represent their movement and point of view? Traditional German music was transformed for political and propaganda purposes.




Checkpoint


During this time, why did change occur slowly for most Europeans?


Post a detailed answer with specifics on our Shanawiki page.


HW: email me at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


Based on the material, "Rococo Reaction," answer the following:


1. Make Generalizations

Based on what you see in the collection of images here ("Rococo Reaction"), describe what you think it would have been like to live during this time period.

2. Draw Inferences

Why might the philosophes have disliked the rococo style?

AP Economics: 29 September 2009

Prayer


Current Events (none today because of the assembly):


Quiz hand-back and review.


Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


We are a short schedule for today but we will finish up other issues in Chapter Two with a PowerPoint presentation.


HW email to me, nothing written today at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


Read Chapter 2 in particular for the parts not covered in the Quiz. We will cover the non-Quiz material in Chapter 2.

Monday, September 28, 2009

WH II 29 September 2009

Prayer:


Current events:


Dennis, the Constitutional Peasant (courtesy of Monty Python)




In a humorous fashion, the British comedy group Monty Python contrasts the divine right of kings, in contrast to a government of the people. The philosophical differences between monarchy and rule by the people are explored in this comedy sketch.


We can review the results of the Quiz.


Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


The online version of the Textbook is available.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.



Learn

Focus Question (Honors students should be able to add detailed, specific, examples in answering this question) to be added (first come, first serve) on our Shanawiki page.


As Enlightenment ideas spread across Europe, what cultural and political changes took place?


New Ideas Challenge Society


Enlightenment ideas spread quickly through many levels of society. Educated people all over Europe eagerly read not only Diderot’s Encyclopedia but also the small, inexpensive pamphlets that printers churned out on a broad range of issues. More and more, people saw that reform was necessary in order to achieve a just society.


During the Middle Ages, most Europeans had accepted without question a society based on divine-right rule, a strict class system, and a belief in heavenly reward for earthly suffering. In the Age of Reason, such ideas seemed unscientific and irrational. A just society, Enlightenment thinkers taught, should ensure social justice and happiness in this world. Not everyone agreed with this idea of replacing the values that existed, however.


Writers Face Censorship


Most, but not all, government and church authorities felt they had a sacred duty to defend the old order. They believed that God had set up the old order. To protect against the attacks of the Enlightenment, they waged a war of censorship, or restricting access to ideas and information. They banned and burned books and imprisoned writers.


To avoid censorship, philosophes and writers like Montesquieu and Voltaire sometimes disguised their ideas in works of fiction. In the Persian Letters, Montesquieu used two fictional Persian travelers, named Usbek and Rica, to mock French society. The hero of Voltaire’s satirical novel Candide, published in 1759, travels across Europe and even to the Americas and the Middle East in search of “the best of all possible worlds.” Voltaire slyly uses the tale to expose the corruption and hypocrisy of European society.


Satire by Swift




Jonathan Swift published the satirical Gulliver’s Travels in 1726. Here, an illustration from the book depicts a bound Gulliver and the Lilliputians, who are six-inch-tall, bloodthirsty characters. Although Gulliver’s Travels satirizes political life in eighteenth-century England, it is still a classic today.


Checkpoint


What did those opposed to Enlightenment ideas do to stop the spread of information?


Post detailed, specific examples to our Shanawiki page.


Arts and Literature Reflect New Ideas


In the 1600s and 1700s, the arts evolved to meet changing tastes. As in earlier periods, artists and composers had to please their patrons, the men and women who commissioned works from them or gave them jobs.


From Grandeur to Charm


In the age of Louis XIV, courtly art and architecture were either in the Greek and Roman tradition or in a grand, ornate style known as baroque. Baroque paintings were huge, colorful, and full of excitement. They glorified historic battles or the lives of saints. Such works matched the grandeur of European courts at that time.


Louis XV and his court led a much less formal lifestyle than Louis XIV. Architects and designers reflected this change by developing the rococo style.


Rococo art moved away from religion and, unlike the heavy splendor of the baroque, was lighter, elegant, and charming. Rococo art in salons was believed to encourage the imagination.


For example, we can consider: "Rococo Art." We will examine this art in more detail (see below).


Introduction


Rococo art was an important element of French culture during the ancien regime. The style is highly suggestive of the attitudes and atmosphere in the royal court during the period leading up to the French Revolution. In this activity you will read about four rococo painters and how they experienced the shift from rococo to neoclassicism, and from the ancien regime to the era of the French Revolution.


Destination Title: "Ancien Regime Rococo"


Directions

Start at the Ancien Regime Rococo Web site.

* Read the introductory section, taking notes as you go.
* Click on the links to read about the rococo artists François Boucher and Jean-Honore Fragonard.


In particular, consider Fragonard's, "The Good Mother." Fragonard can be contrasted with an earlier related painting, Rembrandt's, "Holy Family." We will consider the similarities and differences between the two illustrations.


Rembrandt's, "Holy Family," is an excellent portrayal of an earlier time.




After considering the link, "Ancien Regime Rococo," we can pick up the lesson from the previous material.


Furniture and tapestries featured delicate shells and flowers, and more pastel colors were used. Portrait painters showed noble subjects in charming rural settings, surrounded by happy servants and pets. Although this style was criticized by the philosophes for its superficiality, it had a vast audience in the upper class and with the growing middle class as well.


The Enlightenment Inspires Composers


The new Enlightenment ideals led composers and musicians to develop new forms of music. There was a transition in music, as well as art, from the baroque style to rococo. An elegant style of music known as “classical” followed. Ballets and opera—plays set to music—were performed at royal courts, and opera houses sprang up from Italy to England. Before this era, only the social elite could afford to commission musicians to play for them. In the early to mid-1700s, however, the growing middle class could afford to pay for concerts to be performed publicly.


Among the towering musical figures of the era was Johann Sebastian Bach. A devout German Lutheran, Bach wrote beautiful religious works for organ and choirs. He also wrote sonatas for violin and harpsichord. Another German-born composer, George Frideric Handel, spent much of his life in England. There, he wrote Water Music and other pieces for King George I, as well as more than 30 operas. His most celebrated work, the Messiah, combines instruments and voices and is often performed at Christmas and Easter.


Handel, Hallelujah (4:07)




Composer Franz Joseph Haydn




Haydn, The Bird, 4th movement, (3:34)


was one of the most important figures in the development of classical music. He helped develop forms for the string quartet and the symphony. Haydn had a close friendship with another famous composer, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.


Mozart was a child prodigy who gained instant celebrity status as a composer and performer. His brilliant operas, graceful symphonies, and moving religious music helped define the new style of composition. Although he died in poverty at age 35, he produced an enormous amount of music during his lifetime. Mozart’s musical legacy thrives today.


Infographic


Rococo Reaction


The Novel Takes Shape


By the 1700s, literature developed new forms and a wider audience. Middle-class readers, for example, liked stories about their own times told in straightforward prose. One result was an outpouring of novels, or long works of prose fiction. English novelists wrote many popular stories. Daniel Defoe wrote Robinson Crusoe, an exciting tale about a sailor shipwrecked on a tropical island. This novel is still well known today. In a novel called Pamela, Samuel Richardson used a series of letters to tell a story about a servant girl. This technique was adopted by other authors of the period.


Checkpoint


How did the arts and literature change as Enlightenment ideas spread?


Post detailed, specific examples on our Shanawiki page.


Enlightened Despots Embrace New Ideas


The courts of Europe became enlivened as philosophes tried to persuade rulers to adopt their ideas. The philosophes hoped to convince the ruling classes that reform was necessary. Some monarchs did accept Enlightenment ideas. Others still practiced absolutism, a political doctrine in which a monarch had seemingly unlimited power. Those that did accept these new ideas became enlightened despots, or absolute rulers who used their power to bring about political and social change.


Map


Enlightened Rulers in the Eighteenth Century


Go online to, PHSchool.com, for an audio guided tour and related questions. The text in the audio is on the page as well. Enter web Code: nap-1721, in each of the two boxes listed there.


Easy-to-Use Web Codes


Summary:


To use a Web Code:

1. Go to PHSchool.com.
2. Enter a particular Web Code.
3. Click on GO!


There are three questions there, listed below:


Map Skills: Map of Eastern Europe


Although the center of the Enlightenment was in France, the ideas of reform spread to the rulers of Austria, Prussia, and Russia.

1. Locate

(a) Paris (b) Prussia (c) Austria

2. Location

Which enlightened despot ruled farthest from Paris?

3. Draw Conclusions

According to the map, approximately how much of Europe was affected by the Enlightenment?


Frederick II Attempts Reform


Frederick II, known as Frederick the Great, exerted extremely tight control over his subjects during his reign as king of Prussia from 1740 to 1786. Still, he saw himself as the “first servant of the state,” with a duty to work for the common good.


Frederick openly praised Voltaire’s work and invited several of the French intellectuals of the age to Prussia. Some of his first acts as king were to reduce the use of torture and allow a free press. Most of Frederick’s reforms were directed at making the Prussian government more efficient.


To do this, he reorganized the government’s civil service and simplified laws. Frederick also tolerated religious differences, welcoming victims of religious persecution.


“In my kingdom,” he said, “everyone can go to heaven in his own fashion.” His religious tolerance and also his disdain for torture showed Frederick’s genuine belief in enlightened reform. In the end, however, Frederick desired a stronger monarchy and more power for himself.


Catherine the Great Studies Philosophes’ Works


Catherine II, or Catherine the Great, empress of Russia, read the works of the philosophes and exchanged letters with Voltaire and Diderot. She praised Voltaire as someone who had “fought the united enemies of humankind: superstition, fanaticism, ignorance, trickery.” Catherine believed in the Enlightenment ideas of equality and liberty.


Catherine, who became empress in 1762, toyed with implementing Enlightenment ideas. Early in her reign, she made some limited reforms in law and government. Catherine abolished torture and established religious tolerance in her lands. She granted nobles a charter of rights and criticized the institution of serfdom. Still, like Frederick in Prussia, Catherine did not intend to give up power. In the end, her main political contribution to Russia proved to be an expanded empire.


Joseph II Continues Reform


In Austria, Hapsburg empress Maria Theresa ruled as an absolute monarch. Although she did not push for reforms, she is considered to be an enlightened despot by some historians because she worked to improve peasants’ way of life. The most radical of the enlightened despots was her son and successor, Joseph II. Joseph was an eager student of the Enlightenment, and he traveled in disguise among his subjects to learn of their problems.


Joseph continued the work of Maria Theresa, who had begun to modernize Austria’s government. Despite opposition, Joseph supported religious equality for Protestants and Jews in his Catholic empire. He ended censorship by allowing a free press and attempted to bring the Catholic Church under royal control. He sold the property of many monasteries that were not involved in education or care of the sick and used the proceeds to support those that were. Joseph even abolished serfdom. Like many of his other reforms, however, this measure was canceled after his death.


Checkpoint


Why were the philosophes interested in sharing their beliefs with European rulers?


Post detailed, specific examples on our Shanawiki page.


Lives of the Majority Change Slowly


Most Europeans were untouched by either courtly or middle-class culture. They remained what they had always been—peasants living in small rural villages. Echoes of serfdom still remained throughout Europe despite advances in Western Europe. Their culture, based on centuries-old traditions, changed slowly.


By the late 1700s, however, radical ideas about equality and social justice finally seeped into peasant villages. While some peasants eagerly sought to topple the old order, others resisted efforts to bring about change. In the 1800s, war and political upheaval, as well as changing economic conditions, would transform peasant life in Europe.


Important Composers included in this section: Bach, Handel, and Haydn, among others. Music is available on Songza.


Bach, Air on the G String (5:21)




Haydn, Deutschland Ueber Alles (3:35), and a bit of trivia about this composition. Do you know which 20th century German political group adopted this song to represent their movement and point of view? Traditional German music was transformed for political and propaganda purposes.




Checkpoint


During this time, why did change occur slowly for most Europeans?


Post a detailed answer with specifics on our Shanawiki page.


HW: email me at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


1. Does The Magic Flute evoke a different emotion than Eine kleine Nachtmusik? What is the difference between the two pieces?
2. Consider Fragonard's, The Good Mother:


What make this work so charming? What feelings does Fragonard intend to induce in the viewer? Compared to his erotic and "gallant" pictures, what does this work say about French life at the end of the 18th century? Of course, we can only speculate here, but is this painting a foretaste of "bourgeois art?" Is the "good mother" painted precisely because she and her child are radically separated from all the frivolity of the ancien regime?

Sunday, September 27, 2009

AP Economics: 28 September 2009

Prayer


Current Events:


How do the Obama deficits compare with past presidents? And how did the national debt get so big anyway. This video tries to answer those questions by looking at the debt as a road trip and seeing how fast different administrations have been traveling.




Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


We will need to hold off handing back the Quizzes and reviewing the material until all of your colleagues have taken the Quiz.


Overhead In-class exercise

1. Read the summaries below of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:
* The Five Year Plans
* The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact
* Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens

Overhead Student Handout Research Exercise

2. Prepare a tabled presentation of your research for the class. Your presentation should identify alternatives and costs and should make a case for your opinion on the following questions:

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs?

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

The Five Year Plans

In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution and World War I, the weakened condition of the Soviet economy was clearly visible. Output in every economic sector had declined: agricultural output was well below pre-war levels; the availability of consumer goods had fallen dramatically; and industrial output faced a long, slow path to recovery.

During the early to mid-1920s, Soviet leaders engaged in a great deal of internal debate about the relative importance of peasant owned and controlled agriculture on the one hand and state-run industry on the other. The essential question concerned the best path to economic growth: Was economic growth - national wealth and prosperity - best achieved through growth of private farms and the agricultural sector or was it best achieved through state-directed investment in industry? Soviet leaders clearly felt that they could not pursue both and that a choice would have to be made.

The Five Year Plan called for investing in industry by limiting the resources available for the production of consumer goods and the farm sector and directing those resources to the production of such industrial essentials as steel and electricity. For this to be accomplished, the profits from agricultural would have to be used for investment in industry, and satisfying citizens' desires for consumer goods and housing would have to be delayed. The alternative was to encourage the use of resources to satisfy the immediate desires of citizens for food and other agricultural and consumer goods. This would mean delaying investment in the capital necessary for heavy industry and future industrial strength.


Consider the Soviet leaders' choice by drawing a table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns:


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think the leaders made the right choice? Why?

Results of the choice to adopt the First Five Year Plan

By implementing the first of many Five Year Plans, the Soviet leaders clearly chose to push for high economic growth rates through investment in heavy industry and military production. One immediate result of implementing the plan was the seizing of agricultural harvests for redistribution by the state. Farming was collectivized in state-run cooperatives, and there was little or no emphasis on producing consumer goods. In addition, prices and wages were set by the government, which left few consumers with money for consumer purchases, in any case.

Investment in industry rose to 25% by the late 1920s, meaning that effectively one-fourth of the resources of the Soviet Union were being diverted into building an industrial foundation. During the First Five Year Plan (1928-1933) the Soviet economy grew by 48%. Industrial goods grew by 113% and electric power production by 227%. On the other hand, consumer goods grew by only 1%.

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

Nazi Non-Aggression Pact

In the years immediately preceding World War II, Joseph Stalin worked hard to keep the Soviet Union isolated from, although not necessarily neutral in, the growing tensions in Europe. He was very much aware that Hitler's Germany posed a threat to the Soviet Union. He was very much concerned that Hitler's powerful army might invade and take the agriculturally rich Ukraine. He also knew that his own army was no match for Hitler's and that, at the very least, he needed time to prepare to defend the Soviet Union from the Nazis. With these concerns very much in mind, in early 1939 Stalin entered into two sets of negotiations: with the French and British on one hand and with Nazi Germany on the other.

Looking at Soviet history in the years before the war, it is apparent that Stalin was a pragmatist, looking for the circumstances that would be most favorable to the USSR. First, the Soviet Union joined the League of Nations - a move that Stalin had previously opposed - presumably to become more friendly with the Western nations. (However, the known atrocities of Stalinist regime and the perceived weakness of the Soviet military kept the Soviet Union from reaching any agreements with western nations working through the League.) As events heated up in Europe, Stalin had to ask himself whether an alliance with Great Britain and France, and their combined military strength, would deter Hitler, or whether it would only mean that the Soviet forces would be exposed to the fury of German attack from the very beginning of an armed conflict.

Stalin's greatest fear was to be dragged into a war against Germany while other countries like France and Great Britain sat on the sidelines and watched, and an alliance with Germany offered other possibilities. The Nazis proposed the division of Poland between Germany and the USSR in return for not having to worry about attack from the east as they dealt with their foes in the west. From Stalin's point of view, Soviet-Polish relations had never been particularly good, and the Soviet Union had no reason to come to Poland's assistance. Perhaps most importantly, such an agreement would provide an opportunity to stay out of the war. Additionally, the Germans seemed likely to agree to recognize the Baltic area as belonging to the Soviet Union's "sphere of influence," advancing Stalin's perennial goal of extending the Soviet empire.

Consider Stalin's choice by drawing another table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns.


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think Stalin made the right choice? Why?

Results of Stalin's Choice

The signing of the Non-Aggression Pact between the Soviets and the Germans was announced on August 23, 1939, and came as a shock and surprise to the rest of the world. On September 1, German troops invaded Poland, and shortly thereafter, Soviet troops crossed Poland's eastern boundary to claim their share of the spoils. Later the Non-Aggression pact was extended, allowing Stalin to include Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia within the Soviet "sphere of influence."

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?


Emphasis On Education*

*Statistics in this scenario were taken from Hedrick Smith, The New Russians, p. 20.

While the rate of change seemed slow in many areas of Soviet society and economy in the years that followed World War II, this was not the case with the area of education, which was targeted early as a priority for investment. At the time of the 1917 Revolution, Russia was primarily an illiterate peasant society with a primitive work force comprised largely of unskilled manual laborers. It is estimated that the illiteracy rate was 75% and that school enrollment was only about ten million in the early 1920's. In part because of a desire to teach about the writings of Lenin and the achievements of communism, but also to help move the country from an agrarian backward economy to a world power, schools and education were areas where the Soviets invested heavily right from the beginning. In addition, school attendance was given high importance in Soviet society.

Consider the Soviet leaders' choice by drawing a table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns.


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think the Soviet leaders made the right choice? Why?

Results of the Choice:

By 1980 the literacy rate was one of the highest in the world. The increase in the numbers of people enrolled in higher education institutions was also striking. In 1950 there were 1.2 million university-level students in the Soviet Union; by the mid-1980s, that number had increased to over 5.4 million students being taught by half a million professors and instructors. By 1985 the Soviet Union had one of the largest bodies of scientific researchers in the world: 1.5 million scientists doing research work.

This emphasis on education produced both a blessing and a curse for the Soviet Union. It was a blessing in that the level of literacy, the quality of the labor force and the knowledge of the leadership increased dramatically. It was a curse in the fact that it was much easier for Soviet citizens to learn and read about life in the West, (if they could obtain banned books and newspapers). The university educated, or intelligentsia as they were called in the Soviet Union, became well-read in history and western thought. For this group blindness to the lies of the past and unquestioning loyalty to the Marxist and Leninist ideals were no longer acceptable. After all, the Soviet universities had taught them to think.

Questioning by the intelligentsia was perceived by Soviet leaders as a threat; critics were branded disloyal. Stalin conducted purges that sent many of the intelligentsia to concentration camps in Siberia, or in some cases even to death sentences. While the education system continued to increase the level of literacy and the size of the intelligentsia, it was only in the last years of the Soviet Union that the questioning of the past and present policies of the communist leadership came out in the open. Many observers of the Soviet Union believe that this force of education and the millions of individuals who were literally trained to question the past helped to break the hold that the communist party had on the loyalties of Soviet citizens. Gorbachev, the architect of perestroika, was part of this growing educated middle class, the first university-educated Soviet leader since Lenin.

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.


We will finish up other issues in Chapter Two with a PowerPoint presentation.


HW email to me at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


You pick the last of three scenarios to do the HW on. You should have already done two, now you are picking a third of the three scenarios to work on (Cf. the summaries above in the post for today): a)* The Five Year Plans; b) * The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact; or, c) * Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens. Just pick a last of three scenarios and answer the HW questions: gmsmith@shanahan.org.


1. * All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

2. * Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

3. * Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

4. * Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

5. * Who bore the costs?


Summary and review of lesson follows.

Friday, September 25, 2009

AP Economics: 25 September 2009

Prayer


Quiz today: you need a pencil. On Quiz and Test days, we will have daily prayer first and then the Quiz/Test.


Current Events:


How do the Obama deficits compare with past presidents? And how did the national debt get so big anyway. This video tries to answer those questions by looking at the debt as a road trip and seeing how fast different administrations have been traveling.




Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


Overhead In-class exercise

1. Read the summaries below of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:
* The Five Year Plans
* The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact
* Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens

2. For each event or decision, answer the following questions:

* What were the considered alternatives at the time of choice?

* What were the perceived benefits of each considered alternative at the time of choice?

* What action was taken; what choice was made?

* What was the opportunity cost of that choice? (Remember that the opportunity cost of one alternative is the perceived benefits of the other alternative - the benefits that are given up. The benefit of doing something becomes the cost of not doing it.)

3. Choose one of the 3 issues you studied and prepare answers for the class. Your preparation should identify alternatives and costs and should make a case for your opinion on the following questions:

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs?

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

Overhead Student Handout Research Exercise

Directions:

1. Read the summary of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:

* The Five Year Plans

* The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact

* Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens

2. For each event or decision, answer the following questions:

* What were the considered alternatives at the time of choice?

* What were the perceived benefits of each considered alternative at the
time of choice?

* What action was taken; what choice was made?

* What was the opportunity cost of that choice? (Remember that the opportunity cost of one alternative is the perceived benefits of the other alternative - the benefits that are given up. The benefit of doing something becomes the cost of not doing it.)

3. Research one of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:
* Berlin Blockade
* Cuban Missile Crisis
* Space Race
* Exile A. Solzhenitzyn to Siberian gulags and then to US
* Gorbachev - perestroika political reforms

4. Prepare a tabled presentation of your research for the class. Your presentation should identify alternatives and costs and should make a case for your opinion on the following questions:

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs?

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

The Five Year Plans

In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution and World War I, the weakened condition of the Soviet economy was clearly visible. Output in every economic sector had declined: agricultural output was well below pre-war levels; the availability of consumer goods had fallen dramatically; and industrial output faced a long, slow path to recovery.

During the early to mid-1920s, Soviet leaders engaged in a great deal of internal debate about the relative importance of peasant owned and controlled agriculture on the one hand and state-run industry on the other. The essential question concerned the best path to economic growth: Was economic growth - national wealth and prosperity - best achieved through growth of private farms and the agricultural sector or was it best achieved through state-directed investment in industry? Soviet leaders clearly felt that they could not pursue both and that a choice would have to be made.

The Five Year Plan called for investing in industry by limiting the resources available for the production of consumer goods and the farm sector and directing those resources to the production of such industrial essentials as steel and electricity. For this to be accomplished, the profits from agricultural would have to be used for investment in industry, and satisfying citizens' desires for consumer goods and housing would have to be delayed. The alternative was to encourage the use of resources to satisfy the immediate desires of citizens for food and other agricultural and consumer goods. This would mean delaying investment in the capital necessary for heavy industry and future industrial strength.


Consider the Soviet leaders' choice by drawing a table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns:


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think the leaders made the right choice? Why?

Results of the choice to adopt the First Five Year Plan

By implementing the first of many Five Year Plans, the Soviet leaders clearly chose to push for high economic growth rates through investment in heavy industry and military production. One immediate result of implementing the plan was the seizing of agricultural harvests for redistribution by the state. Farming was collectivized in state-run cooperatives, and there was little or no emphasis on producing consumer goods. In addition, prices and wages were set by the government, which left few consumers with money for consumer purchases, in any case.

Investment in industry rose to 25% by the late 1920s, meaning that effectively one-fourth of the resources of the Soviet Union were being diverted into building an industrial foundation. During the First Five Year Plan (1928-1933) the Soviet economy grew by 48%. Industrial goods grew by 113% and electric power production by 227%. On the other hand, consumer goods grew by only 1%.

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

Nazi Non-Aggression Pact

In the years immediately preceding World War II, Joseph Stalin worked hard to keep the Soviet Union isolated from, although not necessarily neutral in, the growing tensions in Europe. He was very much aware that Hitler's Germany posed a threat to the Soviet Union. He was very much concerned that Hitler's powerful army might invade and take the agriculturally rich Ukraine. He also knew that his own army was no match for Hitler's and that, at the very least, he needed time to prepare to defend the Soviet Union from the Nazis. With these concerns very much in mind, in early 1939 Stalin entered into two sets of negotiations: with the French and British on one hand and with Nazi Germany on the other.

Looking at Soviet history in the years before the war, it is apparent that Stalin was a pragmatist, looking for the circumstances that would be most favorable to the USSR. First, the Soviet Union joined the League of Nations - a move that Stalin had previously opposed - presumably to become more friendly with the Western nations. (However, the known atrocities of Stalinist regime and the perceived weakness of the Soviet military kept the Soviet Union from reaching any agreements with western nations working through the League.) As events heated up in Europe, Stalin had to ask himself whether an alliance with Great Britain and France, and their combined military strength, would deter Hitler, or whether it would only mean that the Soviet forces would be exposed to the fury of German attack from the very beginning of an armed conflict.

Stalin's greatest fear was to be dragged into a war against Germany while other countries like France and Great Britain sat on the sidelines and watched, and an alliance with Germany offered other possibilities. The Nazis proposed the division of Poland between Germany and the USSR in return for not having to worry about attack from the east as they dealt with their foes in the west. From Stalin's point of view, Soviet-Polish relations had never been particularly good, and the Soviet Union had no reason to come to Poland's assistance. Perhaps most importantly, such an agreement would provide an opportunity to stay out of the war. Additionally, the Germans seemed likely to agree to recognize the Baltic area as belonging to the Soviet Union's "sphere of influence," advancing Stalin's perennial goal of extending the Soviet empire.

Consider Stalin's choice by drawing another table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns.


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think Stalin made the right choice? Why?

Results of Stalin's Choice

The signing of the Non-Aggression Pact between the Soviets and the Germans was announced on August 23, 1939, and came as a shock and surprise to the rest of the world. On September 1, German troops invaded Poland, and shortly thereafter, Soviet troops crossed Poland's eastern boundary to claim their share of the spoils. Later the Non-Aggression pact was extended, allowing Stalin to include Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia within the Soviet "sphere of influence."

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?


Emphasis On Education*

*Statistics in this scenario were taken from Hedrick Smith, The New Russians, p. 20.

While the rate of change seemed slow in many areas of Soviet society and economy in the years that followed World War II, this was not the case with the area of education, which was targeted early as a priority for investment. At the time of the 1917 Revolution, Russia was primarily an illiterate peasant society with a primitive work force comprised largely of unskilled manual laborers. It is estimated that the illiteracy rate was 75% and that school enrollment was only about ten million in the early 1920's. In part because of a desire to teach about the writings of Lenin and the achievements of communism, but also to help move the country from an agrarian backward economy to a world power, schools and education were areas where the Soviets invested heavily right from the beginning. In addition, school attendance was given high importance in Soviet society.

Consider the Soviet leaders' choice by drawing a table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns.


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think the Soviet leaders made the right choice? Why?

Results of the Choice:

By 1980 the literacy rate was one of the highest in the world. The increase in the numbers of people enrolled in higher education institutions was also striking. In 1950 there were 1.2 million university-level students in the Soviet Union; by the mid-1980s, that number had increased to over 5.4 million students being taught by half a million professors and instructors. By 1985 the Soviet Union had one of the largest bodies of scientific researchers in the world: 1.5 million scientists doing research work.

This emphasis on education produced both a blessing and a curse for the Soviet Union. It was a blessing in that the level of literacy, the quality of the labor force and the knowledge of the leadership increased dramatically. It was a curse in the fact that it was much easier for Soviet citizens to learn and read about life in the West, (if they could obtain banned books and newspapers). The university educated, or intelligentsia as they were called in the Soviet Union, became well-read in history and western thought. For this group blindness to the lies of the past and unquestioning loyalty to the Marxist and Leninist ideals were no longer acceptable. After all, the Soviet universities had taught them to think.

Questioning by the intelligentsia was perceived by Soviet leaders as a threat; critics were branded disloyal. Stalin conducted purges that sent many of the intelligentsia to concentration camps in Siberia, or in some cases even to death sentences. While the education system continued to increase the level of literacy and the size of the intelligentsia, it was only in the last years of the Soviet Union that the questioning of the past and present policies of the communist leadership came out in the open. Many observers of the Soviet Union believe that this force of education and the millions of individuals who were literally trained to question the past helped to break the hold that the communist party had on the loyalties of Soviet citizens. Gorbachev, the architect of perestroika, was part of this growing educated middle class, the first university-educated Soviet leader since Lenin.

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.


We will finish up other issues in Chapter Two with a PowerPoint presentation.


HW email to me at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


You pick the last of three scenarios to do the HW on. You should have already done two, now you are picking a third of the three scenarios to work on (Cf. the summaries above in the post for today): a)* The Five Year Plans; b) * The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact; or, c) * Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens. Just pick a last of three scenarios and answer the HW questions.


1. * All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

2. * Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

3. * Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

4. * Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

5. * Who bore the costs?


Summary and review of lesson follows.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

WH II: 25 September 2009

Prayer:


On Quiz or Test days, we will take exams directly after opening prayer. This is Quiz day; you need a pencil.


If finished early, cover up your answers until all the Quizzes/Tests are collected. You may sit quietly without talking and take out other books or materials while you waiting for others to finish.


Current events:


The issues to consider, based on the Constitution and Bill of Rights we enjoy in the U.S. as a heritage of the Enlightenment, is the role that the military plays in the life of American civilians.


Should we have a military presence in the ordinary, day-to-day life of American civilians? Should we have military checkpoints as other countries do? Should the military be involved when there are no riots, demonstrations, or other extraordinary circumstances? Should the U.S. deploy combat troops in the U.S.? Who should decide, or should there be a separation of powers, to calling out combat troops? What has happened before when the National Guard was called out to counter the actions of citizens?


In any case, since 1 October 2008, the US Army announced that combat troops will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command (NORTHCOM), as an on-call federal response force for emergencies.

This marks the first time an active U.S. Army unit will be given a dedicated assignment to NORTHCOM, where it is stated they may be "called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control."

Since October 2008 combat troops returning from Iraq are deploying across the U.S. The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 according to Pentagon officials.

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction. The Act prohibits the federal uniformed services, the military, from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property.

Except in extraordinary circumstances, such as during the Los Angeles riots in 1992, or when necessary quelling riots in the late 60s, military forces are not to be deployed in the U.S.


However, soldiers have been appearing in everyday events, this past year at the Boston Marathon, at the Kentucky Derby, at the last Inauguration, and in routine murder investigations.

On August 4, 2009, the Illinois National Guard deployed combat vehicles in Springfield.

Staff Sgt. Daniel Becker told the AP that people shouldn’t be afraid.

“No, they shouldn’t be afraid — they need to let the idea sink in that it is normal for armed troops to be on the streets. After they get used to military vehicles on the roads, they will need to get accustomed to military checkpoints like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan.”




In Kentucky and Ohio military checkpoints appeared around the downtown area on 6 September 2009. Officially, this was done for traffic control purposes during the annual Riverfest celebration that is held on both sides of the Ohio River.

The officers interviewed at the festival stated that they were on duty to help the local police. They did make it clear that they would follow orders, whatever they may be. They are simply soldiers doing their duty.


On 29 July 2009, The Onion produced a parody of the news. It is not real, however, they are suggesting something that could be possible. This is something to think about, and, as one student put it after viewing the clip, this is a real "head-scratcher."



For the parody of the news, this is supposedly a heavily classified clip that ran on C-SPAN. The words and phrases released include:


"80% of population effected"


"outbreak"


"spewing"


"escape"


"airborne"


"flesh-eating"


"uncontrollable"


"Jesus"


"casualties"


"darkest nightmares"


"body disposal actions"


"underground protected centers"


"new bill of rights drafted and approved by . . . "




As reported on 14 August 2009, "The Pentagon Wants Authority to Post Almost 400,000 Military Personnel in U.S."

As a point of contrast, the highest number of troops stationed in Iraq during wartime conflict was about 162,000.


In classes about the Enlightenment, we have been discussing liberties, bill of rights, and the relationship between people and the government. Now we have troops in the streets, possibly in preparation for civil disorder, and a pandemic.



Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


The online version of the Textbook is available.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


The Enlightenment thinkers knew civil disorder and the conflict brought on by the English Civil War. Can they provide guidance for us today?


Voltaire was a passionate defender of individual freedom.


Voltaire Defends Freedom of Thought

Probably the most famous of the philosophes was François-Marie Arouet, who took the name Voltaire. “My trade,” said Voltaire, “is to say what I think,” and he did so throughout his long, controversial life.

Voltaire used biting wit as a weapon to expose the abuses of his day. He targeted corrupt officials and idle aristocrats. With his pen, he battled inequality, injustice, and superstition. He detested the slave trade and deplored religious prejudice.

Voltaire’s outspoken attacks offended both the French government and the Catholic Church. He was imprisoned and forced into exile. Even as he saw his books outlawed and even burned, he continued to defend the principle of freedom of speech.


Montesquieu


Montesquieu Advances the Idea of Separation of Powers


Another early and influential thinker was Baron de Montesquieu (mahn tus kyoo). Montesquieu studied the governments of Europe, from Italy to England. He read about ancient and medieval Europe, and learned about Chinese and Native American cultures. His sharp criticism of absolute monarchy would open doors for later debate.


Born to wealth, Charles Louis de Secondat (1689–1755) inherited the title Baron de Montesquieu from his uncle. Like many other reformers, he did not let his privileged status keep him from becoming a voice for democracy.

His first book titled Persian Letters ridiculed the French government and social classes. In his work published in 1748, The Spirit of the Laws, he advanced the idea of separation of powers—a foundation of modern democracy.

In 1748, Montesquieu published The Spirit of the Laws, in which he discussed governments throughout history. Montesquieu felt that the best way to protect liberty was to divide the various functions and powers of government among three branches: the legislative, executive, and judicial.

He also felt that each branch of government should be able to serve as a check on the other two, an idea that we call checks and balances. Montesquieu’s beliefs would soon profoundly affect the Framers of the United States Constitution.


Diderot Edits the Encyclopedia

Denis Diderot (dee duh roh) worked for years to produce a 28-volume set of books called the Encyclopedia. As the editor, Diderot did more than just compile articles.

His purpose was “to change the general way of thinking” by explaining ideas on topics such as government, philosophy, and religion. Diderot’s Encyclopedia included articles by leading thinkers of the day, including Montesquieu and Voltaire.

In these articles, the philosophes denounced slavery, praised freedom of expression, and urged education for all. They attacked divine-right theory and traditional religions. Critics raised an outcry.

The French government argued that the Encyclopedia was an attack on public morals, and the pope threatened to excommunicate Roman Catholics who bought or read the volumes.

Despite these and other efforts to ban the Encyclopedia, more than 4,000 copies were printed between 1751 and 1789. When translated into other languages, the Encyclopedia helped spread Enlightenment ideas throughout Europe and across the Atlantic Ocean to the Americas.

Rousseau Promotes The Social Contract

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (roo soh), believed that people in their natural state were basically good. This natural innocence, he felt, was corrupted by the evils of society, especially the unequal distribution of property.

Many reformers and revolutionaries later adopted this view. Among them were Thomas Paine and Marquis de Lafayette, who were leading figures of the American and French Revolutions.

In 1762, Rousseau set forth his ideas about government and society in The Social Contract. Rousseau felt that society placed too many limitations on people’s behavior.

He believed that some controls were necessary, but that they should be minimal. Additionally, only governments that had been freely elected should impose these controls.

Rousseau put his faith in the “general will,” or the best conscience of the people. The good of the community as a whole, he said, should be placed above individual interests.

Rousseau has influenced political and social thinkers for more than 200 years. Woven through his work is a hatred of all forms of political and economic oppression. His bold ideas would help fan the flames of revolt in years to come.

Women Challenge the Philosophes

The Enlightenment slogan “free and equal” did not apply to women. Though the philosophes said women had natural rights, their rights were limited to the areas of home and family.

By the mid- to late-1700s, a small but growing number of women protested this view. Germaine de Staël in France and Catharine Macaulay and Mary Wollstonecraft in Britain argued that women were being excluded from the social contract itself. Their arguments, however, were ridiculed and often sharply condemned.

Wollstonecraft was a well-known British social critic. She accepted that a woman’s first duty was to be a good mother but felt that a woman should be able to decide what was in her own interest without depending on her husband.

In 1792, Wollstonecraft published A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. In it, she called for equal education for girls and boys. Only education, she argued, could give women the tools they needed to participate equally with men in public life.


HW, if and when you have written work, you can email the answers to me gmsmith@shanahan.org.


Its Friday, nothing written; however,


you can look ahead as we are moving to Section 3 The Impact of the Enlightenment.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

AP Economics: 24 September 2009

Prayer


Current Events:




Quiz tomorrow: you need a pencil.


Today's lesson plan and HW is available on the blog: http://gmicksmithsocialstudies.blogspot.com/


Email: gmsmith@shanahan.org


The Shanawiki page (http://shanawiki.wikispaces.com/) has updated class information.


LibraryThing has bibliographic resources.


I moved the "Blog Archive" to the top right on the blog page so it should be easier to find the daily lesson, HW, and other class material.


As we left the lesson from last time, we needed to evaluate the Soviets' choice in terms of costs and benefits: was it the best choice at the time?

Our four (4) small groups to answer the following questions with regard to the decisions made by leadership of the Soviet Union:

* What were the considered alternatives at the time of choice?

* What were the perceived benefits of each considered alternative at the time of choice?

* What action was taken; what choice was made?

* What was the opportunity cost of that choice? (Remember that the opportunity cost of one alternative is the perceived benefits of the other alternative - the benefits that are given up. The benefit of doing something becomes the cost of not doing it.)

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs?

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

Debrief: Emphasize the 3 characteristics of opportunity cost:

* All costs are to someone; people bear costs.

* All costs are the result of actions. (Objects have no cost.)

* All costs lie in the future.

Overhead In-class exercise

1. Read the summaries below of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:
* The Five Year Plans
* The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact
* Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens

2. For each event or decision, answer the following questions:

* What were the considered alternatives at the time of choice?

* What were the perceived benefits of each considered alternative at the time of choice?

* What action was taken; what choice was made?

* What was the opportunity cost of that choice? (Remember that the opportunity cost of one alternative is the perceived benefits of the other alternative - the benefits that are given up. The benefit of doing something becomes the cost of not doing it.)

3. Choose one of the 3 issues you studied and prepare answers for the class. Your preparation should identify alternatives and costs and should make a case for your opinion on the following questions:

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs?

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

Overhead Student Handout Research Exercise

Directions:

1. Read the summary of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:

* The Five Year Plans

* The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact

* Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens

2. For each event or decision, answer the following questions:

* What were the considered alternatives at the time of choice?

* What were the perceived benefits of each considered alternative at the
time of choice?

* What action was taken; what choice was made?

* What was the opportunity cost of that choice? (Remember that the opportunity cost of one alternative is the perceived benefits of the other alternative - the benefits that are given up. The benefit of doing something becomes the cost of not doing it.)

3. Research one of the following events or decisions in Soviet history:
* Berlin Blockade
* Cuban Missile Crisis
* Space Race
* Exile A. Solzhenitzyn to Siberian gulags and then to US
* Gorbachev - perestroika political reforms

4. Prepare a tabled presentation of your research for the class. Your presentation should identify alternatives and costs and should make a case for your opinion on the following questions:

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs?

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

The Five Year Plans

In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution and World War I, the weakened condition of the Soviet economy was clearly visible. Output in every economic sector had declined: agricultural output was well below pre-war levels; the availability of consumer goods had fallen dramatically; and industrial output faced a long, slow path to recovery.

During the early to mid-1920s, Soviet leaders engaged in a great deal of internal debate about the relative importance of peasant owned and controlled agriculture on the one hand and state-run industry on the other. The essential question concerned the best path to economic growth: Was economic growth - national wealth and prosperity - best achieved through growth of private farms and the agricultural sector or was it best achieved through state-directed investment in industry? Soviet leaders clearly felt that they could not pursue both and that a choice would have to be made.

The Five Year Plan called for investing in industry by limiting the resources available for the production of consumer goods and the farm sector and directing those resources to the production of such industrial essentials as steel and electricity. For this to be accomplished, the profits from agricultural would have to be used for investment in industry, and satisfying citizens' desires for consumer goods and housing would have to be delayed. The alternative was to encourage the use of resources to satisfy the immediate desires of citizens for food and other agricultural and consumer goods. This would mean delaying investment in the capital necessary for heavy industry and future industrial strength.


Consider the Soviet leaders' choice by drawing a table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns:


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think the leaders made the right choice? Why?

Results of the choice to adopt the First Five Year Plan

By implementing the first of many Five Year Plans, the Soviet leaders clearly chose to push for high economic growth rates through investment in heavy industry and military production. One immediate result of implementing the plan was the seizing of agricultural harvests for redistribution by the state. Farming was collectivized in state-run cooperatives, and there was little or no emphasis on producing consumer goods. In addition, prices and wages were set by the government, which left few consumers with money for consumer purchases, in any case.

Investment in industry rose to 25% by the late 1920s, meaning that effectively one-fourth of the resources of the Soviet Union were being diverted into building an industrial foundation. During the First Five Year Plan (1928-1933) the Soviet economy grew by 48%. Industrial goods grew by 113% and electric power production by 227%. On the other hand, consumer goods grew by only 1%.

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?

Nazi Non-Aggression Pact

In the years immediately preceding World War II, Joseph Stalin worked hard to keep the Soviet Union isolated from, although not necessarily neutral in, the growing tensions in Europe. He was very much aware that Hitler's Germany posed a threat to the Soviet Union. He was very much concerned that Hitler's powerful army might invade and take the agriculturally rich Ukraine. He also knew that his own army was no match for Hitler's and that, at the very least, he needed time to prepare to defend the Soviet Union from the Nazis. With these concerns very much in mind, in early 1939 Stalin entered into two sets of negotiations: with the French and British on one hand and with Nazi Germany on the other.

Looking at Soviet history in the years before the war, it is apparent that Stalin was a pragmatist, looking for the circumstances that would be most favorable to the USSR. First, the Soviet Union joined the League of Nations - a move that Stalin had previously opposed - presumably to become more friendly with the Western nations. (However, the known atrocities of Stalinist regime and the perceived weakness of the Soviet military kept the Soviet Union from reaching any agreements with western nations working through the League.) As events heated up in Europe, Stalin had to ask himself whether an alliance with Great Britain and France, and their combined military strength, would deter Hitler, or whether it would only mean that the Soviet forces would be exposed to the fury of German attack from the very beginning of an armed conflict.

Stalin's greatest fear was to be dragged into a war against Germany while other countries like France and Great Britain sat on the sidelines and watched, and an alliance with Germany offered other possibilities. The Nazis proposed the division of Poland between Germany and the USSR in return for not having to worry about attack from the east as they dealt with their foes in the west. From Stalin's point of view, Soviet-Polish relations had never been particularly good, and the Soviet Union had no reason to come to Poland's assistance. Perhaps most importantly, such an agreement would provide an opportunity to stay out of the war. Additionally, the Germans seemed likely to agree to recognize the Baltic area as belonging to the Soviet Union's "sphere of influence," advancing Stalin's perennial goal of extending the Soviet empire.

Consider Stalin's choice by drawing another table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns.


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think Stalin made the right choice? Why?

Results of Stalin's Choice

The signing of the Non-Aggression Pact between the Soviets and the Germans was announced on August 23, 1939, and came as a shock and surprise to the rest of the world. On September 1, German troops invaded Poland, and shortly thereafter, Soviet troops crossed Poland's eastern boundary to claim their share of the spoils. Later the Non-Aggression pact was extended, allowing Stalin to include Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia within the Soviet "sphere of influence."

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.

* All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

* Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

* Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

* Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

* Who bore the costs?


Emphasis On Education*

*Statistics in this scenario were taken from Hedrick Smith, The New Russians, p. 20.

While the rate of change seemed slow in many areas of Soviet society and economy in the years that followed World War II, this was not the case with the area of education, which was targeted early as a priority for investment. At the time of the 1917 Revolution, Russia was primarily an illiterate peasant society with a primitive work force comprised largely of unskilled manual laborers. It is estimated that the illiteracy rate was 75% and that school enrollment was only about ten million in the early 1920's. In part because of a desire to teach about the writings of Lenin and the achievements of communism, but also to help move the country from an agrarian backward economy to a world power, schools and education were areas where the Soviets invested heavily right from the beginning. In addition, school attendance was given high importance in Soviet society.

Consider the Soviet leaders' choice by drawing a table with five (5) rows and three (3) columns.


I will provide an example.


Given the alternatives and the benefits of each, as they were considered at the time, do you think the Soviet leaders made the right choice? Why?

Results of the Choice:

By 1980 the literacy rate was one of the highest in the world. The increase in the numbers of people enrolled in higher education institutions was also striking. In 1950 there were 1.2 million university-level students in the Soviet Union; by the mid-1980s, that number had increased to over 5.4 million students being taught by half a million professors and instructors. By 1985 the Soviet Union had one of the largest bodies of scientific researchers in the world: 1.5 million scientists doing research work.

This emphasis on education produced both a blessing and a curse for the Soviet Union. It was a blessing in that the level of literacy, the quality of the labor force and the knowledge of the leadership increased dramatically. It was a curse in the fact that it was much easier for Soviet citizens to learn and read about life in the West, (if they could obtain banned books and newspapers). The university educated, or intelligentsia as they were called in the Soviet Union, became well-read in history and western thought. For this group blindness to the lies of the past and unquestioning loyalty to the Marxist and Leninist ideals were no longer acceptable. After all, the Soviet universities had taught them to think.

Questioning by the intelligentsia was perceived by Soviet leaders as a threat; critics were branded disloyal. Stalin conducted purges that sent many of the intelligentsia to concentration camps in Siberia, or in some cases even to death sentences. While the education system continued to increase the level of literacy and the size of the intelligentsia, it was only in the last years of the Soviet Union that the questioning of the past and present policies of the communist leadership came out in the open. Many observers of the Soviet Union believe that this force of education and the millions of individuals who were literally trained to question the past helped to break the hold that the communist party had on the loyalties of Soviet citizens. Gorbachev, the architect of perestroika, was part of this growing educated middle class, the first university-educated Soviet leader since Lenin.

With the knowledge of hindsight, discuss the following questions. Be prepared to defend your answers.


We will finish up other issues in Chapter Two.


HW email to me at gmsmith@shanahan.org.


You pick another one of the three scenarios to do the HW on. You should have already done one, now you are picking a second of the three scenarios to work on (Cf. the summaries above in the post for today): a)* The Five Year Plans; b) * The Nazi Non-Aggression Pact; or, c) * Consciously emphasizing university education and increasing numbers of educated citizens. Just pick a second scenario and answer the HW questions.


1. * All costs lie in the future. With the benefit of hindsight (your knowledge of history), do you think the Soviet leaders made the best choice?

2. * Did the leaders accurately perceive the benefits and costs?

3. * Were the benefits worth the costs? (What was the consequence of the choice that was made?)

4. * Who reaped the benefits of the choice that was made?

5. * Who bore the costs?


Summary and review of lesson follows.