Industrialization and Immigration

In the eighteen hundreds, America started to industrialize itself, by building more and more factories. Work was hard and dangerous. Now in 2008, many immigrants are doing jobs that require the same amount of work, and possibly the same amount of danger? Is this fair? You decide.
When the amount of factories started to grow, so did the number of job possibilities. Immigrants like the Irish and the Italian coming over to America for better job opportunities saw these openings and took them without any hesitation. As did women, whose only job before this time was to stay at home and take care of their house and children. When the time finally came for immigrants and women to work, their jobs were exceptionally difficult. They worked long, almost twelve-hour days, with little breaks. They were paid very little, and were put in unsafe situations that at any point could take their lives. Immigrants worked in almost any kind of work area, which could include moving, lifting, or working heavy and unstable machinery, (a death sentence for their fingers and/or hands, arms, etc.). Women were most popularly place in textile factories, where they spun and made fabric. This was dangerous because their fingers could be in danger, and there were many harmful particles of fabric floating around in the air that they could inhale at any moment. Taking one day off at work meant being fired, and the low pay put people in to a depression.
At one point, people were making so little money, that they had their children start working. At the age of twelve or thirteen, children would drop out of school and face the same job hardships their parents did, just to put bread on the table. Some children lost lives because of the extreme dangers they were put in. Limbs were lost, and immune systems were shattered. Some children were actually hired to go inside of the machinery if it stopped working, to see what the problem was. Sometimes, the machinery would start back up with the children inside (this is the part where you thank God you were born in the twenty-first century!). The life of a factory worker was hard, and did not always support the employee.
Now in 2008, illegal immigrants from all around the world are doing these same dangerous jobs for low wages. Hard labor is one of the main things these people do for the smallest bit of money. Intricate construction jobs put these aliens in danger, especially because they have no benefits or opportunities to insurance. If one of them gets hurt, they cannot afford to go to a hospital, and do not do so anyway in fear of being caught. They cannot argue with their pay either, because getting the police involved would mean being deported. Some people believe that this is extremely unfair, and that immigrants should be treated better. It is believed that this sort of discrimination is the main reason for all the racism in America. Is this true? Or, did they bring this upon themselves for coming to the United States illegally? It is clearly against the law, but should these illegal immigrants be handed better jobs because of the fact that discrimination is also wrong? Or should we treat them with a more iron fist, and not employ them at all, so that they go back to where they come from? What do you think?

George Dubya vs. Honest Abe!

when most people think about Abe Lincoln, they imagine and honest and good man, who "freed the slaves". on the other hand, when people think of George W. Bush, they see an ignorant and ill-tempered man, who's impetuous actions led to the downfall of the current American economy. if someone who was uneducated on the two men compared them, there would be an obvious bias; that Abe Lincoln was a better president. in reality, the two men were alike in some ways in their rash and hurtful decisions to America during times of war.
both of these presidents have taken money from our own pockets to do things that inevitably hurt our economy. Abe took money from the treasury to fund the war and for his own expenses without recieving an appropriations bill. this is said to be illegal in Article 1 section 9 of the Constitution, which states "no money shall be dreawn from the trasury, but in consewuence of Appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time". this was not followed. George Bush is also in favor of taking money from America. he has signed the "Bail Out Bill", which will pay off the banks and Wallstreet, which will greatly effect anyone who pays taxes.
this is the only comparison that I can find about George Bush and Abe Lincoln. though he has done other things, this was the only prominent one. Abe Lincoln, however, did many other shady things to America when he was in office, as suprising as it seems. he suspended Habeus Corpus, which is the right to know why you're being arrested. at one point he just started having people sent to jail without telling them why. this is also illegal, and it says in the Constitution in Article 1 Section 9 that "the pricelegde of the writ of habeus corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." the only reason he was arresting people was because of the bad press they were putting out against him. he was not seen as a good president, because most of his actions (like the Emancipation Proclaimation) were unefective, and they starting publishing negative things about him. because of this, he would have them thrown in jail.
another bad thing that he did was that he drafted and built up an army without having this action approved. he was so focused on the war, and avenging his lost friend that he completely abandoned the rules. he was a reckless president, and by drafting, he put many people's lives in danger. it was an irrespondible thing to do, and the powers to draft an army are left in and completely up to the congress.
so next time you think about Abraham Lincoln being a wholesome and "honest" man, think about all of the illegal things he did to the country. who's to say that he's any better that George W. Bush? looking back at what I learned in class, Abe was about the same level as Bush, it's just the media's input on things. becasue Lincoln controlled the press, they could not write bad things about him. Bush can not do this, and it is easier for people who read newspapers and other articles about him to come to immediate conclusions. it all depends on the facts.

South Africa and Post Civil War America

The Civil War in America occured between 1861 and 1865. Though it was not a long war, it was one of the bloodiest America has seen yet. It turned North and South against each other for economic and social reasons. Not only did the conflict arise because of the disagreement on slavery, but states rights and state soveriegnity also were being argued over. The Constitution was also came into play, when dealing with slavery and immigration rights. Currently, in South Africa, a similar war is going on that has lasted for over 40 years and it is called Apertheid. Both of these conflicts have many things in common, including colonization, land ownership, and faulty constitutions.
During the civil war, there was the obvious black and white separation. After, however, more immigrants started moving into the US, looking for jobs. Italians, Irish, Polish, and Chinese all came over and tried to work in the industrial areas of the North. This created tension with the just freed slaves, who were trying to get the same jobs as these immigrants. Nonetheless, all Caucasians still treated them harshly, got paid more, and did not have such hard labor or dangerous jobs. During the Apertheid, there was tension between the Africans and the whites, Africans and the Indians, and the Africans and the "coloreds", meaning anyone who is mixed. All of these different races were legally separated from the whites, and sent to live in townships out of the city. Their homes, good education, and voting rights were all stripped away from them, and they were deemed inferior to the Whites. In revolt, the other races would rob, rape, or commit other crimes against the Caucasians, which caused them to built high fences around their yards to protect themselves. Both America and South America had a lot of racial tension, and both still have it today, although it has calmed down.
Though it was never in the United States Constitution, the prominent land owners in America were white. There was no rule against other ethnicities owning land, but most of them couldn't afford it anyways. Most immigrants came over to America with barely any money looking for work, not for land. Since almost all of them were discriminated against and had horrible wages, it would take years to save up to buy land. During Apertheid, it was a law that only Caucasians could own land. All other races were legally not allowed to. Both countries had white land ownership.
Another thing both countries had in common were faulty Constitutions. The US's Constitution had blurred lines on Africans. It did not state whether blacks were property or people, so America came up with the 3/5 clause, stating that they were 3/5 person and 3/5 property. Obviously, it didn't work. There was also the "fugitive slave clause", which stated that any slave that ran away to a free state was returned to their master, which contradicted some states that said once you walked into their borders you were a free human. The Constitution since then has been changed. In South Africa, the Constitution banned all Coloreds and Blacks from voting or participating at all in the government. Later, the country threw out their Constiution and came up with a whole new one in 1996.
So although these two countries are on complete different continents, they both endured the same problems. Even with different economic standings, the two have many things in common when it comes to how their government has changed over time. Both countries faced racial tension, the same land ownership, and bad constitutions.