Assignment #8

#1: The discovery of Spindletop was vital in the success in Texas’ economy. It was important because it created jobs and also vast wealth, far unknown to anything Texas had seen before.

#2: “Abandoning the Lost Cause” was an important event because the society in Texas was finally getting over their “old roots,” per say. They were starting to modernize economically and socially. Finally they were starting to accept participation from the National government instead of their “isolationist” type mentality that was so abundant in the philosophy of their government (state wise.)

#3: The 1900 hurricane that hit Galvest0n is important (in a bad way but still important) because it showed that even after a city was wiped out, people could still come together to improve their city with the help of the elitist control of the rebuilding.

#4: Educational reform helped change the future of the youth. With the improvement of the quality and the teachers qualifications, this helped create higher educational opportunities for the youth among Texas.

#5: Prison reforms were vital for minorities (especially women) because they segregated the facilities from men and women. Also the health was drastically improved which is well deserved because they are still human beings, not animals.

#6: The improvement of roads was probably underrated in terms of importance because the automobile companies would only grow and even nowadays this still relates because there is still improvement needed on roads.

#7: The conversation of trees and attempt of reforestation was important for the environment. The timber companies were pretty much unregulated up til this point so it was vital that someone or a governmental identity comes in and tells them they need to calm down, they don’t need that much wood.

#8: World War 1 changed the economic landscape because it actually created new jobs of course, as well as bringing change such as prohibition efforts that would soon be taken into effect.

 

 

Assignment #7

Assignment #7

Question #1: Economically, Texas suffered but not near as bad as the rest of the nation had. Until an overproduction of oil caused a surge of unemployment to fluctuate heavily in places such as Midland. Socially people we’re scared to even attend church (which is ironic because it’s usually depicted as a safe place to go to especially in movies) because they thought people would try to rob the church of their canned goods.

Question #2: In order to kickstart the economy within Texas, federal involvement was needed. Nowadays in Texas “federal involvement” is not the typical ideology that runs through Texan heads but the deficit spending used in the New Deal helped recreate Texas’ economic landscape. It differed because the government actually got more involved in Texas in comparison to post or even more recent times.

Question #3: The leaders wanted more people to flock into Texas to create a more diverse culture. It’s not that they wanted to leave their “southern roots” but it was more of them wanting to have a culture of different people with different backgrounds. I’d say they were successful when you look at how Texas is now, in a cultural point of view.

Primary Source Analysis

Document 7

This document was originally produced by the Texas Observer in 1974 for news purposes. It addresses the hopes for racial equality also produces a fear for the ignorance shown in the 1950’s by other state senators. The time of the 1950’s was vastly different from today’s society so the article is trying to represent the differences (even though it was 1974 but still.) 1974 was after the 60’s civil rights movement so it’s trying to give a perspective of the lack of educational opportunities years before. The article in it’s entirety is still similar today in a sense that some minorities do not receive the same benefits as the so called ‘privileged’ but yet even though opportunities for minorities are at an all time high, the article is trying to show a time even worse. “I intend to fight every one of em to the last ditch,” shows Senator Gonzales’ concern with the lack of equality for the African-American community and his filibustering shows his commitment to improving the life for African-Americans. For a Caucasian this article may not mean much but to an African American it represents much more because it reminds them of a time they were looked upon as unequal to the privileged white male and how times have changed since the 50’s (speaking in a modern day sense.)

Pages 432-436 show the upbringing and fall of the “only whites allowed” rule in the Democratic party dating back to the 1800’s. First it starts by talking about the “white man’s association club” then it introduces the poll tax amendment. As well as at one point in 1923 only white men could vote in the Democratic party. The article states the Nixon v. Condon surpreme court ruling in Nixon’s favor but then the Democrat’s response was changing the policies of it’s membership access. Grovey v Townsend is acknowledged as a setback for African American rights. It states that the civil rights act of 1965 finally got rid of the poll tax.

Assignment #5

Progression in Houston

The progress Houston has made is quite astonishing considering the systematic homophobia instilled within the community. This homophobia is correlated to the traditionalistic society that was Texas until it socially progressed. Texas has always been depicted as an evangelical conservative ‘heaven’ by other parts of the country. Even if now it truly isn’t, it is still the stereotype that the “Murder in Montrose” lived up to. Around the gay community within Houston this wasn’t unordinary because the gay community had been persecuted and scrutinized and almost betrayed by the law enforcement due to the lack of respect and/or understanding towards others will a different sexual orientation. So to the “non-gay community” this would have been shocking to know that this hatred towards homosexuals was so strong that an individual felt the need to take another’s life.

This murder ignited a fuse for social justice within the gay community. Their protests seemed to bring awareness to the injustice done upon the gay community and brought attention to what was truly going on to local Houstonians. Even though the difference in the population within Houston ranges from African-Americans to Mexican-Americans all the way to backwoods rednecks and everything in between, Houstonians have a sense of morality still and realize when injustices are being done. Even though it took a long time for the justice and rights to be given to the gay community and the rights (marriage license in particular) that were long overdue, and were well deserved. In particular this murder really stirred the social justice pot, per say and went to show the hatred within that area for the gay community. I think the gay community had no choice but to step up and fight for what they believe in and stand against the ignorance showed towards them. In retaliation towards the protests, of course the typical anti-gay protests had shown up as well which was expected. The gay community has progressed forward and fought against the religious social norms within America and Texas in specific.

In retrospect, murder is always wrong in any case but there is some positives you can draw from this terrible situation. You can say that Broussard’s death didn’t go unavenged in a sense that his death caused more people to realize what was going on within the gay community and the persecution they were receiving from homophobes. His death made others who were ignorant, realize that regardless of race, gender,  and/or sexual orientation that people are all the same. We all live, we all have feelings, we have all opinions and no one’s opinion on something is better than anyone else’s. So his death had an influence on opposing views views on dehumanizing an entire community just based on their preference of gender. It’s a quite simple concept but due to the passed down societal norms that have been systematically implemented into people’s belief systems, being gay is apparently “morally wrong” to them which this opinion usually stems from a religious view. It’s okay to disagree with a lifestyle due to your own personal religious beliefs but at no point is it okay to take another life because of a disagreement, at the end of the day people are born the way they are and no one has the right to tell you how to life your live. This isn’t a bash on religion, it just seems that the persecutions of homosexual stems from religion the majority of the time. For example, if you look at anti-gay protests, it’s usually religious people holding signs that say why it’s wrong to them based upon their views which is subjective to your term of “morality.” Over time it seems the realization that homosexuality is normal among humans and animals as well has been realized. Also as a whole society it seems progression has been made among heterosexuals and homosexuals because at the end of the day, we are all people trying to achieve happiness so who is to say what happiness is? To one individual it could mean one thing and a different thing to the other.

In reference to Texas History, this story shows how Texas’ traditionalistic views intertwine with different backgrounds. Texas is known for being a religious state so when you have different cultures you can obviously see the problems that will arise. Over time these different cultures have learned to mingle better and become accepting of opposing views. Although there’s more work to be done, I think it is safe to say that Texas is a more socially accepting place now than it was during the Murder in Montrose.

Assignment #4

Chapter 13

Question #1: I consider the years of the 60s and 70s as success for the Republican party. Lyndon B. Johnson’s refusal to acknowledge the United States population’s point of view on the Vietnam war sealed the deal on the downfall of the popularity of the Democratic party. In return a slow rise of the Republican party occurred.

Question #2: The African-American civil rights movement, the feminist movement and the Chicano movement all share success as a similarity. Although the feminists had to overcome the largest obstacles because through out the United State’s history, our society has been consumed by patriarchism and this concept that men should dominate the world while women are there solely to produce more men to dominate the world. This movement really challenged that notion and it was brave for those women to stand up to society like they did. The Feminist movement was a great success but the most successful out of the 3 was the African-American civil rights movement, solely because there was more rights granted to the African American community with legislative bills to hault racism and promote a better voter turnout and to make them feel they belong here, they’re apart of our country.

Question #3: To me, the biggest political reforms was the creation of NASA, the 1964 Civil Rights Act & the increase of higher educational possibilities within Texas. Their significance outweighs the negative scandals such as Watergate and the Vietnam War. Although it’s human nature to always remember the negatives and hardly remember the positives, this era was actually quite the opposite. The political reforms (In LBJ’s Great Society) benefited society socially and made it a better place for minorities to express themselves and live their life but as well it helped the economy with Keynesian styled economics in which it allowed the government to expand programs to help everyone out which in return made society more productive (because they received a better education.)

 

Chapter 13

Question #1: The conservative rich businessmen benefited the most by the still to this date status quo of “balance the budget and no new taxes” that was said by the Republicans. Although the upper class benefited by lack of taxes, the rest of the classes practically didn’t stand a chance with Texas’ traditional view of “you’re on your own, stop relying on the government.” The lack of support for labor unions negates any positive economic change for the non-upper class, while the rich oilmen who basically manipulated Texas’ politics by lobbying for a decrease in taxes, everyone else suffered at their expense.

Question #2: Prison Reform in Texas was long overdue. The rest of the world still believed people should be punished but they’re still human beings and you can’t fight fire with fire (or evil with evil depending on the crime) but Texas still lived and died by their traditionalistic view of dehumanizing individuals to inhumane extremes as another punishment to the crimes they have committed, as if the death penalty wasn’t enough. I would that the Texas’ government actually did a good job as a whole in their post war modernization with the educational reform as well as the economic reform to help benefit society, so yes as a whole all parts were benefited-to an extent that was possible. Now not every single city may have received benefits in comparison to a more populated state but as a whole it was successful.

Question #3: The Mexican American civil rights movement was more successful than the African American civil rights movement, in this era. It seemed as this society had deemed Mexican Americans not quite as good as Caucasians but still better than African Americans. You can see this in the clear denial of Sweatt’s initial admission into a University in which he had to go to supreme court just to get a

 

Assignment #3

 

Will Texas remain Republican?

The first essay starts out by stating how Texas used to be a heavily democratic state up until around 1980. In the 1960’s only about a dozen of five thousand local officeholders (county judge, district attorneys, etc) were Republicans. Around 1980 the Republican party slowly started growing into what it is today. Clements’ win to become the governor of Texas and Ronald Reagans victory to become the president is what kickstarted that political party growth. All the way up until 1994 was the rise of the party and since 1994 they haven’t been competed with by the opposing party, they have purely dominated politically. The Republican’s last eight years of spending have been prioritized the same as the Democrat’s last eight were with the same priorities such as: health, education, welfare, and law enforcement. Under the control of the Republican party, the Texas economy (2007-2014) created 1,100,000 new jobs which is why Texans generally display confidence within their party because economically it has created success for the people as a whole. Although the Republican’s are stereotyped by some as ‘racist’ an argument the article makes is that the first African-American elected to a statewide office was a Republican and likewise the first Hispanic United States Senator was a Republican.  An argument the article makes against the Democrats is that 50 years prior to 1996, not one minority held a United States Senate seat, Court of Criminal Appeals or the Railroad Commission, but there was one minority Supreme Court judge and state row office member that were Democrats.

Now the second essay is more from the Democrat’s point of view of the downfall of Democratic control in Texas. In 1928 when Republican President Herbert Hoover was elected, it was deemed as a “once in a lifetime fluke,” by Texas Democrats. Franklin D. Roosevelt had won the next 4 elections until Dwight Eisenhower (Republican) won in 1952 and 1956. Eisenhower had the full support of the Texas Democratic party though. Whenever Lyndon Johnson had won people viewed Eisenhower as a “fluke.” Democrats in Texas had an extreme feeling of confidence within their party until 1961 when a Republican won a seat in the United States Senate, in which he occupied for 25 years. Another instance the article claims is that the Democrats had lost popularity with the “Sharptown Scandal” which weakened the public image of the Democratic party.  When Republican Bill Clements had won in the 1980’s, it set a tone of the upcoming future of the rise of the Texas Republican party. By 1990, the Republicans had claimed 33 percent of the Texas Congressional delegation. Although things started looking better for the Democrats when Ann Richards had won in 1990. Ann Richards had lost her re-election to future Republican President George W. Bush. This 1994 election really sealed the deal of Republicans controlling Texas, politically.

    Both articles are very similar in their historical accuracies that line up with each other although they do differ in the direction of political bias. The first article seems to come from the view point of a conservative while the second article seems to come from the view point of a liberal. The reasoning behind this is the emphasis on the rise of the Republican party in the first article. While the second article had noted historical facts about the Republican party, it noted the downfall of the Democratic party and even referred to Democrats as “the good guys.” The good guys reference stands out and really screams the political bias of the writer. The first article claims the Republican party became increasingly popular due to it’s success in the economy (as of recently through the Rick Perry era) and in contrast the second article claims it was the Democrat’s fault for becoming overly confident in their success and their “Sharpton Scandal” mistake.

Life in 2017

These past few weeks before this spring semester has gone under way, I’ve mostly spent my hours of the day working out, playing basketball, playing videos games on my ps4 and hanging around my friends. To some staying up til the wee hours of the night playing shooter games may sound like a good night and to others it may sound like a waste of time. Let me reassure you, I am the first. Now I had a good balance, during the day I would go see any of my friends and I always made sure to go to the gym and to go play basketball but by nightfall you can bet I was gaming profusely.

Other people around the world share some common interests with me. When I say that I mean that just because of where I live doesn’t determine my entire life’s outcome or my personal interests. For instance, there’s someone right now in Russia hanging out with close friends or even someone in Miami playing a pickup basketball game. Now those things are very common hobbies per say but there is also certain past-times that may only occur to certain people depending on their geopolitical background. A perfect example of this would be the two sports soccer and football (In America’s terms.) You see soccer is gaining popularity in America but it still isn’t “America’s past time,” but American football (originated from rugby) is basically unheard of to foreign countries so playing “American football” is not a hobby outside of America.

So yes your geopolitical origins can not only determine your hobbies but also career options. For instance is someone who lives in downtown New York City going to be looking for a job in the agricultural field? The simple is answer is no because naturally people grow accustomed to what they’re surrounded around. Your geopolitical origins can somewhat ‘alter’ your upbringing in life and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. For instance the country, state, county, city, or even down to your household will determine your upbringing in political views based on the the majority’s views that surround you.

Ultimately the entirety of a life lies upon the individual but there can also be some definite advantages as well as disadvantages based on your geopolitical background and sometimes those advantages help in the area’s majority occupations and a disadvantage is you could less “trained” in a different area’s majority occupation if you were to move.

Kobe Bryant

He’s my favorite player in the NBA. In my opinion, he’s the second greatest to ever play. Michael Jordan is 1st of course but still, Kobe puts up the best argument with his 5 championship rings & 1 MVP.