To say the least, Industrialization is one of the most significant (and therefore highly tested) topics in world history. Let the games begin!
For the question on page 407, "How might the social and political backgrounds of the United States and Russia have affected their industrial development?" I was a little bit confused on what the question meant by social and political backgrounds.
For my answers, I had:
- United States:
- civil war
- political stability lead to the US being a leading power
- their industrialization was linked to Europe
- less direct government involvement
- government controlled industrialization
Are these the right type of answers, or did I understand the question wrong?
Hi! I was also a little confused on this question, but if it helps, here's what I put:
-Generally Eastern Christian Orthodox
-Reliance on serfdom
-Reliance on slavery
Sorry me again, but I forgot to add:
Russia - had established two vastly separated social classes; russian gov. autonomous
U.S - comes with american equality ideals; people have a political plug
Okay guys, you are coming up with characteristics of the two states, but this is a causation question. So which of these effected the course (playing out of) industrialization in each place. Try starting out on the other end of the question by characterizing each process of industrialization. How were they the same and different? Then look back at some of these social and political characteristics. Could any of them plausibility explain how industrialization happened in each place?
390- "In what ways did the Industrial Revolution mark a sharp break with the past? In what ways did it continue earlier patterns?"
For this question I only got one continuity and I feel there are more (I am uncertain with even this one). I put "continued pattern of population growth". Did anyone else get other answers?
Nobody's helping you. Shame on them!
I am not completely sure about these answers but for continuities, I think that discovering new technology is a continuity, and maybe having a lot of resources leads to more success (but I think that is too obvious).
In terms of older patterns, patriarchy persisted. Social inequality continued, becoming more pronounced (sharper). Ties between different parts of the world continued to strengthen.
On page 397, is the first paragraph explaining a change in middle-class society or is it just explaining what the middle class was like?
It's what changes occurred in middle-class society
402- "In what situations would the ideas of Karl Marx have the most appeal among the lower classes"
In this question, how did you guys interpret "situations"? I am not quite sure what it is asking.
Situations: like circumstances. Your go-to should be the themes. Economic situations such as farming, etc.
I also wondered about this, but I took it as the living conditions and general life of the Industrial Revolution.
I have that:
- Marx's idea that capitalism was unstable was supported by the poor living conditions of the working class
- The wealth that the revolution brought made Marx's idea of redistribution of wealth viable
@Callisto: Okay, but you're being vague. How about longer hours and dangerous working conditions?
Your 2nd part is fine, but you guys need to learn to answer questions in a way that demonstrates your understanding of the topic. redistribution of wealth is your term, not Marx's. He called for a "classless" society. The wealth gap would make that more appealing to the working classes.
393- "Drawing on your prior knowledge about Europe. explain why historians might consider Europe an unlikely place for the Industrial Revolution to have begun?"
I am also a bit confused about this question. It asks why Europe is an unlikely place but the text around it just explains why it did happen here. Should we think about Europe before the Industrial Revolution?
It was unlikely because Islam, India, and China were wealthy, technologically advanced societies at the time - compared to Europe. One would have guessed that the IR would have happened in one of those places before they guessed Europe.
Also, long distance trade (and all the goodies that come with it) was passing Europe by.
Plus, Europeans were politically fragmented and frequently invaded.
For the question, "How does this image illustrate the social and economic changes that took place during the Industrial Revolution?" we were not sure how it shows social transformation. I thought it might be that the person in the middle shows how the middle class became more successful and the workers show that the lower class have worse working conditions, but I wanted to check on here.
Glad to help. You guys are on your own after today!
Socially, this image shows workers risking their health for a likely low-paying job making coal gas, characteristic of the increasing economic stratification that accompanied industrialization.
Economically, this image demonstrates one of the major shifts of the industrial period: from agriculture to mechanized mining and its products, in this case coal.
On page 405, "What aspects of the Industrial Revolution facilitated the migration of Europeans to other parts of the world?", I listed the pushes (factories displacing peasant farmers, poverty and poor urban living conditions, and growing population) and the railroads and steamships providing cheap/fast transport. I was wondering if anyone had any other answers?
The only other answer I got besides the ones you listed is that workers were pulled by demand for labor overseas.
on page 449, i got these points for the effects of imperialism on asian and african societies. i feel like it could be condensed more, or that some points may be unnecessary.
- societies lose all political sovereignty
- racial hierarchy introduced to societies
- daily life transformed by western government and technology
- rebellions erupt in colonized societies
- opportunities for elite and western-educated
below are my points on the effects on imperialism on Asian/African societies:
- European racism and racial divide
- natural resources lead to large European settler population = closer proximity of different races (i.e., South Africa's mining)
- daily life affected by Western governing (a point you already have)- i.e, public health/sanitization, tax collecting bureaucracies
- counting and classification of subjects
- invention of tribe identities (the notion of "tribal" Africa)
- inferiority of women
- masculine colonized people recruited for military
I also got (not including the ones you and kate have):
Use of Brahmin caste system in India
Identification and invention of distinct tribes
Alignment of POC with femininity and weakness
On 442, the book asks "what caused the scramble for Africa?" I felt like this was a really broad question that the book doesn't provide many answers that I could find, so I was wondering if other people had any ideas.
Here's what I had, I'm not sure if all of these answer the question:
Intensity of European rivalries
Belief that it was the natural order for Europeans to dominate savage peoples
Growing military might of Europe
Yeah, this one is tricky (and kinda stupid) because there is only one universal answer for all the examples of imperialism given in this chapter. But it IS very telling, and the overarching idea Strayer wants you to take away from this chapter. Here is what I wrote in my notes last summer: The scramble for Africa occurred because of intense rivalries among European states. And there you have it - nationalism, patriarchy, militarism, and greed. It's all there, along, of course, with testosterone.
I'm going to take this down if I don't see a wider group of people posting. I hate lurkers!
For the question on page 459, "In what different ways did the colonial experience reshape the economic lives of Asian and African societies? how were some societies able to translate these changes into economic opportunities after independence? I got
- brought into contact with global commerce
- were introduced to making a substantial living with cash crops
- African women were allowed more control in local trade
I feel like there is more to this question than what I put here.
I also had:
-growth of urban poor in booming cities
-use of trade infrastructure (railroads, ports, etc) persisting after decolonization
One I also added was :
-need for labor brings migrants
For the third question on 484, "Analyze the internal and external factors that led to the Taiping uprising" I got these:
Lack of food/farms which led to mass starvation
Lack of jobs which led to unemployment and impoverishment
Corrupt provincial officials who treated peasants harshly gained power (due to weakening gov.)
European military pressure cut off internal trade routes.
European economic penetration created unemployment and raised taxes.
Also my answers here were practically the same as the ones for the causes of peasant rebellions on the same page, which makes sense, but I just want to make sure I'm not messing up.
some other ones I got for this were
- their economy can't keep up with their population growth
- many citizens followed leaders with millenarian messages
- opposition to Qing Dynasty because of its Manchu origins
- i have the same answers as you for this
here are some more (someone else came up with these)
- opium crisis
- peasant rebellions
- spread of christianity
- industrialization of outside countries
- origins among minority hakka people
Since this question asking us to analyze, I would explain why each answer caused the uprising
@Julliette, I had not listed Machu origins of the Qing, but I think that's right
@Emerson, I like the way you did your analysis with your answers (are you listening Robert?) But let me give you an example of how you can front load the analysis: Internal problems to which the rebels reacted included the inability of the government to keep pace
with the growing Chinese population *so this includes lack of jobs, lack of food* corruption among the provincial gentry, harsh treatment from tax collectors, anger about prostitution, and opium smoking *also seen a vice that needed correction*, and millenarianism.
@all. I think you've articulated the external reasons well. But I think Emerson's first two are parts of the same answer: Externally, Europeans exerted military pressure and penetrated China’s economy, which disrupted internal trade routes, created substantial unemployment, and raised peasant taxes.
I would add: The rebels thought that foreigners, including the Manchu Qing dynasty, had “poisoned China” and “defiled the emperor’s throne.” (get it? the opium & prostitution) I would also note that opium came to China by way of the British from India, which made the problem of opium internal and external.
I was wondering, could the educated elite becoming disillusioned with the Qing dynasty work as a reason or is that later?
Or actually, could I classify that under Chinese Nationalism, as Strayer puts in on 491.
I'd like to address another margin question as part of this conversation Emerson, Juliette and Robert. To what extent were the causes of these peasant rebellions similar to those that led to the loss of the Mandate of Heaven in earlier Chinese dynasties?
Like the situation in the middle of the nineteenth century, previous Chinese imperial dynasties lost the Mandate of Heaven by not being able to rule effectively. This is evident in the nineteenth century
when one examines the causes of the Taiping Uprising, which included the state’s increasing inability to effectively collect taxes, control flooding, and provide social welfare and public security.
For the question on 494, "What factors led to the decline of the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century", I put:
-Mass territorial loss
-Weakening of central state
-Growing technology and military gap between modernized and industrialized countries
-Commercial prominence of land decreased as ships improved (Could be part of growing technology gap)
-European penetration of the economy (Inability to pay growing debts + competition of manufactured vs artisan goods)
I got all the same points but added:
-Janissaries lost military edge
-growing debt leading to foreign control
-weakening centrality in world commerce (goes with sea commerce>land commerce)
below are all the points I had for this question- a few of them overlap:
- Mass territorial loss to Christian powers
- Weak central state power, provincial authorities + local warlords gain power
- Conservative Janissaries lose military edge
- Technological and military gap with the West widens
- Europe gains direct oceanic access to Asia
- Cheap European goods cause competition for artisan goods
- Capitulations→ allowed the West exemptions from ottoman taxes & laws
- Erosion of Ottoman sovereignty
- Reliance of foreign loans to finance economic development
- Nationalist revolts on empire’s periphery leads to internal crisis
Okay, I am going to break my own rule, and take a moment here to analyze (break apart) one of the margin questions. I'm doing this to reinforce what I said in class, that you guys are learning incomplete (non point-worthy) answers in your study process.
On page 484, we are asked, “What were the causes of the massive peasant rebellions in nineteenth-century China?” So, we are looking for events that had a causative relationship with Chinese peasant rebellions. Quickly you will find that Strayer talks at some length about China’s increasing population in this period. A disengaged student might write, “population”, or “population growth.” But this is incomplete, and alone, these “answers” don’t fully answer the question. For example, does Strayer tell us why the population increased? Not really. Well, what else does he tell us? Oh! The centralized government was unable to manage this increasing population. Awesome. Now we write, “The Chinese central government was unable to manage (not keep up with – to vague) the increasing population.” Okay, good, we have it. We. Are. Done. Right? Well, if an engaged student is thinking about whether the answer they have written actually answers the question, we are left with, “does a mismanaged and growing population explain peasant rebellions?” Well, by itself, it really doesn’t. Back to Strayer. Blah, blah, blah. Wait! He says all this leads to unemployment, impoverishment, misery, and starvation. I don’t know about you, but THAT would lead ME to rebel! And so now, the thoughtful student has a point-worthy answer to proceed with spaced recall, peer evaluation, and maybe a post on the forum. “The central government was unable to manage a growing population, this led to poverty & starvation.”
I have a little bit of confusion about the "To what extent" questions (causation). Is the limit to the extent a part of the answer? Like if it was asking to what extent two things were similar, would it be correct to include how they were not similar in addition to how they were similar?
At least for our class, Mr. Bingham said that putting the extent was acting towards complexity which we don't need to do, but I'd take it as just put similarities, and then the degree to how similar those things were. ie. China and Japan both responded to imperialism with defensive modernization, but the similarity is to a lesser extent, as China barely modernized and Japan went all the way.
Ok I see, thank you!
For the question on page 528, "Before the outbreak of WWI, which territories did European powers fight over, and why were they considered valuable?" I couldn't figure out if Serbia and the Balkans were territories that were fought over, or if they only had to do with WWI. I said that they were considered valuable because they provided national security to bigger European powers. I'm not sure if this is correct, did anyone get something else?
Thanks for kicking off this chapter. By the 20th c. European powers weren't really concerned that much about security. At least not in a general territory sense of the word (security). But they were interested in strategic locations for their naval fleets. And, as always, they were concerned about ever more raw materials (you know, industrialization). The places of interest were in China, Samoa, and Morocco.
On 534, it asks "in what ways did WWI mark new departures in the history of the 20th century?"
I feel like this might have a lot of potential answers and wanted to check if y'all thought that some of these might not answer the question:
-Expansion of European gov power
-Substantial social change after the war, especially women's suffrage
-EU disillusionment with western superiority
-Heightened consumerism as a response to the frugality of war
-Collapse of Ottoman Empire and thus a lack of a strong Islamic Empire
-Formation of new states based on national self-determination
-Colonial disillusionment with col. masters which led to independence movements
-U.S. as a world power
-Beginning of global communism
-Idea of an international organization in League of Nations
-Japan's imperial presence grows
I know it's a lot, and that's exactly why I wanted to ask if there's something that we think doesn't answer the question, or if I missed something that does.
Not sure if they directly answer the question, but in addition to your points, I was considering the below for this question:
- Treaty of Versailles from WWI led to WWII
- widespread pop culture (ex- American jazz to Europe... not sure if I could go beyond about how it relates to global interconnections in culture?)
i had all the same points you did, except i didn’t have the collapse of the ottoman empire or the last three. i don’t know how relevant those ones are; i’d like to get more feedback on that.
I'm having a hard time with the forum and the captcha thingy. I've created a Google doc for my responses. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xT3WEMPEo5-UD_2bDfP5qdFM2kvBTDXUIFMcT7pvXzk/edit?usp=drivesdk
On page 530 the question is "What factors in the early modern era led to a European-dominated world system?"
I feel like I'm missing something, and also that I didn't quite answer the question correctly.
- European state rivalries leading to nationalism and imperialism, which resulted in large overseas empires
- European industrial Revolution expanded european power and influence, as well as created a need for raw materials which led to colonies being established to obtain those materials
- social Darwinism and ideas of European superiority that gave justification to imperial goals
@Abigail I think your first answer is good, but it conflates two answers. I would say:
1. the rise of the competitive nation-state, largely as a result of the Protestant Reformation
and 2. outward expansion, especially the establishment of colonies in the Americas but also commercial expansion to China especially.
Social Darwinism does not appear until after the early modern period, but the IR is definitely a factor.
I think you guys are still not fully understanding nationalism. I can not overstate it's role in societies beginning in the 19th century.
How did the Great Depression affect the relationship between governments and their citizens?
Especially in the West, the Great Depression sharply challenged citizens’ perceptions of their governments, and the governments responded to this challenge by becoming more invasive and
assertive in their citizens’ economic lives, leading to a “democratic socialism” that sought greater regulation of the economy and a more equitable distribution of wealth through peaceful means and
Just to make this class relevant to your lives, this question aims at exactly the issues facing America, and countries around the globe in 2022. What conditions in Germany made the nation fertile ground for the growth of fascism?
*Due to the Great Depression, the German economy largely ground to a halt in the early 1930s leading to massive unemployment among workers and the middle class. Everyone demanded decisive action from the state.
*Germany was a new European nation with only limited experience with democracy.
*Resentment about the Treaty of Versailles was widespread.
*Upper- and middle-class people feared the perceived prevalence of socialism and communism.
*Fears that the rural and traditional values of Germany would be lost as the country modernized
*Long-established currents of anti-Semitism
p.528 In what ways were the world wars and the Depression motors of global change? I'm not sure if I'm going off on the wrong foot but my answers were:
-mounted popular nationalism as the world wars transformed political life; new maps of states were created
-casualties from the world wars promoted social mobility = loss of tradition
-great depression stimulated a "democratic socialism" which meant regulation of economies and equal distribution of wealth for the west
-Both the great depression and the world wars strengthened the power of the state through actions such as a state-controlled economy
Good stuff Vivian!
Your first point is spot on.
I'm not sure why you connected loss of tradition with casualties, and I don't see where social mobility is a factor.
Definitely democratic socialism.
And the power of the state did indeed grow.
I would add that:
* the war led to the loss of colonial empires
* the US emerged as a global power
*disillusionment among intellectuals with their own civilization
*communism emerged as a potent political movement
You need to address the depression further:
*questioning of capitalism
*inspired a modest social safety net in the US.
*in the US led to increased federal regulation and supervision of the economy
*caused long term changes to the political culture of Latin America
Here's a couple for free:
p. 575 What major global shifts facilitated independence movements of the late twentieth century?
The decline of Europe after the devastation of World War II and the emergence of the bipolar world of the Cold War account for this.
Also p. 576 What enabled Europe, the Soviet Union, and Japan to recover from the devastation of war?
Three factors account for the ability of Europe and Japan to recover:
* The resiliency innate in industrial society. The knowledge, skills, and habits of mind that enabled industrial societies to operate effectively remained intact, even if the physical infrastructure had been substantially destroyed.
* Economic integration, wherein countries put aside nationalism for peace and prosperity. The European Economic Community (EEC) exemplifies this trend.
* The emergence of the United States, which aimed to help at least Europe and Japan recover politically, militarily, and economically; for example, the Marshall Plan.
The Soviet Union recovered as a result of:
* A large convict labor pool resulting from Stalinist policies
* A state-planned economy, although one that focused on heavy industry
* The wartime seizure of industrial complexes and valuables
on page 579, How was China’s shift to communist rule different from that of the Soviet Union? seemed like an important question. here are my thoughts
- China builds communism with Soviet support and previous governing experience
- support found in Chinese peasants (rather than Soviet urban dwellers)
- China has a less modernized society to build from (ex. a lacking industrialization, literacy, and transportation)
- collectivization of agriculture is peaceful but more extreme (the Great Leap Forward)
- greater emphasis on eliminating class inequality (Cultural Revolution)
any comments would be appreciated!
Those look good to me. I also had
- China had the support of an already established communist empire, the Soviet Union
- the communist revolution represented the real beginning of the country's emergence from a century of imperialist humiliation
I spelled my own name wrong.
Not differences, but I also had that both were result of outrage at the losses from war (Russia with ww1, China with ww2)
Both also had charismatic leaders
I agree w all, I just added:
China eventually focused on small-scale industrialization in rural areas while Russia continued heavy industry in urban factories
I see that on tests and essays all the time.
On 599, Strayer asks what were the similarities in the colonial opposition movements that arose in Asia and Africa?
The text mainly features differences, and I was wondering what other people got as far as similarities.
I only have that:
-inspired by the strong growth of nationalism
-sought major social transformation
-nationalist leaders with mass followings led anticolonial movements, pushing for a new independent future
-many inner tensions between different diverse groups within movements
Not a margin question, but what is the specific difference between 'nationalism' and 'national self-determination'? I want to make sure I'm using them in the right context when answering questions...
I'm pretty sure that the difference is that nationalism is support for one's own nation to the point that the interests of other nations are ignored or opposed, while national self determination is the belief in the right of the people to make their own decisions and rule themselves, kind of like popular sovreignty but more extreme. So, nationalism would apply more to interactions with other nations, while national self determination applies more to interactions within a nation. I'm not entirely sure so if anyone else has something to add or correct that would be great.
I am having a difficult time with the question on 597, "In what way did the Indian National Congress represent a continuity in Indian culture? In what way was it a change?" I got that the continuity is that it represents the divisions between different religious groups and within the caste system. I am not sure about the change, because I know it represents an adoption of more democratic values but I think that is more political than cultural.
Um, your continuity is off. The leaders of the INC were high caste Indians, just as leaders always were in Indian history. You are correct on you change, that the INC represented democratic/Western values, it's still cultural because that view was a product of their Western education.
i wanted to share my answers for ‘In what way was technology a major driver if economic and social change during the past century?’ (626)
1. electricity generated by fossil fuels becomes widely available to homes and businesses
a. electricity changes schedules at night in personal and professional lives
b. Electric motors allow more productive output of goods
2. internal combustion engine allows rapid movement of people and goods and transforms daily life
a. cars grant elite status and connection rural to urban areas
3. communication technology
a. widespread information access of current events
b. personal computers elevate education and shape business and personal life
c. e-commerce emerges
d. generates privacy uncertainty
i may have organized them oddly. any thoughts?
I think your answers are good
I had one more answer to add also
- technology like online shopping made China the largest e-commerce country
Here is my first thought: You are working hard on this chapter!
I would tighten up your responses, several can be combined, and some left out. This isn't bullet point stuff, but I think it's the best way to answer.
Technology in energy conversion enabled the energy stored in fossil fuels to be converted to electricity, which allowed round-the-clock activities and increased economic output, and to be used in external combustion engines, creating modern car culture.
Technological innovations in transportation enabled the surge in the movement of goods
Communications technologies shortened the time in which one could receive information to the point that today an event on the other side of the world can be known instantaneously and have altered our conceptions of social and economic relations, e.g. how we interact with other and how we bank.
Military technologies have enhanced our ability to destroy and to kill but also have had numerous civilian spin-offs, including radar, nuclear power plants, the Internet, space exploration, and communication satellites.
For the question on 656, Compare the issues that were important to Western feminists and feminists from the Global South, I couldn't find many answers, and I wanted to check if I was missing any answers.
- struggle for independence
- colonialism, poverty, development, and political oppression
I think you took the wrong approach to this question. Your answers are too vague, and you are not directly answering the question. You need to head straight at feminism, and the comparison is women in the global South versus women in the West. Specifically, women in the global South felt oppressed, not just by men or patriarchy, but by women of the Western countries who had colonized them. Women in the West wanted to focus on political or economic rights.
On page 636, "In what ways have global economic connections deepened during the past century? What have been the consequences of these deepening connections?" I have some answers but am not sure if they answer the question:
Ways connections deepened:
> increased international trade
> increased foreign investment
> increased labor migration
> reduced tariffs led to increase of less expensive imports/exports
> higher employment rate
> access to foreign goods
> increased "foreign direct investment" and transnational corporations
> increased literacy
> reduced poverty
> increased life expectancy
> economic crises have worldwide effects
> increased income inequality
Hey! I was a tad confused with this question as well especially with which answers go with the first vs the second questions. I got a lot of the same answers though. Here is what I put:
Ways connections deepened:
- Agreements between nations about rules for commercial and financial dealings: the Bretton Woods system (promoted free trade, stable currency values linked to US dollar and high levels of capital investment after WWII)
- Establishment of World Bank and International Monetary Fund
- Increased international trade
- Spread of neoliberalism (this one I was not too sure about)
- Establishment of transnational corporations (I put this one in the first because Strayer introduced the topic with "central to the acceleration of economic globalization..." which seems more like a cause than an effect)
- Increased unemployment rate
- Increased access to foreign goods
- Increased dependency on exports (raw materials and agricultural products) by developing countries
- Increased foreign investment
- Increased mobility of personal funds (international credit cards)
- Increased economic growth
- Increased life expectancy
- Increased literacy
- Decreased infant mortality rate
- Decreased poverty rate
- Increased instability in global economy
-> increased frequency of economic crises
- Growing economic inequality between countries, region, and within individual nations (rich vs. poor, rural vs. city...)
Okay guys, I can't blame you for this. I've trained you to think deeply about these questions, and you are doing exactly that. Good for you, this will pay off on May 12!
All I'm looking for here is:
Global economic connections have deepened in the past century in the areas of monetary policy (e.g. the Bretton Woods system), freer trade, labor migration, the quick and efficient movement of goods (i.e. commerce), and foreign investment, especially through transnational corporations.
On page 632 I'm a little confused on the question "Explain hoe twentieth century globalization can be considered a continuation of earlier interregional trade systems. I've written a few answers but am really not really sure where to start with this question
-Dependence on industrial development
-Building economic relationships internationally
-Stress on 'specialty' products from nations
I'm also having trouble on this one, so I'm not sure if what I have answers the question.. but below is what I have:
- growth of one system enabled the growth of another
- increase of trade and currency flow
- exchange of new ideas and technology/innovations
You guys are working with other people to compare approaches to questions and formatting the responses, right?
This is good guys, you can pull it together this way.
Humans have always linked the regions they have known about together economically and integrated newly connected regions (e.g. the Americas in the sixteenth century and Oceania in the eighteenth century) into that economic network. This is not new. What is new about economic globalization is the rapidity and comprehensiveness with which that integration is now accomplished.
629: How did the increase in the technological infrastructure lead to globalization? How was infrastructure different from previous systems?
I was v e r y confused on this question.
For the first question I only have:
- Made possible the surging movement of goods and people
For the second I only have:
- Faster and more efficient
What does it mean by previous systems? I feel like I am missing a lot here as I am a tad hazy with what he means by technological infrastructure.
For the first part I had another point which was
- Easier access to different parts of the world
When I did this question, I compared/contrassted it to the Silk Road, since it is a previous trading system.
I had two answers:
- Criisscrossed on land, sea and air (it used to only be on land)
- Faster transportation using technology and energy (they used to walk)
Yikes! I'm glad you asked. Here's what I have.
The internal combustion engine enabled quicker and cheaper movement of goods on cars, trucks, container ships, and airplanes. This form of energy conversion was more efficient and faster than
the previous trading systems based on animal energy (e.g. humans, camels, and horses) and on steam power (e.g. railroads and steamships).
633: What differences in global industrial development have occurred during the past century?
What does he mean by differences here. I have some answers but I have no clue if they answer the question because I am not sure what it is actually asking.
- Colonial rule made harder to develop (bc very little foundation was established to build off of) whereas countries without this history has more to stand on
- Asia fared better than Latin America
It means a comparison of the various iterations of development. This is billed as a comparison question, but my brain sees it as a change over time thing. Really, you can do both.
Global industrial development in the past century has almost entirely been carried out in the regions that were not industrialized or industrializing before 1900, i.e. the Global South. These regions made it a point during the decolonization struggle to industrialize but have been hindered by internal divisions, a hindering legacy of colonial rule, and a global context dominated by the cold war and the economic power of the already industrialized West. And, difficulties lay in what strategies to pursue — private-industry-led or state-led, import-oriented or export-oriented?
On page 633, the question "What differences in global industrial development have occurred during the past century', I'm confused on what the question is asking... Is it the differences between how industry has developed between countries, or is it the differences between industry before and after the developments of the past century?
Engage your brain! See above.
On page 633, I am very confused about what the question is asking: "What differences in global industrial development have occurred during the past century?"
It's phrased like a change over time question, but it's labeled as comparison so it is kind of throwing me off. Is it asking for differences between industrialization in newly independent countries and countries that had already had a strong independent political and economic base (like great Britain)?
Oops I just realized that this question was already answered, sorry!
For the question on page 647, "How has technology shaped the demographic, cultural and environmental changes of the past century?" I had:
- larger population due to new medical tech and innovations in agriculture that sustain population, then population slows down due to birth control technology
- communication technology (especially film) allows spread of cultures around the globe
- technology (esp. in fishing) leads to loss of biodiversity
- modern industry leads to degradation of air, water, soil and atmosphere, like greenhouse gases, endangering ocean food webs, and thinning the ozone
I forgot to ask if anyone had any other answers
sorry, i meant to type 674
On page 687, "In what ways were traditional ideas on nationalism challenged throughout the twentieth century?" I had two answers:
- Globalization challenges nationalism bc its a vision of a world without borders
- International economic links and global awareness gives a feeling of global citizenship
I one answer could be how in Africa and Arabia never achieved political expression and how the EU was unstable after WWII but I'm very confused about what strayer is talking about here. Does anyone know or have other answers?
The nation has been under threat with the rise of postwar transnational integration movements like the UN, the EU, and the Pan-African Union as well as by globalization and increasing economic linkages.
Would international services like WHO and The Red Cross fall under integration movements or economic linkages
You've started already, right?
674 How has technology shaped the demographic, cultural, and environmental changes of the past century?
* New medical technologies like antibiotics, disinfectants, vaccines, and x-rays along with increased sanitation have severely limited the death rate, increasing the need to migrate for people who cannot find work or who are otherwise affected by increasingly limited resources.
* The Green Revolution in agriculture has increased agricultural output, especially in developing countries, providing more food to people but also forcing them off rural lands and into cities or overseas.
* New technologies like steamships, jets, trains, and automobiles make movement quicker and cheaper, thus making transit more of a possibility for many.
* Instantaneous communication technologies have spread cultural ideas around the world, e.g. Western music, television and film.
* Industrialization has led to massive environmental problems caused by the depletion of the ozone layer and subsequent global warming.
on page 689, for ‘what continuities and changes can be seen within religions during the past century?’ i had
- buddhism, islam, and christianity remain trans regional cultures (ex. 62% of christians are non-western, buddhism ideas accepted in the west)
- religious fundamentalism promotes traditional beliefs and practices
for continuities, and for change:
- religious belief and practice declined amid scientific culture and modernity
- religious fundamentalism develops as a response to modernity, to revitalize religion.
as you can see i had religious fundamentalism in both categories, which i’m not sure is correct. comments are appreciated!
@sofia You are right, those religions are "transnational", another word for that is "global." Since this is a CCOT question, you would need to specify that they had been global before the 20th century, and remained such as that process was increased. *continuity*
Islamic fundamentalism, in it's current form (terrorism) is a change.
Yes, organize religion is being consistently rejected is also a change. And I would add that states have become more secularized, either rejecting religion, or claiming that is a private affair.
I have a suggestion for all of you. Really work on this question: How has technology shaped demographic, cultural, and environmental changes of the past century. (5 answers)
And: In what differing ways have racial, national, and ethnic identities found expression during the past century? (3 answers, one for each.
All of these answers should be well explained.
Nationality: loyalty to national states drove world wars
Ethnic: there were ethnically based separatist movements because people of same ethnicity wanted separate political status led to disintegration of of states, like British India into Pakistan and India
for the racial identity section of the question on page 685, i wrote:
Racist ideologies find expression in institutions, such as Nazi Germany and apartheid-era South Africa, and in societal behavior, generated from beliefs of European supremacy. However, overt racism became globally illegitimate following independence movements in Africa and Asia.
i’m not sure if it gets across a single point, or if it has unnecessary information.
I think since the question is asking about how racial identities found expression, the first sentence about the Nazis and apartheid South Africa should be enough. But also, the Nazis formed their identity in as an overlap of racism and nationalism, so I'm not sure which that would fall under.
Also, for the other aspects of the question, I have:
Migrants in new countries create ethnic areas and form identities that blend aspects of their homelands and aspects of their new homes
Certain states secede or seek to secede based on national identities like the Eritreans from Ethiopia, Scottish from the UK, and the Tibetans from China.
Wouldn't new states seceding be categorized under ethnic expression since they were based on ethnic identity? I'm confused on what else could be categorized as expression of national identity, as they eroded in favor of more global identities...
I organized the question on page 685 as below:
- shapes individual behavior, institutional practices, and government policies by racial ideologies -- ex) racist regimes- Nazi Germany, southern US, apartheid-era South Africa -- generates racial awareness in colonized people and loses public legitimacy as social distinction.
- Loyalty to national states drives global wars. Growth of international economic linkages + increasing global awareness of problems connects to an international outlook
Culturally distinct people seek separate political status under logic of nationalism; ethnic separatist movements threaten integrity of existing nation-states -- ex) British India dissolution to Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India, Eritrea seceded from Ethiopia
I'm not sure if this fully answers the question, and would appreciate any comments!
Good Callisto, but I think you need all of the overt expressions of racism - Nazis, apartheid, and the American south 1890s to 1950. (Jim Crow).
Can you see how nationalism is related to (not necessarily an answer to this) the desire among people of the same ethnicity demanding their own state.
On nations you make some good points, but you should focus on the post war rise of transnational entities such as the UN, the EU, and the Pan-African Union.
I'm not sure that answers the racial part of this question because it's asking about the ways in which racial identities are expressed, and while racist ideology is definitely related to that it doesn't actually express a racial identity, just the belief in the superiority of a race.
On page 685 it talks about racial awareness among colonized people as well as people living in places like nazi germany, apartheid south africa, the southern united states, and latin america, so I would say that the awareness of racial distinctions gave cause for a solidarity among non-white racial groups in those places.
I'm not quite sure though, so if anyone has a correction or a suggestion it would be very welcome!
I think I agree most with Kate's answer for the racial part, and I agree with what everyone else is saying for the national and ethnic parts
I would add that As a result of the Holocaust, race lost much of it's public legitimacy as a social distinction - as shown by the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights
You know how this works. It is NOT just about asking questions, it is also about answering the questions of others. And then engaging in a back and forth with other people about correct or incorrect answers - and why they are correct/incorrect.