Area Study Merging with Cross-National Approach

Area Study Merging with Cross-National Approach Overview Are area studies and a cross-national approach really that different or they have more in common than we might expect? I think it is the latter, having three major similarities. First, these studies have increasingly merged to seek systematic explanations that cut through regions, which had been thought to be fundamentally different or exceptional (such as Latin America). As such, the second similarity is that they have also come to share some roles, such as confirming a theory. Third, the rise of mixed method approach that can combine area study and cross-national approaches further illuminates not only the second similarity but also a common and ultimate goal shared by the two approaches, which to expand our knowledge. At the same time, how they go about playing similar roles and accomplishing the shared goal remains as a major difference. In other words, to answer the second question, each approach is better suited than another to answer particular types of questions. Area studies that are often in qualitative nature ask for conditions necessary or sufficient for particular outcomes to occur, while cross- national approach that tend to be in quantitative in nature is much suited for asking the average effect of an independent variable on such outcomes. Similarities: Area Study Merging with Cross-National Approach Once again, I think area studies and a cross-national approach have come much closer to each other, having three major similarities. The first major similarity is that both studies seem to have sought systematic explanations that cut through regions. While it is straightforward that a cross-national approach seeks such accounts, I argue that this similarity has emerged due to a change in seeing what area study should be. Fundamentally, area study is a study that focuses on particular areas or regions of the world. In the mid 20th century, an area study approach had particularly been used as a â€Å"cookie cutter† strategy. That is, it ‘snips’ out regions or areas that do not conform to accepted ideas or particularly the ones that are studied through the scope of â€Å"ethnocentrism† (Wiarda 1993, 16). Thus, the study is driven by the idea—â€Å"what works in one context may not work in another† –and utilized to understand not just deviant or outlier but ‘exceptional’ cases (Wiarda 2005, 2). For instance, O’Donnell’s area studies on Argentina and Brazil (1973; 1976) caught grater attention in the 1970s; he challenged Lipset’s modernization theory (1959; 1960) that came out a decade ago based on Western states as a widely accepted idea displaying the positive relationship between economic development and democracy. Contra rily to Lipset, O’Donnell showed that a process of modernization actually yielded a bureaucratic-authoritarian regime in the ‘richest’ countries in the region. Dependency theorists, such as Frank (1969) and Dos Santos (1971) also elevated the importance of area studies by arguing that Latin American economies would not follow the path of Western states because the region was exploited as ‘satellite economies’ by the West and ended up contributing to the Western modernization. Recently, Mainwaring and Perez-Linan (2003) empirically demonstrated a non-linear relationship between economic development and democracy in Latin America; they concluded that â€Å"Latin American exceptionalism† existed in the mid to late 20th century because of distinctive economic policies (ISI) and a link between political elites. Regardless of Mainwaring and Prez-Linan’s work, however, I see area study to increasingly become a ‘lesson-drawing’ approach (Wiarda 2005). Instead of pointing out regional distinction and exception as an end goal, these differences are used as lessons for building a ‘mega-theory’ or producing systematic accounts regarding comparative politics. This is in part because of the rise of other area studies focusing on the Middle East and East Asia, which show their paths towards democracy that are distinct from both Western states and Latin America. These studies, therefore, diminish Latin America exceptionalism. In addition, area studies, namely of O’Donnell’s (1973; 1976) have come under much attack for being ad hoc explanations, since Latin American turned to re- democratize in the 1980s. All of these factors have then called for a more systematic investigation for providing an account, which identifies common and different conditions c ontributing to such outcomes (Acemoglu and Robinson 2006). For instance, Acemoglu and Robinson (2006) recognized Lipset’s modernization theory as one of four paths, rather than ‘the only path,’ and sought conditions that make democratization likely, using the cases of Argentina, Singapore, and South Africa. O’Donnell’s later work with Schmitter (1986) on Latin America also merged with Przeworski (1991) and Haggard and Kaufman (1995), which utilized cases from various regions, such as the Philippines, South Africa, Bolivia, Uruguay, and Nepal. These studies have then provided a powerful account, suggesting the entrance and exit or authoritarianism to depend on a strategic bargaining between political (military) and economic elites in the wake of economic downturns. Hence, the first major similarity is, once again, a tendency of both area studies and cross-national approaches to seek systematic accounts that cut through regions. While cross-national approach is essentially thought to have such a goal, area studies have come to understand the need of the goal, while no single region seems to stand as entirely exceptional or can be isolated from the rest of the world. As such, the second similarity is that they have also come to share some roles. When area studies, at least some parts of the studies, have come close to cross-national approach theoretically, these studies can play a similar analytical role as well, namely the role in confirming a theory. The theory of political activism may be a good example. Mainly based on Western states, including the United States, empirical cross- ational studies have suggested that well-established democracies have increasingly faced a â€Å"legitimacy crisis† or increase in â€Å"democratic deficits† (Norris 2011, 3- 5). Using a wide range of indicators such as a declining civic engagement or voter turnout (Teixiera 1992; Putnam 2000), declining party loyalties (Aldrich 1995; Dalton et al. 1984), and surveys, they show dissatisfaction and decrease in confidence in national governments (Norris 2011). As such, Fung and Drakeley (2013) conducted an area study focusing on East Asia, ranging from South Korea to Indonesia and Cambodia, and confirmed that even in ‘transnational democracies’ face similar challenges with old democracies or what Norris (2011) calls ‘democratic deficits.’ The area study shows that East Asian states are remarkably similar with Western democracies in a sense that democratic regime may be ‘flawed’ but not ‘broken.’ In turn, cross-national studies can also confirm a theory based on area studies. For instance, Lipset’s modernization theory on the basis on Western Europe has been reinforced with a growing number of empirical cross-national studies (Boix and Stokes 2003; Epstein et al 2006), although debatable (e.g. Przeworski and Limongi 1997; Kennedy 2010; Teorell 2010). Geddes (2003, 351-365) explicitly stated the literature on modernization theory has become much more â€Å"persuasive† because â€Å"large-n studies have begun to play a greater role in the comparative development fields.† Third, the rise of mixed method approach that can combine area study and cross-national approaches further illuminates not only the second point but also a common and ultimate goal shared by the two approaches, which to expand our knowledge. For instance, Liberman (2005) recently suggested a mixed-method approach, called nested analysis, which is a research design employing both a Large-N statistical analysis and small-N case studies for in-depth investigation. In particular, this approach advocates the use of a large-N analysis as a guide to draw a subsequent small-case N analysis for two different purposes: a model-building tool for testing an outlier case and a model-testing tool for confirming an online case. Coppedge (2002) is a good example of the nested analysis; he developed a large-N study to determine the need of an area study on Venezuela, which appeared to have a large portion of residuals since the 1990s. Fish (2005) also employed a mixed approach, which conducted a larg e-n analysis and the Russian case study. Similarly, King et al (1994) and Brady et al (2006) also suggest a mixed approach, which, though unlike Liberman, utilizes area studies to draw a large- n analysis. For instance, Krieckhaus (2006) briefly reviewed areas of Latin America, East Asia, and Sub- Saharan Africa to argue distinctive effects of democratic governance on economic growth. This area study thus confirms not only a null relationship between the two variables in cross- national studies but also the positive and negative relationships that appear when empirical analyses are conducted separately. In short, these mixed approaches show that area studies and cross-national studies can reinforce their finding or give a valid reason for each to be conducted; and ultimately, these mutual roles highlight the most important similarity –both studies contribute to enhance our knowledge in comparative politics (Walt 1999). Different Questions and Approaches At the same time, how they go about playing similar roles and accomplishing the shared goal remains as a major difference. In particular, area studies are usually qualitative in nature, with some exceptions (e.g. Mainwaring and Prez- Pinan 2003). This means that, as I mentioned sometimes, area studies are a small-n or case study, which intensively examine particular events with careful attention to historical and cultural contexts. King et al (1994) similarly argue that a small- n study is better at conducting a descriptive inference, which is the â€Å"process of understanding an observed phenomenon on the basis of a set of observations† (55). As such, area studies are particularly suited for asking two questions. The first one is, â€Å"what are conditions necessary or sufficient for a particular event to arise?† Returning to the works by O’Donnell and Schmitter (1986), Przeworski (1991), and Haggard and Kaufman (1995), they essentially found economic downturn and ‘authoritarian bargaining’ between political and economic elites as crucial and interactive conditions that change the likelihood of a regime change. Acemoglu and Robinson (2006) as well as Boix (2003) also constructed a model where the level of income inequality and capital mobility to interactively alter the probability of democratization, as they contribute to power relations between political elites and mass citizens. Area studies are also suited for questions that identify important actors. The identification of domestic actors is crucial because they, according to Mahoney (2011, 115), â€Å"create†¦structures, which in turn shape subsequent actor behaviors, which in turn lead to the development of institutional structural patterns† It is also important, as Walt (1999, 12) points out that the main task of political science research is to produce â€Å"useful knowledge about human social behavior.† As such, the above studies are also praised for identifying important actors, such as political elites, business actors, and military, which are â€Å"black boxed† (Rueschemeyr et al. 1992, 29) in Lipset’s modernization theory and subsequent empirical studies that focus on the relationship between economic development and democracy (e.g. Prezeworksi and LImongi 1997; Epstein et al 2006; Boix and Stokes 2003; Kennedy 2010; Teorell 2010). Ziblatt (2006: 322) commented, â€Å"their accounts improve upon the agentless structural functionalism implicit in modernization theory by reasserting the primacy of collective actors resources, preferences, and strategies.† Teorell (2010, 151) also argues, â€Å"The key theoretical virtue of this novel approach is that it integrates the previous †¦traditions by providing structural conditions explaining preference and actions of ordinary citizens, in turn affecting the strategic choices made by political elites.† In turn, cross-national studies are naturally equipped with a larger sample size and conducted through statistical or quantitative analyses. As such, they are better suited for asking, â€Å"what is the average effect on an independent variable on the same or similar outcome seen across the world?† (Mahoney 2011; King et al 1994). Put differently, King et al (1994) argues that, while area studies tend to be good at descriptive inference, large- n studies are better suited for causal inference—that is—to â€Å"demonstrate the causal status of each potential linkage in such a posited mechanism the investigator would have to define and then estimate the causal effect underlying it† (86). For instance, Boix and Stokes (2003, 531), building on Lipset, specifically concluded, â€Å" A simulation of the results shows that for low and medium levels of development, the probability of a transition to democracy grows by about 2 percent for each $1,000 increase in per capita income.† Similarly, Kennedy (2010, 797) notes â€Å"a 1% increase in per- capita GDP above the country mean† increases the probability of democratic transition. These specific numbers would not come out of area studies; for instance, although Haggard and Kaufman (1992) identified economic downturn as a crucial condition for a regime change, they do not specify exactly how bad the economic situation has to be; it was rather relative judgment in comparing cases.

Political Economies

Contemporary political economies are mixtures of fascism, socialism, capitalism, anarchism, etc. Most of them stress aspects of certain systems more than those of others but in each one will find a mixture. Recent largely fascist systems are those of Mussolini's Italy, Peron's Argentina, Hitler's Third Reich, Chavez' Venezuela, and several of recent Middle Eastern regimes (e. g. , Libya), Egypt, et al. So called communist regimes are also effectively fascist since they tend to be ruled by an undemocratic group of rulers†e. . , North Korea, Cuba. Welfare Statism The welfare state or, from the economic viewpoint, the mixed economy, may be understood as a combination of the principles of capitalism and socialism. Sometimes the emphasis in this system is placed not so much on economic as on certain moral considerations. Basically the welfare state consists of a legal system that aims at securing for everyone the negative right to liberty and the positive right to well being.The wel fare state, which is to say most Western countries, balances the two values that together seem to its advocates to be the bedrock of a civilized society. No one ought to have his or her sovereignty seriously compromised, nor should anyone be permitted to fall below a certain standard of living. This is difficult to maintain ecause at different times one or another of these objectives will probably take priority and in mostly democratic systems political leaders will vacillate between giving more support to one or the other.The right to strike, for example, which is the negative liberty to quit one's Job in an effort to gain respect for one's terms of employment, may conflict with the positive right to be provided with various services–e. g. , health care, mail delivery or education. It is indeed a prominent feature of the welfare state that both negative and positive rights receive their legal protection. Negative rights involve respect for a person's life, liberty and proper ty–that is, everyone is by law supposed to abstain from interfering with these.Positive rights, in turn, involve respect for a person's basic needs–that is, everyone who is unable to secure the requirements ot survival and even tlourishing is supposed to have those provided by way of the appropriate public policy (e. g. , taxation, mandated services, public education, national health care). The moral underpinnings of the welfare state can be utilitarianism, altruism or certain intuitively held moral precepts. Utilitarianism requires that all pursue the eneral welfare and whatever public policies to facilitate this were needed would be justified.Although many utilitarians believe that the general welfare is best achieved when government operates in a largely laissez-faire fashion, there is no objection to government intervention in social affairs if without those many in the society may fail to achieve a decent and prosperous form of life. Altruists, in turn, often hold that to make certain that people fulfill their primary obligation to help others, it is necessary to introduce public measures that will secure such help, given that many might wish o breach their duty to do the right thing.Finally, there is the claim that by our common intuitions it is evident that both a measure of personal liberty and social welfare must be guaranteed to all, lest the quality of life in society fall below what it should be. While people object to the welfare state from several other perspectives, it is thought by its supporters to be the most stable modern political orders. Although it is characterized by much dispute and controversy, in the long run, its supporters maintain, the system seems to be overall satisfactory and Just.

Apush Notes: Conquering a Continent 1861-1877 Essay

* Essential Question: What factors helped advance the integration of the national economy after the Civil War? Section 1: The Republican Vision: * Integrating the National Economy: * Reshaping the former Confederacy after the Civil War supplemented a Republican drive to strengthen the national economy to overcome limitations of market variations that took place under previous Democratic commands. * Failure to fund internal improvements left different regions of the country disconnected, producing the Civil War, Republicans argued. * During the Civil War and after, the Republican-dominated Congress made strong use of federal power, passing protective tariffs that gave U.S. manufacturers a competitive advantage against foreign firms. * Republican administrations would strengthen the economy through a massive public-private partnership that modern historians argue represents a turn away from a laissez-faire or â€Å"hands off† approach of previous administrations towards the economy. * Railroad developments in the United States began well before the Civil War but peaked after the Civil War. By 1900, virtually no corner of the country lacked rail service. * Railroads transformed American capitalism by adopting a legal form of organization, the corporation, enabling them to raise private capital in large amounts. * Along with the transformative power of railroads, Republicans’ protective tariffs also helped build thriving U.S. industries. A Civil War debt of $2.8 billion was erased during the 1880s by a $2.1-billion-dollar income from tariffs. * Fierce tariff debates marked American politics in the 1880s and 1890s. Democrats argued that the tariff had not slowed poverty in the United States. * Protective tariffs had also helped to foster the growth of trusts, giant corporations that dominated whole sectors of the economy and wielded monopoly power. * The rise of railroads and trusts prompted a pushback by companies against new state and federal regulatory laws. In Munn v. Illinois (1877), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states possessed the right to regulate businesses, but not at the expense of fragmenting the national marketplace. * In the Southwest, federal courts promoted economic development at the expense of racial justice. Although the United States had taken control of New Mexico and Arizona after the U.S. Mexican War of 1848, much of the land still remained in Mexican American hands by the 1870s. * As the post–Civil War years brought railroads and Anglo-American settlers, Mexican Americans lost 64 percent of their lands through special courts that ruled on land titles. * The Santa Fe Ring was a notorious group of politicians and lawyers who conspired to defraud Mexican Americans of their lands. * After the Civil War, U.S. and European policymakers attempted to transform their economies to the gold standard. But basing money supplies on gold was a divisive issue that framed U.S. politics for a generation. * In 1873, Congress directed the U.S. Treasury, over a six-year period, to retire the greenback paper dollars issued during the Civil War and replace them with notes from an expanded system of national banks. After 1879, the Treasury exchanged notes for gold upon request. * Silver adherents received a modest victory when Congress passed the Bland-Allison Act of 1878, requiring the United States to coin a modest amount of silver. * Republican nationalist policies fostered rapid economic growth in the form of an expansion of telecommunications, corporations, and capital, making the United States a mighty industrial power by 1900. * The New Union and the World: * Following the Civil War, the United States achieved greater leverage with foreign nations like Britain. American expansionists expected to add more territories to the nation. The use of the Hawaiian Islands and the invention of steam transportation facilitated expansion off the continent to places like Japan in the 1850s. * Union victory also increased trade with Latin America. Mexico freed itself from French rule in 1867, but risked economic manipulation by its larger northern neighbor, the United States. * International trade became a new model for asserting power in Latin America and Asia. Under the leadership of Secretary of State William Steward (1861–1869), the United States embraced China and Japan, forcing the Japanese to remain open to trade. * Seward also advocated the purchase of strategic locations for naval bases and refueling stations, such as land in Nicaragua for a canal, Hawaii, and the Philippines. * In 1868, Seward achieved a significant victory with congressional approval of the Burlingame Treaty with China, regulating immigration. The same year, Seward also purchased Alaska from Russia, further establishing the United States as a global power. Summary: * Essential Question: What factors drew homesteaders to the Great Plains, and what role did they play in the Republicans’ vision for the post-Civil War nation? Section 2: Incorporating the West: * Cattlemen and Miners: * Conquest and development of the American West became the domestic foundation for national supremacy in the late 1800s. Farm development was as vital as factory development to Republican policymakers. * Republicans sought to bring families to the West by offering 160 acres of land through the Homestead Act. * Innovative federal policies, such as the U.S. Geological Survey, helped in 1879 to open up western lands managed under a new Department of the Interior. * Federal policies helped to incorporate the trans-Mississippi West. As railroads crossed the country, thousands of homesteaders filed land claims. * To make room for cattle, professional buffalo hunters eliminated the buffalo. * Texas ranchers inaugurated the famous Long Drive, hiring cowboys to herd cattle hundreds of miles north to the railroads that pushed west across Kansas. * As soon as railroads reached the Texas range country during the 1870s, ranchers abandoned the Long Drive. Stockyards appeared beside railroad tracks in large Midwestern cities like Chicago. These places became the center of a new industry, meatpacking. * Sheep raising also became a major enterprise in the high country of the Rockies and the Sierras. * In the late 1850s as California gold panned out, other mineral discoveries helped to develop the Far West in places like Nevada, the Colorado Rockies, South Dakota’s Black Hills, and Idaho. The Comstock Lode in Nevada was a major silver discovery. * At some sites, miners found copper, lead, and zinc that eastern industries demanded. The insatiable material demands of mining triggered economic growth at many far-flung sites, such as Pueblo, Colorado, which smelted ore. * Remote areas turned into a mob scene of prospectors, traders, gamblers, prostitutes, and saloonkeepers; prospectors made their own mining codes and often used them to exclude or discriminate against Mexicans, Chinese, and blacks. * California created a market for Oregon’s produce and timber. * Homesteaders: * Upon first encountering the Great Plains, Euro-Americans thought the land barren, and referred to it as the Great American Desert. * Railroads, land speculators, steamship lines, and the western states and territories did all they could to encourage settlement of the Great Plains. * New technology—steel plows, barbed wire, and strains of hard-kernel wheat—helped settlers to overcome obstacles. * Between 1878 and 1886, settlers experienced exceptionally wet weather, but then the dry weather typical of the Great Plains returned, and settlers fled recently settled land. * â€Å"American fever† took hold in northern Europe as Norwegians and Swedes came to the United States. * For some southern blacks known as Exodusters, Kansas was the Promised Land; by 1880, 40,000 blacks lived in Kansas—the largest concentration of blacks in the West aside from Texas. * By the turn of the century, the Great Plains had fully submitted to agricultural development. In this process, there was little of the â€Å"pioneering† that Americans associated with the westward movement; farming required capital investment and the willingness to risk boom and bust cycles just like any other business. * Although miners, lumber workers, and cowboys were overwhelmingly men, many women accompanied families as homesteaders. * The Republican ideal of national economic development through farm building supported the cultural value of domesticity. Spread widely before and after the Civil War, domesticity held that it was a man’s devotion to his wife and childr en that caused him to work hard and be thrifty and responsible. * Domesticity produced a political clash with the Mormon Church, whose adherents practiced polygamy. Along with voting rights, this issue framed gender political controversies during Reconstruction. * Women’s rights expanded when Wyoming granted women the right to vote in 1869. Towns in Kansas in the 1880s elected women as mayors and as city professionals. Women were increasingly leaving the home to work. * Yet the majority of rural women lived under harsh frontier conditions. Rolvaag’s contemporary work, Giants in the Earth portrayed the fear and isolation of Norwegian immigrant women on the Dakota vast prairie. * Debt and Aridity: * Farm prices dropped in the late 1800s as technological innovation and global expansion glutted markets for wheat, cotton, and corn. * Farmers also faced the problem of being small producers in a marketplace that rewarded economies of scale, giving large corporations the advantage of undercutting farmers. In the 1880s, farmers would launch one of the most powerful protest movements in the history of American politics. * A hostile environment existed on the Great Plains in the form of grasshoppers, prairie fires, hailstorms, droughts, tornadoes, blizzards, the lack of water, and minimal wood supplies. Many families built homes made of sod. * By the late 1880s, over 50,000 homesteaders had fled the Dakotas and many others gave up their settled lands. Dry farming techniques helped to alleviate some of the challenges of Great Plains farming. But it favored the growth of large corporations. Family farms required over 300 acres to survive low prices and harsh weather conditions. * By 1900, about half of the nation’s cattle and sheep, one-third of its cereal crops, and nearly three-fifths of its wheat came from the Great Plains. But environmental costs multiplied as wasteful anti-biodiversity agricultural practices continued. * Encouragement from experts like John Wesley Powell, a geologist who explored the West, to infuse federal funding into western development ignited a debate over corporate versus small family farms. * Rampant overdevelopment led to a preservation movement by Congress. In 1864, Congress gave 10 square miles of the Yosemite Valley to California for public use. In 1872, Congress set aside 2 million acres of Wyoming’s Yellowstone Valley as a public park for tourism, a new western industry on the rise. * Indian eviction accompanied land preservation. In 1877, the Nez Perce under Chief Joseph and the Bannock tribe of Indians utilized Yellowstone for survival as they fled forced reservation life by the federal military. * The military decided that killing buffalo would help reduce resistance of the Great Plains tribes. They had signed treaties in 1867 and 1868 to ceded vast tracts of land and remain on reservations. Whites now wanted Indians to cede more lands. Summary: * Essential Question: How did the federal government’s relationship with Native Americans change in the decades following the Civil War? How did they stay the same? Section 3: A Harvest of Blood: Native Peoples Dispossessed: * The Civil War and Indians on the Plains: * Before the Civil War, Congress gave the Great Plains to Native Americans because they thought it could not be farmed. But railroads, steel plows, and the desire for land reversed that decision. * The Sioux and other tribes fought against federal government attempts to place them on reservations. In 1862 in Minnesota, the Sioux responded by massacring white settlers. President Lincoln hanged the leaders and exiled the remainder from the state. * The Dakota Sioux uprising escalated tensions elsewhere between whites and Indians. In 1864, Col. Chivington led his troops to commit the Sand Creek Massacre of Cheyenne in eastern Colorado. * The Sioux and Arapaho responded with more attacks. In December of 1866, the Sioux wiped out eighty men under Captain Fetterman and successfully closed the Bozeman Trail. * By 1869, public opinion had turned against warfare as an effective means to subdue Indian tribes. Congressional leaders searched for other options to deal with the â€Å"Indian probl em.† * Grant’s Peace Policy: * Christian reformers heavily influenced the Grant administration’s peace policy. Reformers argued that Indians could be transformed into whites through education and religious indoctrination, particularly of Indian youth in boarding schools. The first boarding school opened at Carlisle in 1879. * Corruption, racism, and denominational in-fighting reduced the effectiveness of the boarding school campaign. To Indian leaders, reformers became just another interest group. * Indian tribes were forced by political circumstances to accommodate. In 1871, Congress abolished further treaty-making with Indian tribes. * The Supreme Court further eroded tribal power in Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903), stating that Congress could make any policies it chose and could ignore existing treaties. * In Ex Parte Crow Dog, the Court ruled that Indians were not citizens unless approved by Congress. Indians would remain wards of the government until the 1930s. * Another assimilation measure attempted to free Indians from their tribal past, this time through land taking. The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 held that all Indians would receive allotments of reservation land and the remainder would be sold to non-Indians. * The Bureau of Indian Affairs’ carelessness, corruption, and greed doomed the act. Fifteen million surplus acres alone were taken from tribes in Indian Territory by 1894, facilitating the birth of the state of Oklahoma. * Before Dawes, Indians had held over 155 million acres of land; by 1900, this had dropped to 77 million. By 1934, native peoples had lost 66 percent of their allotted lands. * The End of Armed Resistance: * By 1873, only Sitting Bull, the great Lakota Sioux leader, openly refused to go to a reservation. * A crisis came on the northern plains in 1876 when the Sioux refused to sell the Black Hills as demanded by the federal government. * On June 25, 1876, George A. Custer pursued a reckless strategy and suffered annihilation by Chief Crazy Horse’s Sioux and Cheyenne warriors at the Little Big Horn. This was the last victory of the Plains Indians against the U.S. Army. * The Apache hated their reservation, so they made life miserable for white settlers in the Southwest until their chief Geronimo was finally captured in 1886. The United States had completed its military conquest of the West. * Strategies of Survival: * Despite living on reservations and halting armed resistance, most native people continued to practice traditional languages, ceremonies, and arts. * Most native people also selectively adopted white ways such as use of the English language and skills such as agriculture. Most native people blended old and new ways. * One of the most famous native people who assimilated during this era was Dr. Charles Eastman, a Dakota Sioux boy trained in white schools to become a medical doctor. * The Ghost Dance movement symbolized the syncretism, or blending together, of white and Indian ways. The dance drew on Christian and native elements, spreading from reservation to reservation across the West and alarmed many local whites. On December 29, 1890, at Wounded Knee Creek in South Dakota, U.S. Army soldiers massacred 150 Lakota Sioux people. The soldiers feared that the Ghost Dance would provoke war uniting Indian communities. * By 1890, the United States included forty states, an industrial economy that rivaled Britain and Germany, steady immigration, and inklings of becoming a major player in foreign places. A new American empire was forming abroad.

The Battle Of Command During Battle - 1271 Words

A major hurdle was thus the war was being fought in foreign terrains and as such, the soldiers had to adapt and learn quickly how to navigate and combat in new grounds. Proper training is also essential for defining roles and functions for each member of the troops to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of the entire units. Confusion of formations and chain of command during battle can be devastating to any unit. Uniformity is crucial in minimizing losses and the number of casualties in battlefields. Similarly, it is neccesary to avoid conflict of interest among soldiers of the same troop and with allies. This war being a collaborative battle among allies thus required the highest level of collaboration and cooperation. Proper training was thus important to ensure that all troops worked and operated as cohesive units. Motivation is crucial in the success of any operation whether economical or military. Workers and in this case soldiers are thus required to be fully committed to the cause and motivated to work for certain incentives for their service. Remunerations aren’t enough to fully motivate a soldier into engaging in life threatening battles. The political class was thus similarly influential ion offering the servicemen proper incentives to ensure that they were motivated to perform the duties assigned to them despite the obvious risks and hardships that they would incur. American soldiers were largely motivated to participate in the war because of the promises thatShow MoreRelatedEssay about COL Prescott’s Command in the Battle of Breed’s Hill1344 Words   |  6 PagesThe award-winning novel by Stephen Ambrose, Band of Brothers: Easy Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitlers Eagles Nest, discusses one of the greatest examples of mission command i n the form of 1st Lieutenant Richard Winters and his role in the Brecourt Manor Assault. This battle is a textbook example of how to fight against a superior enemy force that outnumbered the unit by four times as much. Facing overwhelming odds with just 16 paratroopers against over 60 German SoldiersRead MoreThe Battle of Antietam Creek600 Words   |  3 PagesThe Battle of Antietam Creek The Battle of Antietam Creek was a very bloody and important battle in the Civil war. The battle was fought by two different armies within the Union and the Confederacy, The Army of the Potomac (Union) and The Army of Northern Virginia (Confederate). Antietam Creek is located just to the east of the Potomac River in Maryland. The battle was fought on a hill just above the west bank of Antietam Creek. The Army of the Potomac, who was on the offensive, was pushing towardsRead MoreGeneral Sheridan1433 Words   |  6 PagesBerlin. Operation Market Garden would the largest airborne battle during the war and would be led under Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery who was in command of the 21st Army Group. What was thought to be the final push into Berlin, Germany by the Allies proved to be wrong during Operation Market Garden. The Allies ultimately lost the battle and were forced to delay movement into Germany. The Battle of Arnhem was the most famous battle during Operation Market Garden, known as â€Å"a bridge too far†,Read MoreThe Second Phase Of The Battle Of Shiloh Essay1448 Words   |  6 PagesThe second phase of the Battle of Shiloh starts as reinforcements from General Buell’s Army of the Ohio and a unit of Grant’s own reserve division joined the Union Army now positioned at Pittsburg Landing. These reinforcements added over 22,500 men to the Union lines13 bringing the total number of Union forces to over 45,000, which is more than they had on 6 April, the first day of fighting.14 On April 7, General Grant renewed the fighting with an aggressive counteract.15 Greatly outnumbered (ConfederateRead MoreWorld War 2 essay (Canada)1452 Words   |  6 Pagesï » ¿ During the course of the Second World War, Canada evolved into a powerful, resourceful nation that was needed by the Allies. Canada contributed significantly to the Allied war effort during World War II where they fought on land, water and air and assisted indirectly from the home front. On land, they fought in numerous battles and campaigns such as D-Day, Hong Kong, and the Italian campaign. However, they were also strong and resourceful when it came to air and naval forces in battle. But evenRead MoreGeneral Patton and Mission Command: The Battle of the Bulge Essay1628 Words   |  7 Pagestime has strayed away from operational leaders and adapted Mission Command, which gives leaders the ability at the lowest level the capability to exercise disciplined initiative in an act of carrying out the larger mission . Mission Command is made up of the following six steps: Understanding, Visualize, Describe, Direct, Lead and Assess, in which a commander is responsible for. General Patton understood the intent of the Battle of the Bulge on different levels, he was able to form a mental imageRead MoreAnalyzing Mission Command Principles Of Gen Braxton Bragg1590 Words   |  7 PagesAnalyzing Mission Command Principles of GEN Braxton Bragg According to Army ADP 6-0, mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander, using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent, to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations (CAPE, 2012). Effective mission command can generally be analyzed according to the six principles outlined in ADRP 6-0. The six principles of mission command are to: build cohesiveRead MoreThe Battle of Cold Harbor1730 Words   |  7 PagesThe Battle of Cold Harbor in spring of 1864 was one of General Ulysses S. Grant’s worst offensive defeats during the Civil War. Grant failed to describe his mission command to his subordinate, direct his units to correct movement, understand his operational environment, and lead his army with a coordinated plan. Grant had a stronger, bigger, and better-equipped army than his enemy, but his failure in the mission command process led to fatal mistakes before and durin g the battle. Due to failedRead MoreThe Four Principles Of Mission Command1494 Words   |  6 PagesAccording to Army ADP 6-0, Mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations. Effective mission command can generally be analyzed according to the six principles outlined in ADRP 6-0. The six principles of mission command are: build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create shared understanding, provide a clearRead MoreCapture of Fort Ticonderoga: Benedict Arnold1140 Words   |  5 PagesGovernors Second Company of Guards. When hearing about the battles of Lexington and Concord, Arnold and his men became eager for action. They marched off to Cambridge to ask for the commission of the Massachusetts Committee of Safety to capture Fort Ticonderoga. Along the way, Arnold’s group met up with Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys. Arnold and Allen disputed about who was in total command but Arnold’s attempt to take command was futile so he accompanied the Green Mountain Boys with Allen