"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breath free"

The turn of the century reflected a disparity of politics, social and economics between the working stiffs and those who ran the companies those stiffs worked for. Men who had monopolized industries to ridiculous financial gain left no room for the average Joe to have a change at a successful business. With little room for a middle class, this left the majority of families working 10 and 12 hour workdays, six days a week. There were Capitalists who were able to capitalize on this labor, and in turn bankroll millions of dollars. There was a huge disparity in the social class system.

Though Flanagan felt that the woman of Chicago who were doing charitable work with things like the Settlement House for the continued influx of immigrants, and other metropolitan community involvements. She felt less like Progressivism was actually less about actual Moral Reform, and more about the women doing more in society. Easier to do if living a life of leisure, since many women at the turn of the century were working woman. In industrialized cities women continued to maintain the home and family. Men at the time had little to do with household or child responsibilities.

Progressives were concerned about the unregulation of industrialization. they also had concerns about urbanization. The depression of 1890 had brought hard times and made factory conditions worse. This is one of the areas the Progressives were working on changing, Flanagan was right in that many of these changes had to start at the metropolitan community.. Many of the first laws of reformation were at the State level.Many Americans were in poverty at the time, most of these were immigrants living in cities.

Progressivism did focus on efficiency as Flanagan seemed to have a penchant for organizing society. Not only with immigration and women's issues but in manufacturing productivity and costs. At the government level they came up with the commissions systems and the city manager plan.

Like Flanagan Stromquist wanted reform, but he felt that the problems in society were because of vast differences in class. His ideology was for the working men, and to close the Capitalist ranks of class, while he expected that immigrants and the country needed all to be Americanized for this to work. Everyone should speak the same language, everyone should have and equal opportunity to make their way up the corporate ladder, that there should be not as clear of lines of class distinction. His views were somewhat Socialist if I may.

While both Flanagan and Stomquists views and ideas did pave the way towards eventual progress. There was not an immediate solution.

The Exploited

The cartoon I have chosen is the one with the Chinese man and the Indian looking at the postings on the wall. Every dog....has his day. The Chinese man has his arms folded and his back to the Indian. In the depiction posted at the top of the wall you will see the Chinese represented and an arrow telling them to go east. The Indian with an arrow pointing west.

Some background on this picture is first of all the time is very crucial; February 1879. Also that this picture represented a "California" mentality. California at the time was a bit cut off from the rest of the country, although the railroad had been completed, if it was travelling west, it still had to go through the "Wild West". this was the time period of stagecoach robberies and Indian Wars. Huge Indian wars had been going on in most of the Northwest states. One of the most significant was the Nez Perce War.

Another issue at this time is that 1) It was during the Capitalist Gilded age, and 2) During a depression that had started when the European stock market caused problems here in the states. On top of this since the railroads were finished. Many had been left without funding and laid off quite a lot of the thousands of Chinese immigrants that had come over seas to build them. They had to look for other work. In remote California there were only so many jobs.

There was a party formed in California called the Workingman's party, in the posting on the upper right that reads "The Chinese must go", you see it is signed by Denis Kearney. He was the leader of the Workingman's party. You will also see that it says "a real American" The irony in that statement is that he was an Irish immigrant. He, leaning towards socialism, had a problem with the rich gilded age barons who had put up the money and gone to China to recruit the Chinese for their cheap labor, taking jobs from people that were already here and willing to work. Mainly the Irish and dutch that had taken the long trek west to do that work following the completion of work and competition for work on the canals in the Midwestern states.

This had also come after the huge influx of both Dutch and Irish immigrants. Following the great Irish famine almost 3 million Irish had immigrated here 30 years earlier. Kearney's idea that he was a "real" American probably attributed to the "we were here first" mentality and the sheer number of "white" vs. Chinese. The Signed Social obviously is a reference the the Workingman's origins of the Socialist party. The German references may be just because the artist, Nast immigrated from Germany when he was six years old. The signed X could either be signifying lack of education or the (if you don't know how to write sign an X) because they were manual laborers and not the gilded capitalists. Or more remotely the sign of the cross or a reference to the Catholic Church as this is a Greek symbol for Christ.

The Indian and the Chinese were both exploited for what they had to offer, and then were being told to "get lost". The Indians for their land, the Chinese for their cheap labor. The Indian says to the Chinese "Pale face 'fraid you crowd him our, as he did me".

http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-ethnic&month=0007&week=a&msg=oP5iMLiktIk63Hfeyide3g&user=&pw=

http://www.udel.edu/soe/deal/IrishImmigrationFacts.html

http://www.californiahistoricalsociety.org/timeline/chapter7/c004.html

http://www.army.mil/article/28124/The_Nez_Perce_War_of_1877/

http://www.thehistorybox.com/ny_city/panics/panics_article9a.htm

The opinion of Rights

One could argue as Bentham does of the wordings on any declarations of rights at any given time in any given century. Are they foundations for society? or rights? Are they ""natural or "God" given, does my religious freedom negate these rights if I am an Atheist? So many things that are "natural" for example, nudity, are not a right to impose on others based on their religious "God given" rights, so their freedom of religious rights negates my "natural" rights? Whether they be rights or opinions, Bentham is correct in they are foundations for just getting along in society. So much of these arguments are  matter of opinion whether it be the wording of those rights or the rights themselves. I am placing my focus on the juxtaposition of civil rights.

As stated in the Declaration of Rights of 1789, everyone is not "born and remains free in equal rights" A child is subjugated to be brought up in a religion that is not his choosing, in an economic circumstance that he did not chose, and as a child and young adult may be educated in a way that that is not the best interest of his future choices of career or economic stability in life. The government, while not being monarchist, does demand that children go to school, and (In the United States) does demand that people seek health care whether it be against their religious or economic rights or not.

Many civil rights are a matter of opinion. Rights in Texas may not be the same as rights in Arizona. Rights in one town, may differ from another town. Rights do boil down to personal judgement of the government officials who are enforcing them. Cases have been to the supreme court time and time again over the interpretations of certain rights.A particular case can be appealed because of the interpretation of rights.

Is it my right to go barefoot in a store? Is it a store owners right to insist I own shoes? What peace is being disturbed by bare feet? Can a town enforce a law stating that its residents cannot wear pajama pants in public?  "The moral fiber in our community is dwindling"
Whos moral fiber? Maybe you are being a bit judgemental Mr. Mayor. Is it his right to impose dress codes on the resdidence in a community they share? Seems a bit monarchist to me. The people in the pictures moral fibers seem fine. Maybe its his moral fiber that could be in question. 

The American judicial system is a system of not necessarily rights, but the interpretation of the rights through a series of privileges. The privilege of wealth may allow for legal defense that would pardon an individual taking the rights of another. The privilege of knowing someone can aid the same way. Hierarchy in the community or the government is one of those privileges that greatly affects rights. Those individuals can sway the opinions of a jury of our peers. The peers who decide our rights.

Was it a right for a white store owner to chose who he wanted at his drugstore counter, he chose white customers to do that. Joseph McNeil, a black man decided that it was his right to sit at the same counter as well. They were at a store that had advertised economic equality for black customers and were encouraged to purchase their college supplies there. There was not a right though for the same students to access the lunch counter. Provisions had been made though, a provision for equality, there was a hot dog stand in the basement. For that store owner, he was abiding by the equal civil rights. Is it not his right as a store owner to chose what type of clientele he allow into his store? I am not defending his stance, but am suggesting the point made of whose rights?

American civil rights were continually violated long after the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights was drafted following the second World War.

Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.<sup>1
UNDHR, had a variety of violated "equal in dignity and rights" issues of its own, years after these articles were instated. Rights aren't born. They are proven. We would have no Brown vs. The Board of Education if the rights had been born. It is a matter of opinion of interpretation of the governing entities that are deciding. Although in the Brown case there was consideration to equality that was give to the child to attend school. The problem was with disparity.
The rights before the case were a matter of opinion, and again after the case they were a matter of opinion and interpretation of the law. Civil Rights have continued to evolve in all governments over time. The wording of the Declaration has been amended as a reflection of those changes, and clarification of rights. The people and the branches of government are continually defining and redefining humanity's peaceful coexistence in life, whether it be "natural" rights, "God given" or even if entitled foundations or rights, again, is a matter of opinion.


http://www.ksn.com/content/news/also/story/Town-considers-ban-on-pajama-pants/fZ5hHpONL0-TSkE4J9JYyw.cspx
Giffith/Baker Civil Rights
http://www.un.org/en/documents

Virginian- French Declarations</sup>

Carrettas Point: Equiano's Heritage

In reading Cary's table, it is my take, that his evidence provides more of a possibility that Equiano was born in South Carolina. At that time, both ship manifests, and baptismal records were considered legal documentation. Hearsay was not. In his book, he goes on and on giving a detailed description of a childhood in Africa and the Middle Passage he purportedly took after being kidnapped. Although he does provide some descriptions, this information could have come from others and there is no evidence, either through documentation, or witnesses that he did in fact have those experiences.

At the time the book was written media at that time would support the fact that it was more for entertainment purposes of adventure. Many people reading this book would want to hear about the exciting far away land. Also as pointed out under point 5, the readers really did not care about the specific accurateness of Equianos upbringing. The were interested in reading about the adventurous lifestyle he had lived, and how he overcame the obstacles of life, through the grace of God to rise up again and again to do so.

Although his biography describes scenes of Africa and the middle passage, Equiano could have heard these tales as a young boy, and held onto them. Living as a young boy on a plantation in South Carolina, or on a ship, he would have heard many stories from adult slaves, and felt a bonding and sense of identity in relation to the stories he heard. I really do not think that he intentionally had lied about his past or his upbringing. When he was signed into a ship manifest, or a baptismal record, he could justify someone else could have coerst this place of birth to be in South Carolina for their benefit. (to avoid a tax for example) It is possible he really  believed what he thought about his heritage.

Severe childhood trauma can cause the mind to erase or create memories to cope. Being young and taken from his family whether they were in Africa or in South Carolina, would be a source of trauma on any child. As the arguments state that, his account was usually very accurate in point 2 under the biographical evidence. Children's minds see time and distance, and memories quite different than adult minds. Experiences are exaggerated.

I would build the case that Equiano was born in South Carolina, since any legal document states this, at different times in his life. I think that he wanted a sense of identity. Over time he developed his African identity as a psychological coping mechanism. 

Vincent Carretta, 'Oaudah Equiano or Gustavus Vassa? New Light on an Eighteenth-century Question of Identity'. Slavery and Abolition, 20, 3 (December 1999), 96-105

Vincent Carretta, 'Introduction" in The interesting Narrative and Other Writings, editied with an introduction and notes by Vincent Carretta (London and New York:Penguin, 2003) pp x-xi

Brycchan Carey 2002-2010 An argument