Cumulative Assessment Flashcards
Q: Were the colonists justified in resisting British policies after the French and Indian War?
A: The colonists were justified in resisting British policies after the French and Indian War. The colonists have the right to revolt because the British imposed a lot of taxes on the colonists. Colonists didn’t have representation in Parliament so they didn’t see why they would have to pay a big amount of taxes when they don’t even have a say on what goes on. The British also killed a lot of the colonists during the Boston Massacre and that gave the colonists the right to protest against British, they shouldn’t have to pay a lot of money when many of the colonists’ men were killed.
Q: Was the American War for Independence inevitable?
A: In a way, it may have been prevented if Britain had not imposed so many taxes on the colonists and had listened to the demands or at least tried to compromise peacefully with the colonists but they decided to ignore all the treaties that the colonies had sent them. After the taxes, it became inevitable because it all went down hill from there. The colonists saw that peaceful treaties weren’t getting them anywhere so they finally decided to take action and physically revolt which led to all these battles and the American War For Independence.
Q: Would you have been a revolutionary (Patriot) in 1776? Why or Why not?
A: I would have liked to be a revolutionary (Patriot) in 1776 so that I could fight for the rights that we should have been promised just like everyone else. The colonists are treated unfairly and taxed without representation so the colonists dont have a say in all the decisions that Parliament makes. I would have liked to fight against the large taxes imposed on us and have our demands met so that the colonists could be treated fairly.
Q: Was the American Revolution a “radical” revolution?
A: The American Revolution was a “radical” revolution because the colonists tried everything in their power to gain independence. They tried to send peaceful treaties and tried the Olive Branch Petition which said that the colonists would support the king but not the colonists but the king just ignored that petition and sent more troops to Boston. After that, the colonists had no choice but to physically revolt.
Q: Did the Articles of Confederation provide the U.S. with an effective government? Why? Why not?
A: The Articles of Confederation didn’t provide the U.S with an effective government because it gave them very limited power. The power they had was external, therefore making the Government very weak and hopeless to make any major changes. The federal Government couldn’t levy taxes, regulate interstate commerce, amend a law without the consent of two-thirds of the states, and they didn’t have a federal court system. Without power the government couldn’t do much and therefore they decided to pull the convention to change this dilemma.
Q: Could the Constitution be written without compromise? If not, what were the various compromises made?
A: The Constitution could not be made without compromises because different and opposite ideas were proposed. The first major compromise was the Great Compromise. Virginia desired to have a legislative branch which took into consideration the population of each state while the New Jersey plan opted to represent the states as equals no matter the size. The Great Compromise was led by Roger Sherman and stated that for Senate, each state regardless of it’s size would be represented by two senates and the House of Representatives would represent population, granting more power to larger states. It forbade states from enacting laws that offended many during the 1780s. By compromising between the two, the delegates supported a system known as federalism that divided government power between the federal government and state governments. The second compromise was the 3/5ths compromise. Since southerners would reject a constitution that threatened slavery (because it was an essential part of southerner’s economy and society) Madison made sure that the Constitution took three major forms. These were that the Constitution forbade Congress from blocking importation of slaves for twenty years, counted each slave as 3/5ths of a person, and that the Constitution committed all states to return fugitive slaves to their owners.
Q: Does the system of checks and balances provide us with an effective and efficient government? Do separation of powers and checks and balances make our government work too slowly?
A: The system of checks and balances do provide an effective establishment of equality distributed in three government branches (legislature, executive, judiciary). It ensures that one branch does not gain more power than other and has its power evenly distributed in each branch. Checks and balances also make sure that the President does not abuse his power in office and was made to lower the corruption in the nation’s new government. However, it does not provide a efficiency for our government, this is because of the separation of powers can lead to delay in the government. When a bill is becoming a law, it takes so long for a bill to become a law and then while going through all the different houses of governments. This bill still has to make to the President where he can even decide not to sign. It’s not efficient and I can imagine in some cases where the bill has finally become a law the situation has already passed and a more important issue has been born. Checks and balances have the potential to be a great thing, but sometimes too much separation can cause delays and inefficiency.
Q: Was George Washington’s leadership indispensable in successfully launching the new federal government?
A: George Washington was a great President especially for being the first one of the country. He had a great set of achievements such as keeping the nation out of war and suppressing the Whiskey Rebellion. He established several precedents which is still used today such as the term limit of 2 years. Even though he could have stayed for another term, he decided to resign to set an example for the future Presidents. He set a great example for the future presidents and set some precedents for the future leaders to follow by.
Q: Are political parties good for our nation?
A: Political parties are both beneficial and problematic for our country. Although it allows our country to have different opinions and perspectives, it also may cause arguments which is why they may not be good for our nation. However, it is important to have political parties for our nation so that everyone can express their opinions on subjects and have a say.
Q: Is the suppression of public opinion during times of crisis ever justified?
A: The suppression of public opinion is not justified during these times. The public should be allowed to freely suggest their opinion and it might even help the government decided on their actions depending on the situation. Suppressing the public will only make the people get angry and may result in violence at the end.
Q: Should the United States fight to preserve the right of its citizens to travel and trade overseas?
A: The United States should preserve the right of it’s citizens to travel and trade overseas because citizens should have the right to do as they please. By trading, the U.S will have a better economy which will benefit the country overall.
Q: Can legislative compromises solve moral issues? (Civil War)
A: I do not believe that legislative compromises can solve moral issues because not everyone will be satisfied and it will begin to contradict each other while also causing more problems to arise. Slavery was a big issue and although it is morally wrong, regulations were still made to keep slavery in place and protecting slave owners.
Q: Was the Civil War inevitable? (Civil War)
A: The Civil War was inevitable, because there were just numerous issue that arose and the war seemed to be the only resolution. The war helped America to unite as a country and helped solved prominent issues such as slavery.
Q: Does Abraham Lincoln deserve to be called the “Great Emancipator”? (Civil War)
A: Abraham Lincoln does deserve to be called the “Great Emancipator” because at the end his hard work and effort paid off in establishing the Emancipation Proclamation. However, the reasoning behind it was not necessarily because he truely believed that everyone deserved equal rights, it was more of a war tactic since he needed more men to fight.
Q: Was the Civil War worth its costs? (Reconstruction)
A: The Civil War was definitely worth it’s costs because the long term effect are what’s important and it played a huge role in uniting the country together as well as granting equality to African Americans.
