Fact: Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo is a Full Sentence.

After the end of the Civil War, some black Union soldiers found that they wanted to continue fighting, and so they permanently enrolled in the Army, a first for people of color. However, because segregation and racism were still a thing, they were put in the United States Colored Troops. These soldiers, though kept at arm's length from the rest of the country, would eventually earn the name buffalo soldiers. As the 1860s and 1870s rolled around, America started to head out west. Though native Americans had already been moved from their lands by Andrew Jackson during his presidency in the 1830s (I talk about the Trail of Tears back in December), they were once again a target. Although some wanted them simply wiped out, others attempted to assimilate these cultural outsiders into society. As a result, government action varied widely. The essential question we determined was: During westward expansion, did the impact of federal policy towards buffalo soldiers and Native Americans match the intent? The class took notes on videos and primary sources surrounding this topic and congregated them in a single Google Doc to determine the answer to the question.

When it came to the buffalo soldiers, the government's impact didn't match what it meant to accomplish. What it meant to accomplish was likely the superficial inclusion of black troops while in actuality placing them far below any white soldiers. In a sense, they did succeed; the buffalo soldiers went out west, doing tough jobs that no one else was willing to do, while at a disadvantage with low quality supplies. Yet, at the same time, the strength of the buffalo soldiers drew the respect not of whites, but of Native Americans, who gave the the name buffalo soldiers for 1. their resemblance to buffalo in their hair and 2. their fierce fighting spirit like that of a wounded buffalo. It has also earned them a modern legacy of courage and bravery. Superficially, the government at the time accomplished what they wanted in making things rough for the buffalo soldiers, but in the end, the buffalo soldiers left their mark in history.

A map showing the stationing of buffalo soldiers. They
were mostly sent out west, where conditions were rougher.
As a result, buffalo soldiers were often the ones fighting
the Native Americans. Image source: www.wikipedia.org.

A chart showing government policy
on these groups over the years.
Link to enlarge is on the left.

On the other hand, the government ultimately got what it wanted when dealing with the Native Americans out west: getting rid of their cultural presence. General Sherman, back from the Civil War, used his total war tactics on the Native Americans, wiping out the tribes by getting rid of their horses and the buffalo that they relied on. Less annihilitory tactics tried moving the tribes onto reservations, and then attempting to assimilate them into white culture by telling them to farm, in the form of the Dawes Act (1887, excerpts here), which split reservation land into sections for the residents to farm on.  Eventually, things came to a head in 1890 with the Wounded Knee Massacre, ending with more than 150 Sioux killed and ending Native American resistance to white culture. (from this nice little chart here) With the Native Americans out of the way, the U.S. was free to expand westward.

I think the class managed well enough on our own this week. We got through the material a lot quicker because we knew what we were doing, and read in small groups rather than out loud as a class. It's a nice class format that feels more relaxed, but I'm not sure if I'd want it all the time, since the class sometimes had a little inertia in productivity.

(Sidenote: I Always Thought Carnegie Hall Was Named for a Musician)

Rockefeller in 1885. Doesn't
the mustache just scream
"business superpower"?
Image from wikipedia.org.

During the second half of the 19th century, America experienced a period of major economic growth known as the Age of Industry. Most of this was driven by top businessmen who represent some of America's wealthiest men in history, like John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie. These men, known as captains of industry, gave generously to charity, education, and the public. Yet, these same men were also accused of shady and unethical business practices like bribing politicians, earning some of them the nickname of robber barons. The essential question for this unit, which we came up with as a class, was: Were the captains of industry a positive or negative impact on the public? To learn more, the class watched a series of videos and analyzed some sources surrounding two of the most important and famed captains of industry, John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie. (Bios for the two: Rockefeller Carnegie)

Andrew Carnegie, leader of the
steel industry and philanthropist.
Image from wikipedia.org.

While I approve of both Rockefeller and Carnegie's ideals and goals, I think their business practices were unethical and ultimately impacted America negatively. Rockefeller ran the Standard Oil Company from Ohio, and eventually became one of the biggest businessmen of the country, all while donating millions of his money to charity and education. How he got to the top, however, was somewhat questionable; one of his business tactics was to drop prices low and take the loss until rivals went out of business, at which point he would drive prices up. This is a very effective business tactic, but I don't approve because it destroyed competition rather than taking part, and created a monopoly on oil. Carnegie falls in a similar boat; a wealthy philanthropist whose workers are paid incredibly little for grueling work is somewhat contradictory. Carnegie, who headed the steel industry, attempted to destroy steelworkers' unions. This partially led to a fiasco known as the Homestead strike. (We watched a video on it here.)

I stand by my opinion, but I think it is important to recognize that captains of industry were actually pretty good people, like donating money to the public because they truly felt that it was a moral imperative for the wealthy to give back. One of them, J. P. Morgan, personally bailed out the government on more than one occasion. But this is not about the character of these men, it is about their effect on America. Low worker wages, shady business practices... They treated America as a whole very well, but screwed over a lot of people in the process.

This unit was somewhat challenging because the class was collaboratively learning without the direction of a teacher; the sources were analyzed, notes were taken, and the essential question was proposed as a class, following the plan that Mrs. Gallagher gave us. Some students started taking leadership roles, and I think that also helped. We were somewhat inefficient in our work because we were getting used to the process, and I think we should be able to improve when we do this again for the next units.