The reflections and rantings of one obsessive history student
Catching Elephant is a theme by Andy Taylor
LOOK AT HIS LITTLE SPOTS!
LOOK AT HIS TUFTED EARS!
haha the Boyfran and I do this too. Except it’s Harper, Warren, and Theodore (after Harper’s Ferry, Chief Justice Earl Warren, and Theodore Roosevelt, obviously!).
RE-F’KIN-MARKABLE!!!
Reminds me of that episode of 30 Rock when Jack shows Liz the chart of Shinehardt Wig Company and its subsidiaries…
The majority of things you buy at the grocery store come from just one of ten different companies.
via world-shaker
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.
Thomas Jefferson [Many people forget to add the second part for some reason…]
I realize I don’t do Tumblr right. I guess you’re only supposed to post pictures and gifs or something? I also realize that it has been like months since I’ve updated. But I will continue to ramble on here GODDAMN IT! Because I drank a Red Bull that I shouldn’t have! Since I’ve last updated, I believe I have articulated my historical POV and my future historical studies.
For one thing, I have found a mentor (ish) in history. Granted, he can’t officially be my mentor because he is a Chinese history professor (not my focus) but I have really learned a lot from him. I mainly started talking to him to unravel my own family history. Finding out more about what my mother and grandparents experienced in China during the Mao years has become sort of a pet project of mine. I have no idea in what academic sense I could use this information but I’ve already started writing reflections on things I’ve found out. I might put some of it on this blog. Now with my professor, we mainly talk about Chinese politics and he gives me advice on grad school.
Right now I’m mostly focusing on how much I am sucking at this quarter. Mostly because I’m really behind on my reading (like every other quarter). I’m pretty sure I am taking on more than can handle right now and not taking any of it seriously.
For starters, I am in a class on the golden age of Chinese silent film (1920’s-1930’s) wherein we are required to actuallymakeour own film modeled after films made in that time. So therefore it will be shot in black and white, I’ll be wearing a qipao, and the film will follow will touch on the urban/rural divide in China. Plus, my awful and ancient chicken will make a cameo.
In addition to that, I am in a fifteen person discussion course on constitutional history. We meet about once a week for three excruciating (yet oddly exciting) hours of debate on whatever landmark court case we’re studying for the week (this week: M’Cullough vs. Maryland). My professor in this class is probably one of the most well-versed individual on the history of the Supreme Court in the country. This makes this class terrifying. He once asked me to “explain to the class how Marbury vs. Madison made it to the Supreme Court”. Now, I know this answer but it is an extremely complex question that involves talking about the divide between the Adams Administration and the Jefferson Administration and why they didn’t like each other which then gets into me explaining about the Federalists and the Republicans. Then, there’s the whole Judiciary Act of 1789 that you have to go into… Explain Article 13 and what a writ of mandamus is, then go on to talk about how John Marshall forgot to issue Marbury’s confirmation as a justice of the peace (he was NOT a judge), and by that time it’s been 15 minutes and he’s still staring at me like I have more to say. Also, there is only one graded assignment in the class: a 15 page research paper on one of these landmark cases
In addition to all that…. I am considering writing a 15 page research paper on the obsession with Anastasia Romanov following her execution for my class on the history of the USSR. This sounds really interesting to me but where would I find the time?!?!
Anyway, that’s my ramble for the day. Here’s a picture of Joseph Smith since I just watched that Mormon episode of South Park and the song from that episode is stuck in my head….
ARGGGG
I have procrastinated way too much on this essay yet I still continue to do so. I figure I might just procrastinate with other studies. eh?
Discuss at least three of the compromises that to be made by the framers of the Constitution in 1788 before they had a document to send for ratification
Three important compromises made by the framers of the Constitution were over the issues of representation, slavery, and Congress’ involvement in trade and commerce.
There was a heated debate going on at the Constitutional convention over how the House of Representatives and the senate should be apportioned. The larger states wanted a state’s representation to be based on the size of its population while the smaller states demanded equal representation. A New Englander, John Sherman, proposed what is now known as the Great Compromise. Sherman proposed that the lower house be based on a state’s population, a state would get 1 congressman for every 60,000 citizens. However, in the Senate, there would be equal representation among the states. Every state would get two senators appointed by the state legislature.
Many argue that the issue of slavery was the real great compromise during this Constitutional Convention. Madison even wrote in his notes that the great conflict among the delegates is not between small states and large states but between slave states and free states. There were three key questions surrounding this issue. One was whether or not the import of slaves should be stopped. Delegates from Georgia, North and South Carolina objected to this idea and stated that they would not support the Constitution if the slave imports stopped. Another question was should slaves be counted for purposes of representation? Southerners argued that slaves should be counted, since it would give them more influence in the House of Representatives. Northerners objected because slaves were property and should not be counted as free persons. The result of this divide was the 3/5 Compromise which stated that 5 slaves were equal to 3 free men in terms of representation. It also stated that Congress could not vote to end the slave trade for another 20 years.
The debate over slavery was also a debate over Congressional involvement in trade and commerce. Southerners were hostile to the idea of Congress being allowed to impose tariff duties and regulate interstate commerce. They believed Congress can use this power to tax slave imports or even eliminate the slave trade entirely. In exchange for the 3/5 Compromise, Southerners accepted Congress’ control over trade and commerce as long as they did not tax the export of plantation crops such as tobacco and rice.
finalsfinalsfinalsfinalsfinals *head blows up*
So its that magical time of year where I subject myself to way too much stress than my body knows how to handle. This is only made worse by my frequent caffeine abuse and horrible procrastination that also takes over at this time as well. (I’m talking about finals if you somehow forgot to read the title of this.) But anyway, now I am going to use my blog for the next week or so as just a place where I ramble about what’s on my final and dissect the study guide. Follow along if you care. Today I’m going to talk about EARLY AMERICAN LEGAL HISTORY (note: this subject is really really dry so you’ll probably only read this if you’re in my class, although I don’t think anyone in my lecture reads this.) So now its books cracked. Beyonce on. Let’s roll.
Anti-Federalists: Anti-Federalists opposed the creation of a stronger central government and favored the Articles of Confederation over the Constitution. This was because the Articles of Confederation gave more power to the states than the federal government. Some notable Anti-Federalists include Patrick Henry, Luther Martin, and Elbridge Gerry. They contested with the Federalists over issues of the Bill of Rights, Congressional representation and the size of the republic.
Judiciary Act of 1789: The Judiciary Act is arguably one of the most important laws passed by Congress in America’s history; it essentially established the U.S. federal court system. The Judiciary Act created one Supreme Court (with 6 justices and one Chief Justice) as well as Federal Circuit Courts presided over by a SCJ. There were also lower federal district courts made to oversee civil controversies. There are three important sections to the Judiciary Act
Section 13: This section allows for a writ of mandamus to be called upon federal officers. This section was challenged in the case of Marbury v. Madison.
Section 25: This section details how to enforce the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution. It states that if a state court rejects any claim that someone has under their rights in the Constitution, that claim can be directly appealed to the Supreme Court. This was controversial because it negated states rights and undermined the power of state courts.
Arg! That’s all I have time for before I have to head off to my work. Bleh. Two terms down, 3587985642758934748584 million more to go. AAAAAAH. Kill me.
I made my own Fuck Yeah History Major Heraldic Beast. This happens to be a true story.
