jgo

jgo's Journal

May 18, 2024

On This Day: Bread and circuses to quell revolution and distract from political corruption - May 18, 332

(edited from article)
"
MAY 18, 332 AD: CONSTANTINE GIVES CONSTANTINOPLE BREAD AND CIRCUSES

In this week May 18 332 AD, Constantine the Great gave the first food subsidies to the people of Constantinople, which was founded by Constantine in 330 AD. For a long time, the Romans had given the people of Rome, the city, grain rations called annona, named after the region from which the grain came.

However, this practice was limited to Rome and did not expand to the whole Empire. Therefore, Constantine’s decision to expand the annona to Constantinople is actually a pretty big deal. Although it was certainly nice to be part of the Roman Empire back in the day, many specials were given to citizens of the city. Constantine’s choice to allow this privilege in Constantinople marks the beginning of the move away from Rome and towards Constantinople as the center of trade and government.

[Rations distributed by the church]

Additionally, the rations were distributed by the Catholic church, as the first Christian Emperor this move gave more power and popular support to the church than ever before. And, the distributions were not only limited to food, but also include clothing and games. From this, we get the term “bread and circuses.” It might seem like a selfless and egalitarian move, but really it was a point of appeasement to quell rebellion and distract the populace from more important political moves and corruption. Basically, the Roman Empire bought the city dinner and show, to prevent revolution. The best way to a Roman is through their stomach.
"
https://thejoyofhistory.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/constantine-i-distributes-rations-to-constantinople-may-18-332-ad/

(edited from article)
"
Constantine the Great
The greatest of the Roman Emperors

Constantine the Great (27 February 272 AD — 22 May 337 AD) is a towering figure in Roman, European and Western history. It is generally true that social and economic conditions are more important than ‘great men’ in shaping history but Constantine was one of the few people who really did shape history. His decisions to create a new imperial capital in the East, Constantinople, and embrace a new religion, Christianity, had momentous consequences for the history of Europe and the world in general.

[Eastern Roman Empire survives for a thousand years]

The foundation of Constantinople would allow the Eastern part of the Roman Empire (better known as Byzantine Empire) to survive a thousand years after the fall of the Western Empire. Even after the fall of Byzantium, the city would serve as the imperial capital for the Ottoman Empire.

[Appeal to lower classes and slaves]

The growth of Christianity in the Greek East can be attributed to a number of factors. The most important is that there was a lingua franca in the Roman East that allowed the spread of the word of the new religion among ethnically different populations: that language was Greek (Koine Greek, to be more precise). That was a result of the conquests of Alexander the Great (20/21 July 356 BC — 10/11 June 323 BC) and the subsequent Hellenistic Kingdoms that emerged after his death. The eastern territories of Rome coincided in large part with the western territories of Alexander’s Empire/Hellenistic Kingdoms. Another reason for the growth of Christianity was its appeal to the lower classes and slaves. Christianity offered hope of an afterlife that was enticing to slaves and poor people who suffered in their current life. The early Christian communities also encouraged Christians to offer support to those in need (for example offering free food).

Whether one views the Christianization of the empire as a positive or negative development is up to one’s personal views, but no one can deny its importance in world history. Christianity played a crucial role in European culture (both Western and Eastern) and through the colonization of European powers, that culture spread all over the world. It influenced arts, philosophy, morality and the way of thinking and living. Thus Constantine’s decisions and their influence cannot be overstated.
"
https://medium.com/@christoss200/constantine-the-great-1475fd245b18

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Cura annonae

[Free grain and bread]

In Imperial Rome, Cura Annonae ("care of Annona " ) was the import and distribution of grain to the residents of the cities of Rome and, after its foundation, Constantinople. The term was used in honour of the goddess Annona. The city of Rome imported all the grain consumed by its population, estimated to number 1,000,000 by the 2nd century AD. This included recipients of the grain dole or corn dole, a government program which gave out subsidized grain, then free grain, and later bread, to about 200,000 of Rome's adult male citizens.

[If neglected would cause "utter ruin" ]

Rome's grain subsidies were originally ad hoc emergency measures taken to import cheap grain from trading partners and allies at times of scarcity, to help feed growing numbers of indebted and dispossessed citizen-farmers. By the end of the Republic, grain subsidies and doles had become permanent, uniquely Roman institutions. The grain dole was reluctantly adopted by Augustus and later emperors as a free monthly issue to those who qualified to receive it. In 22 AD, Augustus' successor Tiberius publicly acknowledged the Cura Annonae as a personal and imperial duty, which if neglected would cause "the utter ruin of the state".

[Bread and circuses]

During the Imperial Era, a regular and predictable supply of subsidised grain, the grain dole, and sumptuous public games such as gladiator contests and chariot racing earned the obedience of potentially restive lower-class urban citizens, providing what the poet Juvenal sarcastically summed up as "bread and circuses".

[Import, logistics, distribution]

Sufficient imports of grain to meet the basic requirements of cities relied on dependable surpluses elsewhere, and minimal grain-hoarding by speculators. The logistics of moving the grain by sea to Rome required the state's commission of many hundreds of privately owned merchant ships, some very large, and a system for collecting and distributing the grain at its destination. Most of Rome's grain supply was grown, imported, stored and traded as a profitable commodity, funded by speculators and hoarders, using loans, not state subsidies. Some provinces were almost entirely given over to the production of grain for consumption in Roman cities. The most important sources of bread grain, mostly durum wheat, were Roman Egypt, North Africa (21st century Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco), and Sicily. When the Vandals took over most of these provinces (c. 439), the Western Roman Empire lost the greater part of its grain supply.

[Transportation network not matched until 19th century]

Some form of Cura Annonae may have persisted as late as the 6th century for Rome, but far less grain was shipped compared to earlier periods; in Constantinople, capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, it lasted as late as the 7th century, in reduced form. The population of the city of Rome declined precipitously during the last years of the Western Roman Empire. Thereafter, no city in Europe would assemble the transportation network required to feed 1,000,000 inhabitants until the 19th century.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cura_annonae

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: Brown v. Board of Education 9-0; three SC challenges follow for desegregation - May 17, 1954
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377694

On This Day: Surgeon General reports cigarettes addictive. Now, leading cause of preventable death - May 16, 1988
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377637

On This Day: First women in Olympics, beginning long road towards greater gender parity - May 15, 1900
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377560

On This Day: Chinese rover on Mars! - part of new space race with no clear end goal - May 14, 2021
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377532

On This Day: Queen proclaims neutrality, but UK provides some support for the Confederacy - May 13, 1861
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377462

May 17, 2024

On This Day: Brown v. Board of Education 9-0; three SC challenges follow for desegregation - May 17, 1954

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Brown v. Board of Education

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that U.S. state laws establishing racial segregation in public schools are unconstitutional, even if the segregated schools are otherwise equal in quality. The decision partially overruled the Court's 1896 decision, Plessy v. Ferguson, which held that racial segregation laws did not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as the facilities for each race were equal in quality, a doctrine that had come to be known as "separate but equal." The Court's unanimous decision in Brown and its related cases paved the way for integration, was a major victory of the civil rights movement, and a model for many future impact litigation cases.

The case originated in 1951 when the public school system in Topeka, Kansas, refused to enroll local black resident Oliver Brown's daughter at the school closest to their home, instead requiring her to ride a bus to a segregated black school farther away. The Browns and twelve other local black families in similar situations filed a class-action lawsuit in U.S. federal court against the Topeka Board of Education, alleging that its segregation policy was unconstitutional. A special three-judge court of the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas heard the case and ruled against the Browns, relying on the precedent of Plessy and its "separate but equal" doctrine. The Browns, represented by NAACP chief counsel Thurgood Marshall, then appealed the ruling directly to the Supreme Court.

In May 1954, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous 9–0 decision in favor of the Browns. The Court ruled that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal," and therefore laws that impose them violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. However, the decision's 14 pages did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in Brown II (349 U.S. 294 (1955)) only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

In the Southern United States, the reaction to Brown among most white people was "noisy and stubborn", especially in the "Deep South" where racial segregation was deeply entrenched in society. Many Southern governmental and political leaders embraced a plan known as "massive resistance", created by Senator Harry F. Byrd, in order to frustrate attempts to force them to de-segregate their school systems. Four years later, in the case of Cooper v. Aaron, the Court reaffirmed its ruling in Brown, and explicitly stated that state officials and legislators had no power to nullify its ruling.

[UNESCO 1950 Statement]

The plaintiffs in Brown asserted that the system of racial separation in all schools, while masquerading as providing separate but equal treatment of both white and black Americans, instead perpetuated inferior accommodations, services, and treatment for black Americans. Brown was influenced by UNESCO's 1950 Statement, signed by a wide variety of internationally renowned scholars, titled The Race Question. This declaration denounced previous attempts at scientifically justifying racism as well as morally condemning racism.

[Cold War backdrop]

The United States and the Soviet Union were both at the height of the Cold War during this time, and U.S. officials, including Supreme Court justices, were highly aware of the harm that segregation and racism were doing to America's international image. When Justice William O. Douglas traveled to India in 1950, the first question he was asked was, "Why does America tolerate the lynching of Negroes?" Douglas later wrote that he had learned from his travels that "the attitude of the United States toward its colored minorities is a powerful factor in our relations with India."

Chief Justice Earl Warren, nominated to the Supreme Court by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, echoed Douglas's concerns in a 1954 speech to the American Bar Association, proclaiming that "Our American system like all others is on trial both at home and abroad, ... the extent to which we maintain the spirit of our constitution with its Bill of Rights, will in the long run do more to make it both secure and the object of adulation than the number of hydrogen bombs we stockpile."

Decision

On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous 9–0 decision in favor of the Brown family and the other plaintiffs. The decision consists of a single opinion written by chief justice Earl Warren, which all the justices joined.

The Court ruled that state-mandated segregation, even if implemented in schools of otherwise equal quality, is inherently unequal because of its psychological impact upon the segregated children.

To separate [black children] from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone.

— Brown, 347 U.S. at 494.

The Court then concluded its relatively short opinion by declaring that segregated public education was inherently unequal, violated the Equal Protection Clause, and therefore was unconstitutional:

We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.

— Brown, 397 U.S. at 495.[47]

The Court did not close with an order to implement the integration of the schools of the various jurisdictions. Instead, it requested the parties re-appear before the Court the following Term to hold arguments on what the appropriate remedy should be. This became the case known as Brown II, described below.

[Hardened resistance, black teachers and educators fired]

Americans mostly cheered the Court's decision in Brown, although most white Southerners decried it. Many white Southerners viewed Brown as "a day of catastrophe—a Black Monday—a day something like Pearl Harbor." In the face of entrenched Southern opposition, progress on integrating American schools was slow. The American political historian Robert G. McCloskey described:

The reaction of the white South to this judicial onslaught on its institutions was noisy and stubborn. Certain "border states," which had formerly maintained segregated school systems, did integrate, and others permitted the token admission of a few Negro students to schools that had once been racially unmixed. However, the Deep South made no moves to obey the judicial command, and in some districts there can be no doubt that the Desegregation decision hardened resistance to integration proposals.

In Virginia, Senator Harry F. Byrd organized the Massive Resistance movement that included the closing of schools rather than desegregating them.

For several decades after the Brown decision, African-American teachers, principals, and other school staff who worked in segregated Black schools were fired or laid off as Southerners sought to create a system of integrated schools with White leadership. According to historian Michael Fultz, "In many ways the South moved faster, with more 'deliberate speed' in displacing Black educators than it did in desegregating schools."

Texas Attorney General John Ben Shepperd organized a campaign to generate legal obstacles to the implementation of desegregation.

Brown II

In 1955, the Supreme Court considered arguments by the schools requesting relief concerning the task of desegregation. In their decision, which became known as "Brown II" the court delegated the task of carrying out school desegregation to district courts with orders that desegregation occur "with all deliberate speed," a phrase traceable to Francis Thompson's poem "The Hound of Heaven".

Supporters of the earlier decision were displeased with this decision. The language "all deliberate speed" was seen by critics as too ambiguous to ensure reasonable haste for compliance with the court's instruction. Many Southern states and school districts interpreted Brown II as legal justification for resisting, delaying, and avoiding significant integration for years—and in some cases for a decade or more—using such tactics as closing down school systems, using state money to finance segregated "private" schools, and "token" integration where a few carefully selected black children were admitted to former white-only schools but the vast majority remained in underfunded, unequal black schools.

[Prince Edward County]

For example, based on Brown II, the U.S. District Court ruled that Prince Edward County, Virginia did not have to desegregate immediately. When faced with a court order to finally begin desegregation in 1959 the county board of supervisors stopped appropriating money for public schools, which remained closed for five years, from 1959 to 1964.

White students in the county were given assistance to attend white-only "private academies" that were taught by teachers formerly employed by the public school system, while black students had no education at all unless they moved out of the county.

Griffin v. County School Board

But the public schools reopened after the Supreme Court overturned Brown II in Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, declaring that "...the time for mere 'deliberate speed' has run out" and that the county must provide a public school system for all children regardless of race.

The Supreme Court, in a decision authored by Justice Hugo Black, ordered the schools reopened. It held that the supervisors' action of refusing to fund the public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, where the county offered only private school vouchers for students and where no private schools accepted black students.

For the same reasons the District Court may, if necessary to prevent further racial discrimination, require the Supervisors to exercise the power that is theirs to levy taxes to raise funds adequate to reopen, operate, and maintain without racial discrimination a public school system in Prince Edward County like that operated in other counties in Virginia.

— Griffin v. School Bd. of Prince Edward Cty., 377 U.S. 218, 233 (1964)

This case marked the first time that the Supreme Court ordered a county government to exercise their power of taxation.

[Two justices dissent]

This unusual level of intervention in the function of local government provoked a dissent by Justices Clark and Harlan:

MR. JUSTICE CLARK and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN disagree with the holding that the federal courts are empowered to order the reopening of the public schools in Prince Edward County . . .

— Griffin v. School Bd. of Prince Edward Cty., 377 U.S. 218, 234 (1964)

Brown III

In 1978, Topeka attorneys Richard Jones, Joseph Johnson and Charles Scott Jr. (son of the original Brown team member), with assistance from the American Civil Liberties Union, persuaded Linda Brown Smith—who now had her own children in Topeka schools—to be a plaintiff in reopening Brown.

They were concerned that the Topeka Public Schools' policy of "open enrollment" had led to and would lead to further segregation. They also believed that with a choice of open enrollment, white parents would shift their children to "preferred" schools that would create both predominantly African-American and predominantly European-American schools within the district. The district court reopened the Brown case after a 25-year hiatus, but denied the plaintiffs' request finding the schools "unitary".

In 1989, a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit on a 2–1 vote found that the vestiges of segregation remained with respect to student and staff assignment. In 1993, the Supreme Court denied the appellant School District's request for certiorari and returned the case to District Court Judge Richard Rodgers for implementation of the Tenth Circuit's mandate.

After a 1994 plan was approved and a bond issue passed, additional elementary magnet schools were opened and district attendance plans redrawn, which resulted in the Topeka schools meeting court standards of racial balance by 1998. Unified status was eventually granted to Topeka Unified School District No. 501 on July 27, 1999. One of the new magnet schools is named after the Scott family attorneys for their role in the Brown case and civil rights.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._County_School_Board_of_Prince_Edward_County

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: Surgeon General reports cigarettes addictive. Now, leading cause of preventable death - May 16, 1988
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377637

On This Day: First women in Olympics, beginning long road towards greater gender parity - May 15, 1900
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377560

On This Day: Chinese rover on Mars! - part of new space race with no clear end goal - May 14, 2021
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377532

On This Day: Queen proclaims neutrality, but UK provides some support for the Confederacy - May 13, 1861
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377462

On This Day: Govt pays farmers not to farm, destroy crops, cull animals during depression, shocking many - May 12, 1933
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377400

May 16, 2024

On This Day: Surgeon General reports cigarettes addictive. Now, leading cause of preventable death - May 16, 1988

(edited from news article)
"
MAY 16, 1988
Cigarettes, tobacco are addictive

WASHINGTON -- Surgeon General C. Everett Koop announced unequivocally Monday that cigarettes and other tobacco products are addicting -- like heroin and cocaine -- and called for restrictions on their sale and distribution.

Levels of nicotine in the blood are similar in magnitude in people using different forms of tobacco, said the report. Once in the bloodstream, nicotine is rapidly distributed throughout the body, especially the brain and central nervous system.

'Some people may have difficulty in accepting the notion that tobacco is addicting because it is a legal product,' said Koop in the report. But he noted it fits the standard definition of drug addiction used by the World Health Organization and other health groups.

With drug addiction, and with cigarettes, Koop said the user's behavior is mainly controlled by a substance that stimulates the brain to alter moods. There is compulsive use of the drug despite damage to the individual or others. Also, physical dependence can occur, and is characterized by, a withdrawal syndrome that occurs during abstinence.
"
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1988/05/16/Cigarettes-tobacco-are-addictive/2547579758400/

(edited from article)
"
[Nicotine addicition]

Nicotine addiction is the leading cause of preventable death worldwide. Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure. This is about one in five deaths annually, or 1300 deaths every day.

Signs and symptoms

The time to first cigarette and total cigarettes per day are the 2 strongest predictors of nicotine addiction.

The physical effects of nicotine use include accelerated heart rate, increased blood pressure, and weight loss.

In addition to its physical effects, nicotine exerts a strong behavioral influence. Nicotine may enhance an individual’s level of alertness, although individuals with a tobacco use disorder may simulate a frantic, almost manic, picture. Speech may also be accelerated in line with behavior. Cessation after prolonged tobacco use can contribute to irritability, which is often relieved by a dose of nicotine.
"
https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/287555-overview?form=fpf

(edited from article)
"
[8 million deaths per year]

Nicotine addiction is a leading cause of death worldwide. The important causes of smoking-related mortality are atherosclerotic vascular disease, cancer, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Smoking also can contribute to other diseases, such as histiocytosis X, respiratory bronchiolitis, obstructive sleep apnea, idiopathic pneumothorax, low birth weight, and perinatal mortality.

Worldwide, approximately 1.1 billion people smoke. Around 80% of the world's 1.3 billion tobacco users live in low- and middle-income countries. Also worldwide, tobacco use causes nearly 8 million deaths per year. More than 7 million of those deaths are the result of direct tobacco use, while around 1.3 million are the result of non-smokers being exposed to second-hand smoke.

Through direct healthcare costs and loss of productivity from death and illness, the total global economic cost of smoking is estimated at around $1.85 trillion, or around 1.8% of global GDP. Cigarette smoking cost the United States more than $600 billion in 2018.

[Stimulant in the morning, depressant during the day]

Nicotine in cigarette smoke affects mood and performance and is the source of addiction to tobacco. It meets the criteria of a highly addictive drug, in that it is a potent psychoactive substance that induces euphoria, reinforces its use, and leads to nicotine withdrawal syndrome when it is absent. As an addictive drug, nicotine has 2 very potent effects, being both a stimulant and a depressant. Thus, cigarettes may both get a smoker going in the morning and “chill out” the smoker during the day.
"
https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/287555-overview?form=fpf#a2

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: First women in Olympics, beginning long road towards greater gender parity - May 15, 1900
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377560

On This Day: Chinese rover on Mars! - part of new space race with no clear end goal - May 14, 2021
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377532

On This Day: Queen proclaims neutrality, but UK provides some support for the Confederacy - May 13, 1861
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377462

On This Day: Govt pays farmers not to farm, destroy crops, cull animals during depression, shocking many - May 12, 1933
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377400

On This Day: Labor organizer and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez begins hunger strike - May 11, 1972
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377361

May 15, 2024

On This Day: First women in Olympics, beginning long road towards greater gender parity - May 15, 1900

(edited from article)
"
MAY 15, 1900
First Women in Olympics

Nineteen women were the first to compete in the modern Olympics Games in Paris, France. The women competed in tennis, golf and croquet. During this Olympics, Margaret Abbott was the first American woman to win an Olympic gold medal by winning the nine-hole golf tournament. She won by shooting a score of 47.
"
https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/women-in-sports--19

(edited from article)
"
Equality for Women in the Olympics

Women first took part in the Olympics of 1900, with 22 women competing in only golf and tennis. Since that time, women’s participation in the games has been slowly, but steadily, increasing. In the 2012 London Olympic Games, women made up more than 44% of participants. The U.S. women earned 58 medals in all, including 29 Gold — more than the U.S. men.

The number of Olympic sports events for women has also increased, with women’s boxing finally being accepted by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) for 2012. Despite progress in female participation, inequities in treatment continued. In 2010, The International Boxing Association suggested women should wear skirts to help “distinguish” them from the males, since all the fighters wear headgear. At the October 2011 world championships, Poland Boxing made skirts compulsory, saying they are more “elegant.”

Despite these numerous accomplishments, there is still sex discrimination. Even though the 2012 Olympics was the first in which almost every country sent at least one woman, many Muslim countries still discourage female athletes from competing in public.

Following International Women’s Day on March 8, 2013, Anita DeFrantz, Chairwoman of the IOC’s Women and Sport Commission, spoke at the 57th Session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women to highlight the role of sports in the effort to eliminate and prevent violence against women and girls in the world.
"
https://feminist.org/our-work/education-equity/gender-equity-in-athletics/equality-for-women-in-the-olympics/

(edited from article)
"
How Paris 2024 aims to become the first-ever gender-equal Olympics

It’s been a long road for Olympic women

Women have come a long way since competing in the Olympic Games for the first time in 1900, also in Paris. That year, women represented only 2.2% of all participants.

Why Olympic gender parity matters

Sport can change lives, says UN Women, the United Nations organization dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women. This includes promoting leadership, teamwork, self-reliance and confidence in women.

Gender parity also benefits economies and societies more widely. In its Global Gender Gap Report 2023, the World Economic Forum found that progress in closing gender gaps means more growth, innovation, and resilience for countries.

The report stated that the gender gap across 146 countries is currently 68.4% closed, but equal representation between men and women across the economic, political, health, and education spheres is still 131 years away at the current rate of progress.
"
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/04/paris-olympics-2024-gender-parity/

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
History of women at the Olympics - 1900

The first modern Olympic Games to feature female athletes was the 1900 Games in Paris. Hélène de Pourtalès of Switzerland became the first woman to compete at the Olympic Games and became the first female Olympic champion, as a member of the winning team in the first 1 to 2 ton sailing event on May 22, 1900. Briton Charlotte Cooper became the first female individual champion by winning the women's singles tennis competition on July 11. Tennis and golf were the only sports where women could compete in individual disciplines. 22 women competed at the 1900 Games, 2.2% of all the competitors. Alongside sailing, golf and tennis, women also competed in croquet.

There were several firsts in the women's golf. This was the first time ever that women competed in the Olympic Games. The women's division was won by Margaret Abbott of Chicago Golf Club. Abbott shot a 47 to win and became the first ever American female to win a gold medal in the Olympic Games, though she received a gilded porcelain bowl as a prize instead of a medal. She is also the second overall American woman to receive an Olympic medal. Abbott's mother, Mary Abbott, also competed in this Olympic event and finished tied for seventh, shooting a 65. They were the first and only mother and daughter that have ever competed in the same Olympic event at the same time. Margaret never knew that they were competing in the Olympics; she thought it was a normal golf tournament and died not knowing. Her historic victory was not known until University of Florida professor Paula Welch began to do research into the history of the Olympics and discovered that Margaret Abbott had placed first. Over the course of ten years, she contacted Abbott's children and informed them of their mother's victory.

Two women also competed in the hacks and hunter combined (chevaux de selle) equestrian event at the 1900 Games (Jane Moulin and Elvira Guerra). Originally only the jumping equestrian events were counted as "Olympic", but IOC records later added the hacks and hunter and mail coach races to the official list of 1900 events, retroactively making Moulin and Guerra among the first female Olympians.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_of_women_in_the_Olympics

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: Chinese rover on Mars! - part of new space race with no clear end goal - May 14, 2021
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377532

On This Day: Queen proclaims neutrality, but UK provides some support for the Confederacy - May 13, 1861
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377462

On This Day: Govt pays farmers not to farm, destroy crops, cull animals during depression, shocking many - May 12, 1933
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377400

On This Day: Labor organizer and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez begins hunger strike - May 11, 1972
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377361

On This Day: REDUCTION of tea price does not allay colonists' hate of Tea Act - "Tea Party" follows - May 10, 1773
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377283

May 15, 2024

On This Day: First women in Olympics, beginning long road towards greater gender parity - May 15, 1900

May 14, 2024

On This Day: Chinese rover on Mars! - part of new space race with no clear end goal - May 14, 2021

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Zhurong (rover)

Zhurong is a Chinese rover on Mars, the country's first to land on another planet after it previously landed two rovers on the Moon. The rover is part of the Tianwen-1 mission to Mars conducted by the China National Space Administration (CNSA).

The spacecraft was launched on 23 July 2020 and inserted into Martian orbit on 10 February 2021.

The lander, carrying the rover, performed a soft-landing on Mars on 14 May 2021, making China the third country to successfully soft-land a spacecraft on Mars and the second one to deploy a rover on Mars, after the United States.

Designed for a lifespan of 90 sols (93 Earth days), Zhurong was active for more than 347 sols (358 days) after its deployment on Mars's surface. The rover became inactive on 20 May 2022 due to approaching sandstorms and Martian winter, pending its self-awakening with appropriate temperature and sunlight conditions.

Zhurong was expected to wake up in December 2022 but never did due to excessive dust accumulation, according to the rover's chief designer.

Discoveries

On the surface the team found crusts, cracks, granulation, polygonal ridges, and a strip-like trace. Spectral data showed that the dune surface contains hydrated sulfates, hydrated silica (especially opal-CT), trivalent iron oxide minerals (especially ferrihydrite), and possibly chlorides. The team of researchers concluded that the observed features were due to liquid saline water. This water was derived from frost/snow that melted on the dunes.

Data from the Zhurong rover lead scientists to suggest that liquid water may have been present on at the landing site much later than was previously believed. Hydrated sulfate/silica materials were found in bright-toned rocks. The minerals formed a "duricrust." It was made either by groundwater rising or subsurface ice melting. Maybe, hot magma under the surface melted some of the abundant ice under the surface. The water could have moved to the surface and deposited minerals as it evaporated to make the duricrust.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhurong_(rover)

(edited from article)
"
The new ‘space race’: what are China’s ambitions and why is the US so concerned?
Helen Davidson in Taipei
4 May 2024

The worsening rivalry between the world’s two most powerful countries that has in recent years spread across the world, has now extended beyond the terrestrial, into the realms of the celestial.

As China has become deeply enmeshed in strategic competition with the US – while edging towards outright hostilities with other regional neighbours – Washington’s alarm at the pace of its advancement in space is growing ever-louder.

The US is gathering allies to ensure China doesn’t win the space race. Earlier this month, not long after China announced its intentions to land a person on the moon, US leader Joe Biden and his Japanese counterpart Fumio Kishida pledged to send a astronaut from Japan – China’s historical rival – to the moon on Nasa’s Artemis missions in 2028 and again in 2032.

Ben-Itzhak says the US and China are indeed engaged in a race, but the term doesn’t fully capture “the complex, nuanced dynamics currently unfolding in space, in terms of the diverse and increasing number of actors and initiatives, and no clear end goal in sight”.
"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/05/the-new-space-race-what-are-chinas-ambitions-and-why-is-the-us-so-concerned

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
China National Space Administration

The China National Space Administration (CNSA) is a government agency of the People's Republic of China headquartered in Haidian, Beijing, responsible for civil space administration and international space cooperation. These responsibilities include organizing or leading foreign exchanges and cooperation in the aerospace field. The CNSA is an administrative agency under the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.

Founded in 1993, CNSA has pioneered a number of achievements in space for China despite its relatively short history, including becoming the first space agency to land on the far side of the Moon with Chang'e 4, bringing material back from the Moon with Chang'e 5 and 6, and being the second agency who successfully landed a rover on Mars with Tianwen-1.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_National_Space_Administration

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: Queen proclaims neutrality, but UK provides some support for the Confederacy - May 13, 1861
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377462

On This Day: Govt pays farmers not to farm, destroy crops, cull animals during depression, shocking many - May 12, 1933
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377400

On This Day: Labor organizer and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez begins hunger strike - May 11, 1972
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377361

On This Day: REDUCTION of tea price does not allay colonists' hate of Tea Act - "Tea Party" follows - May 10, 1773
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377283

On This Day: FDA approves "the pill", providing greater reproductive freedom to American women - May 9, 1960
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377219

May 13, 2024

On This Day: Queen proclaims neutrality, but UK provides some support for the Confederacy - May 13, 1861

(edited from article)
"
May 13th – Proclamation of Neutrality
May 13, 2019

It was 158 years ago today, May 13, 1861, that Queen Victoria signed the “Proclamation of Neutrality”, which not only recognized the Confederacy’s right to oppose the United States, but also stated that it would not “interfere” in the ongoing Civil War. Though the English never officially recognized the Confederacy as a separate nation, it did, however; provide support, and in many forms.

Confederate ships often docked in English ports, where they traded their goods and were protected from the Union Navy. Several Confederate raiders were built by the British, including Ironclads that were never delivered, because there was fear of spreading the conflict to English shores. The famed raider C.S.S. Alabama, which was hunted down and sunk off the French coast by the U.S.S. Kearsarge, was crewed mainly by British sailors, and she was not the only ship to have such a complement.

War almost broke out after the Union seized two Confederate emissaries on the English ship H.M.S. Trent off the shores of Cuba. The Parliament protested, and prepared for war, but cooler heads prevailed and the anger subsided. Though the Queen signed a nice, fancy document 158 years ago, it’s frightening to think that at that time, the United States was all alone, except for support from one other country, Russia, let that seep in for a little bit.
"
https://www.signalsaz.com/articles/this-day-in-history-may-13th-proclamation-of-neutrality/

(edited from article)
"
DECLARATION OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.; BY THE QUEEN A PROCLAMATION. VICTORIA R.

... And whereas hostilities have unhappily commenced between the Government of the United States of America and certain States styling themselves "the Confederate States of America."

And whereas we, being at peace with the Government of the United States, have declared our Royal determination to maintain a strict and impartial neutrality in the contest between the said contending parties:

"We, therefore, have thought fit, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, to issue this our Royal Proclamation:

And we do hereby strictly charge and command all our loving subjects to observe a strict neutrality in and during the aforesaid hostilities, and to abstain from violating or contravening either the laws and statutes of the realm in this behalf, or the law of nations in relation thereto, as they will answer to the contrary at their peril.
...
Given at our Court at the White Lodge, Richmond Park, this 13th day of May, in the year of our Lord 1861, and in the 24th year of our reign.
"
https://www.nytimes.com/1861/05/29/archives/declaration-of-the-british-government-by-the-queen-a-proclamation.html

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
United Kingdom and the American Civil War

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland remained officially neutral throughout the American Civil War (1861–1865). It legally recognized the belligerent status of the Confederate States of America (CSA) but never recognized it as a nation and neither signed a treaty with it nor ever exchanged ambassadors.

Lancashire Cotton Famine

Over 90 percent of Confederate trade with Britain ended, causing a severe shortage of cotton by 1862. Private British blockade runners sent munitions and luxuries to Confederate ports in return for cotton and tobacco. In Manchester, the massive reduction of available American cotton caused an economic disaster referred to as the Lancashire Cotton Famine. Despite the high unemployment, some Manchester cotton workers refused out of principle to process any cotton from America, leading to direct praise from President Lincoln, whose statue in Manchester bears a plaque which quotes his appreciation for the textile workers in "helping abolish slavery". Top British officials debated offering to mediate in the first 18 months, which the Confederacy wanted but the United States strongly rejected.

[Trade with Confederacy fell over 90% ]

Large-scale trade continued between Britain and the US. The US shipped grain to Britain, and Britain sold manufactured items and munitions to the US. British trade with the Confederacy fell over 90% from the prewar period, with a small amount of cotton going to Britain and hundreds of thousands of munitions and luxury goods slipped in by numerous small blockade runners operated and funded by British private interests.

[Confederate sought military intervention by Britain and France]

The Confederate strategy for securing independence was based largely on the hope of military intervention by Britain and France. A serious diplomatic dispute erupted over the "Trent Affair" in late 1861 but was resolved peacefully after five weeks.

British intervention was likely only in co-operation with France, which had an imperialistic venture underway in Mexico. By early 1863, intervention was no longer seriously considered, as Britain turned its attention elsewhere, especially toward Russia and Greece.

In addition, at the outbreak of the American conflict, for both the United Kingdom and France the costly and controversial Crimean War (October 1853 to February 1856) was in the still-recent past, the United Kingdom had major commitments in British India in the wake of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, and France had major imperial ambitions outside of the Western Hemisphere, and was considering or had already commenced military ventures in Morocco, China, Vietnam, North Africa, and Italy.

[UK supplies arms and two warships to Confederacy]

A long-term issue was the sales of arms and warships to the Confederacy. Despite vehement protests from the US, Britain did not stop the sales of its arms and its shipyard (John Laird and Sons) from building two warships for the Confederacy, including the CSS Alabama. Known as the Alabama Claims, the controversy was partially resolved peacefully after the Civil War when the US was awarded $15.5 million in arbitration by an international tribunal only for damages caused by the warships.

In the end, British involvement did not significantly affect the outcome of the war. The US diplomatic mission, headed by Minister Charles Francis Adams Sr., proved to be much more successful than the Confederate missions, which were never officially recognized by Britain.

Long-term impact

The Union victory emboldened the forces in Britain that demanded more democracy and public input into the political system. The resulting Reform Act 1867 enfranchised the urban male working class in England and Wales and weakened the upper-class landed gentry, who identified more with the Southern planters. Influential commentators included Walter Bagehot, Thomas Carlyle, John Stuart Mill, and Anthony Trollope. Additionally, many British and Irish men saw service in both the Union and Confederate State Army.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_American_Civil_War

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: Govt pays farmers not to farm, destroy crops, cull animals during depression, shocking many - May 12, 1933
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377400

On This Day: Labor organizer and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez begins hunger strike - May 11, 1972
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377361

On This Day: REDUCTION of tea price does not allay colonists' hate of Tea Act - "Tea Party" follows - May 10, 1773
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377283

On This Day: FDA approves "the pill", providing greater reproductive freedom to American women - May 9, 1960
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377219

On This Day: Joan of Arc transcends gender roles at Orleans, gaining recognition as savior of France - May 8, 1429
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377185

May 12, 2024

On This Day: Govt pays farmers not to farm, destroy crops, cull animals during depression, shocking many - May 12, 1933

(edited from article)
"
AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT ACT

As a means of bringing direct and effective help to farmers, the law sought to reduce production of the huge agricultural surpluses that depressed market prices. The AAA provided for cash benefit payments for cutting the production of seven major farm commodities. The most important of these for Oklahoma farmers were payments to cut wheat and cotton acreage and to reduce hog numbers. In addition to the higher prices that might follow reduced production, farmers who cooperated with the program and signed the required contracts received cash in the form of so-called "benefit payments." At first, money for these payments to farmers came from special taxes on food processors, and later, after that portion of the law was declared unconstitutional in 1936, from the federal treasury.

Because Oklahoma cotton farmers had already planted their crop before the AAA became law, they had to plow up a portion of the growing cotton to qualify for benefit payments. Some farmers and farm leaders strongly objected to destroying such an important and useful crop as cotton. John A. Simpson, a prominent Oklahoma farm leader and president of the National Farmers' Union, was among the severest critics of acreage and production controls. However, 87,794 Oklahoma cotton farmers signed contracts with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and plowed under the required acres to qualify for payments that amounted to $15,792,287 in 1933.

Under the corn-hog program Oklahoma farmers received $4,058,000 in 1934 in return for reducing hog numbers. This program, which involved killing brood sows and little pigs, brought cries of protest from many critics. However, the useable meat was distributed through the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. A similar cattle-purchasing program was also important to Oklahoma farmers.

Tens of millions of dollars were distributed to Oklahoma farmers who participated in AAA programs between 1933 and 1936 when a major part of the law was declared unconstitutional. Prices rose and production and market needs were in better balance. Yet, thousands of Oklahoma farmers still struggled to survive. The benefit payments did not bring much help to farmers on small acreages, and many of these families with only a few acres eventually left the farm and sought opportunities elsewhere. The AAA was important, however, because it set a pattern for making direct payments to farmers under a wide variety of programs during the remainder of the twentieth century.
"
https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry?entry=AG002

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
[AAA and the New Deal]

The Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) [signed on May 12, 1933] was a United States federal law of the New Deal era designed to boost agricultural prices by reducing surpluses. The government bought livestock for slaughter and paid farmers subsidies not to plant on part of their land. The money for these subsidies was generated through an exclusive tax on companies that processed farm products. The Act created a new agency, the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, also called "AAA" (1933–1942), an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, to oversee the distribution of the subsidies. The Agriculture Marketing Act, which established the Federal Farm Board in 1929, was seen as an important precursor to this act. The AAA, along with other New Deal programs, represented the federal government's first substantial effort to address economic welfare in the United States.

Background

When President Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in March 1933, the United States was in the midst of the Great Depression. "Farmers faced the most severe economic situation and lowest agricultural prices since the 1890s." "Overproduction and a shrinking international market had driven down agricultural prices." Soon after his inauguration, Roosevelt called the Hundred Days Congress into session to address the crumbling economy. From this Congress came the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, to replace the Federal Farm Board. The Roosevelt Administration was tasked with decreasing agricultural surpluses. Wheat, cotton, field corn, hogs, rice, tobacco, and milk and its products were designated as basic commodities in the original legislation. Subsequent amendments in 1934 and 1935 expanded the list of basic commodities to include rye, flax, barley, grain sorghum, cattle, peanuts, sugar beets, sugar cane, and potatoes.

[Many shocked]

The juxtaposition of huge agricultural surpluses and the many deaths due to insufficient food shocked many, as well as some of the administrative decisions that happened under the Agricultural Adjustment Act. For example, in an effort to reduce agricultural surpluses, the government paid farmers to reduce crop production and to sell pregnant sows as well as young pigs. Oranges were being soaked with kerosene to prevent their consumption and corn was being burned as fuel because it was so cheap.

There were many people, however, as well as livestock in different places starving to death. Farmers slaughtered livestock because feed prices were rising, and they could not afford to feed their own animals. Under the Agricultural Adjustment Act, "plowing under" of pigs was also common to prevent them reaching a reproductive age, as well as donating pigs to the Red Cross.

In 1935, the income generated by farms was 50 percent higher than it was in 1932, which was partly due to farm programs such as the AAA.

[Tenant farmers and small farmers]

Tenant farming characterized the cotton and tobacco production in the post-Civil War South. As the agricultural economy plummeted in the early 1930s, all farmers were badly hurt but the tenant farmers and sharecroppers experienced the worst of it.

Although the Act stimulated American agriculture, it was not without its faults. For example, it disproportionately benefited large farmers and food processors, with lesser benefits to small farmers and sharecroppers. With the spread of cotton-picking machinery after 1945, there was an exodus of small farmers and croppers to the city.

Ruled unconstitutional

On January 6, 1936, the Supreme Court decided in United States v. Butler that the act was unconstitutional for levying this tax on the processors only to have it paid back to the farmers. Regulation of agriculture was deemed a state power. As such, the federal government could not force states to adopt the Agricultural Adjustment Act due to lack of jurisdiction. However, the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 remedied these technical issues and the farm program continued.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_Adjustment_Act

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: Labor organizer and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez begins hunger strike - May 11, 1972
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377361

On This Day: REDUCTION of tea price does not allay colonists' hate of Tea Act - "Tea Party" follows - May 10, 1773
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377283

On This Day: FDA approves "the pill", providing greater reproductive freedom to American women - May 9, 1960
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377219

On This Day: Joan of Arc transcends gender roles at Orleans, gaining recognition as savior of France - May 8, 1429
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377185

On This Day: Sinking of passenger ship Lusitania switches the position of many U.S. pro-Germany supporters - May 7, 1915
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377157

May 11, 2024

On This Day: Labor organizer and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez begins hunger strike - May 11, 1972

(edited from article)
"
Chavez's fast for farmworkers

Chavez started a 24-day fast on May 11, 1972, the same day the Arizona Legislature and then-representative Jack Williams passed a bill outlawing tactics that unionized farmworkers used to demand fair working conditions.

The bill prohibited collective bargaining, secondary boycotts and strikes at times of harvest, all of which were used by Chavez and were essential to his non-violent and self-sacrifice-based protesting principles.

"Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers Union hoped that governor Jack Williams would veto House Bill 2134. But, he didn't," Christine Marin, historian and professor emeritus of Arizona State University, wrote in an article for barriozona.

Eventually, Chavez's efforts resulted in the government granting farmworkers the right to negotiate with their employers for fair wages, benefits and protections.
"
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2022/05/14/cplc-honors-cesar-chavez-50th-anniversary-historic-phoenix-fast/9732970002/

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Phoenix-Santa Rita Hall-1962

This is the historic Santa Rita Center (also called Santa Rita Hall) building located between 10th street and place and Hadley street. It was where Arizona native Cesar Chavez started his 24-day hunger strike on May 11, 1972, to draw attention to the inhumane conditions farm workers endured in the fields. Coretta King met Chavez in the hall during his fast. For a while, the hall became the headquarters of what became the United Farm Workers of America Union. The structure was built in 1962 and is list as historical in the Phoenix Register of Historical Places.
"

(edited from article)
"
Places of César Chávez

While African Americans were fighting for their Civil Rights in the 1960s, César Chávez organized Latino and Filipino farm workers to do the same. Using similar tactics, including marches and boycotts, Chávez and his team brought crucial awareness to the working conditions and precarious living of the people who grow and harvest our food.

César Chávez was born March 31, 1927, on his family’s small farm outside of Yuma, Arizona. His family lost their land in the Great Depression. Chávez joined them as a migrant farm worker after completing the 8th grade. He worked on farms throughout California, experiencing the challenging working conditions.

He first worked in political organizing with Fred Ross and a Latino Civil Rights group, the Community Service Organization (CSO). Chávez helped organize voter registration drives and anti-discrimination campaigns. In the CSO, he learned organizing principles. But Chávez wanted to focus on the rights of farm workers.

Despite widespread skepticism, he resigned from CSO and founded the National Farm Workers Association, which became the United Farm Workers. Their first major action in 1966 was to join Filipino organizers like Larry Itliong for the Delano grape strike. The strike lasted five years, as workers demanded higher pay, safer working conditions, and the recognition of their union. This would be followed by other national actions, like the 340-mile march from Delano to Sacramento, California in 1966 and an international grape boycott. Chávez would go on three 25-36 day fasts to further raise awareness, inspired by Mahatma Gandhi. Chávez passed away in Yuma, Arizona in 1993, while visiting to support local farm workers being sued by big agriculture.
"
https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/places-of-c%C3%A9sar-ch%C3%A1vez.htm

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Cesar Chavez

Cesario Estrada Chavez (ˈ1927– 1993) was an American labor leader and civil rights activist. Along with Dolores Huerta, he co-founded the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA), which later merged with the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee (AWOC) to become the United Farm Workers (UFW) labor union. Ideologically, his worldview combined leftist politics with Catholic social teachings.

Born in Yuma, Arizona, to a Mexican-American family, Chavez began his working life as a manual laborer before spending two years in the U.S. Navy. Relocating to California, where he married, he got involved in the Community Service Organization (CSO), through which he helped laborers register to vote. In 1959, he became the CSO's national director, a position based in Los Angeles. In 1962, he left the CSO to co-found the NFWA, based in Delano, California, through which he launched an insurance scheme, a credit union, and the El Malcriado newspaper for farmworkers. Later that decade he began organizing strikes among farmworkers, most notably the successful Delano grape strike of 1965–1970. Amid the grape strike his NFWA merged with Larry Itliong's AWOC to form the UFW in 1967. Influenced by the Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, Chavez emphasized direct nonviolent tactics, including pickets and boycotts, to pressure farm owners into granting strikers' demands. He imbued his campaigns with Roman Catholic symbolism, including public processions, Masses, and fasts. He received much support from labor and leftist groups but was monitored by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

In the early 1970s, Chavez sought to expand the UFW's influence outside California by opening branches in other U.S. states. Viewing illegal immigrants as a major source of strike-breakers, he also pushed a campaign against illegal immigration into the U.S., which generated violence along the U.S.-Mexico border and caused schisms with many of the UFW's allies. Interested in co-operatives as a form of organization, he established a remote commune at Keene. His increased isolation and emphasis on unrelenting campaigning alienated many California farmworkers who had previously supported him and by 1973 the UFW had lost most of the contracts and membership it won during the late 1960s. His alliance with California Governor Jerry Brown helped ensure the passing of the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975, although the UFW's campaign to get its measures enshrined in California's constitution failed. Influenced by the Synanon religious organization, Chavez re-emphasized communal living and purged perceived opponents. Membership of the UFW dwindled in the 1980s, with Chavez refocusing on anti-pesticide campaigns and moving into real-estate development, generating controversy for his use of non-unionized laborers.

A controversial figure, UFW critics raised concerns about Chavez's autocratic control of the union, the purges of those he deemed disloyal, and the personality cult built around him, while farm owners considered him a communist subversive. He became an icon for organized labor and leftist groups in the U.S. His reception by Maria Elena Lucas on his October, 1981 visit to dedicate the first Farm Worker Service Center in the Midwest evidences his continuing appeal to migrant farm worker activists. Posthumously he became a "folk saint" among Mexican Americans. His birthday is a federal commemorative holiday in several U.S. states, while many places are named after him, and in 1994 he posthumously received the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesar_Chavez

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: REDUCTION of tea price does not allay colonists' hate of Tea Act - "Tea Party" follows - May 10, 1773
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377283

On This Day: FDA approves "the pill", providing greater reproductive freedom to American women - May 9, 1960
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377219

On This Day: Joan of Arc transcends gender roles at Orleans, gaining recognition as savior of France - May 8, 1429
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377185

On This Day: Sinking of passenger ship Lusitania switches the position of many U.S. pro-Germany supporters - May 7, 1915
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377157

On This Day: Pop. of Rome falls to 10,000 after sacking, atrocities, famine, plague, flight - May 6, 1527
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377104

May 10, 2024

On This Day: REDUCTION of tea price does not allay colonists' hate of Tea Act - "Tea Party" follows - May 10, 1773

(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Tea Act of 1773

The [Indemnity Act of 1767] restored the tea taxes within Britain that had been repealed in 1767, and left in place the three pence Townshend duty in the colonies, equal to £1.61 today. With this new tax burden driving up the price of British tea, sales plummeted. The company continued to import tea into Great Britain, however, amassing a huge surplus of product that no one would buy. For these and other reasons, by late 1772 the East India Company, one of Britain's most important commercial institutions, was in a serious financial crisis.

The best market for the East India Company's surplus tea, so it seemed, was the American colonies, if a way could be found to make it cheaper than the smuggled Dutch tea.

The North Ministry's solution was the Tea Act, which received the assent of King George on May 10, 1773. This act restored the East India Company's full refund on the duty for importing tea into Britain, and also permitted the company, for the first time, to export tea to the colonies on its own account. This would allow the company to reduce costs by eliminating the middlemen who bought the tea at wholesale auctions in London.

In 1772, legally imported Bohea, the most common variety of tea, sold for about 3 shillings per pound, equal to £24.22 today. After the Tea Act, colonial consignees would be able to sell it for 2 shillings per pound, just under the smugglers' price of 2 shillings and 1 penny.

Realizing that the payment of the Townshend duty was politically sensitive, the company hoped to conceal the tax by making arrangements to have it paid either in London once the tea was landed in the colonies, or have the consignees quietly pay the duties after the tea was sold. This effort to hide the tax from the colonists was unsuccessful.

Resisting the Tea Act

In September and October 1773, seven ships carrying East India Company tea were sent to the colonies: four were bound for Boston, and one each for New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston. In the ships were more than 2,000 chests containing nearly 600,000 pounds of tea. Americans learned the details of the Tea Act while the ships were en route, and opposition began to mount. Whigs, sometimes calling themselves Sons of Liberty, began a campaign to raise awareness and to convince or compel the consignees to resign, in the same way that stamp distributors had been forced to resign in the 1765 Stamp Act crisis.

The protest movement that culminated with the Boston Tea Party was not a dispute about high taxes. The price of legally imported tea was actually reduced by the Tea Act of 1773. Protesters were instead concerned with a variety of other issues. The familiar "no taxation without representation" argument, along with the question of the extent of Parliament's authority in the colonies, remained prominent. Samuel Adams considered the British tea monopoly to be "equal to a tax" and to raise the same representation issue whether or not a tax was applied to it. Some regarded the purpose of the tax program—to make leading officials independent of colonial influence—as a dangerous infringement of colonial rights. This was especially true in Massachusetts, the only colony where the Townshend program had been fully implemented.

Colonial merchants, some of them smugglers, played a significant role in the protests. Because the Tea Act made legally imported tea cheaper, it threatened to put smugglers of Dutch tea out of business.

Legitimate tea importers who had not been named as consignees by the East India Company were also threatened with financial ruin by the Tea Act. Another major concern for merchants was that the Tea Act gave the East India Company a monopoly on the tea trade, and it was feared that this government-created monopoly might be extended in the future to include other goods.

In New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston protesters compelled the tea consignees to resign. In Charleston, the consignees had been forced to resign by early December, and the unclaimed tea was seized by customs officials. There were mass protest meetings in Philadelphia. Benjamin Rush urged his fellow countrymen to oppose the landing of the tea, because the cargo contained "the seeds of slavery". By early December, the Philadelphia consignees had resigned, and in late December the tea ship returned to England with its cargo following a confrontation with the ship's captain. The tea ship bound for New York City was delayed by bad weather; by the time it arrived, the consignees had resigned, and the ship returned to England with the tea.

Standoff in Boston

In every colony except Massachusetts, protesters were able to force the tea consignees to resign or to return the tea to England.

In Boston, however, Governor Hutchinson was determined to hold his ground. He convinced the tea consignees, two of whom were his sons, not to back down.

When the tea ship Dartmouth arrived in the Boston Harbor in late November, Whig leader Samuel Adams called for a mass meeting to be held at Faneuil Hall on November 29, 1773. Thousands of people arrived, so many that the meeting was moved to the larger Old South Meeting House.

British law required Dartmouth to unload and pay the duties within twenty days or customs officials could confiscate the cargo (i.e. unload it onto American soil). The mass meeting passed a resolution, introduced by Adams and based on a similar set of resolutions promulgated earlier in Philadelphia, urging the captain of Dartmouth to send the ship back without paying the import duty. Meanwhile, the meeting assigned twenty-five men to watch the ship and prevent the tea – including a number of chests from Davison, Newman and Co. of London – from being unloaded.

The colonial governor of Massachusetts, Governor Hutchinson, refused to grant permission for the Dartmouth to leave without paying the duty. Two more tea ships, Eleanor and Beaver, arrived in Boston Harbor. On December 16 – the last day of Dartmouth's deadline – approximately 5,000–7,000 people out of an estimated population of 16,000 had gathered around the Old South Meeting House. After receiving a report that Governor Hutchinson had again refused to let the ships leave, Adams announced that "This meeting can do nothing further to save the country." According to a popular story, Adams's statement was a prearranged signal for the "tea party" to begin.

However, this claim did not appear in print until nearly a century after the event, in a biography of Adams written by his great-grandson, who apparently misinterpreted the evidence. According to eyewitness accounts, people did not leave the meeting until 10–15 minutes after Adams's alleged "signal", and Adams in fact tried to stop people from leaving because the meeting was not yet over.

Destruction of the tea

While Samuel Adams tried to reassert control of the meeting, people poured out of the Old South Meeting House to prepare to take action. In some cases, this involved donning what may have been elaborately prepared Mohawk costumes. While disguising their individual faces was imperative, because of the illegality of their protest, dressing as Mohawk warriors was a specific and symbolic choice. It showed that the Sons of Liberty identified with America, over their official status as subjects of Great Britain.

That evening, a group of 30 to 130 men, some dressed in the Mohawk warrior disguises, boarded the three vessels and, over the course of three hours, dumped all 342 chests of tea into the water. The precise location of the Griffin's Wharf site of the Tea Party has been subject to prolonged uncertainty. The property damage amounted to the destruction of 92,000 pounds or 340 chests of tea, reported by the British East India Company worth £9,659 (roughly $1,700,000 in today's money).

Another tea ship intended for Boston, the William, ran aground at Cape Cod in December 1773, and its tea was taxed and sold to private parties. In March 1774, the Sons of Liberty received information that this tea was being held in a warehouse in Boston, entered the warehouse and destroyed all they could find. Some of it had already been sold to Davison, Newman and Co. and was being held in their shop. On March 7, Sons of Liberty once again dressed as Mohawks, broke into the shop, and dumped the last remaining tea into the harbor.

Reaction

Whether or not Samuel Adams helped plan the Boston Tea Party is disputed, but he immediately worked to publicize and defend it. He argued that the Tea Party was not the act of a lawless mob, but was instead a principled protest and the only remaining option the people had to defend their constitutional rights.

John Adams, Samuel's second cousin and likewise a Founding Father, wrote in his diary on December 17, 1773, that the Boston Tea Party proved a historical moment in the American Revolution, writing:

This is the most magnificent Movement of all. There is a Dignity, a Majesty, a Sublimity, in this last Effort of the Patriots, that I greatly admire. The People should never rise, without doing something to be remembered—something notable And striking. This Destruction of the Tea is so bold, so daring, so firm, intrepid and inflexible, and it must have so important Consequences, and so lasting, that I cant but consider it as an Epocha in History.

In Great Britain, even those politicians considered friends of the colonies were appalled and this act united all parties there against the colonies. The Prime Minister Lord North said, "Whatever may be the consequence, we must risk something; if we do not, all is over". The British government felt this action could not remain unpunished, and responded by closing the port of Boston and putting in place other laws known as the "Intolerable Acts."

These were intended to punish Boston for the destruction of private property, restore British authority in Massachusetts, and otherwise reform colonial government in America. Although the first three, the Boston Port Act, the Massachusetts Government Act and the Administration of Justice Act, applied only to Massachusetts, colonists outside that colony feared that their governments could now also be changed by legislative fiat in England. The Intolerable Acts were viewed as a violation of constitutional rights, natural rights, and colonial charters, and united many colonists throughout America.

A number of colonists were inspired by the Boston Tea Party to carry out similar acts, such as the burning of Peggy Stewart. The Boston Tea Party eventually proved to be one of the many reactions that led to the American Revolutionary War. In February 1775, Britain passed the Conciliatory Resolution, which ended taxation for any colony that satisfactorily provided for the imperial defense and the upkeep of imperial officers. The tax on tea was repealed with the Taxation of Colonies Act 1778, part of another Parliamentary attempt at conciliation that failed.

Legacy

John Adams and many other Americans considered tea drinking to be unpatriotic following the Boston Tea Party. Tea drinking declined during and after the Revolution, resulting in a shift to coffee as the preferred hot drink.

According to historian Alfred Young, the term "Boston Tea Party" did not appear in print until 1834. Before that time, the event was usually referred to as the "destruction of the tea". According to Young, American writers were for many years apparently reluctant to celebrate the destruction of property, and so the event was usually ignored in histories of the American Revolution. This began to change in the 1830s, however, especially with the publication of biographies of George Robert Twelves Hewes, one of the few still-living participants of the "tea party", as it then became known.

American activists from a variety of political viewpoints have invoked the Tea Party as a symbol of protest. In 1973, on the 200th anniversary of the Tea Party, a mass meeting at Faneuil Hall called for the impeachment of President Richard Nixon and protested oil companies in the ongoing oil crisis. Afterwards, protesters boarded a replica ship in Boston Harbor, hanged Nixon in effigy, and dumped several empty oil drums into the harbor. In 1998, two conservative US Congressmen put the federal tax code into a chest marked "tea" and dumped it into the harbor.

In 2006, a libertarian political party called the "Boston Tea Party" was founded. In 2007, the Ron Paul "Tea Party" money bomb, held on the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, broke the one-day fund-raising record by raising $6.04 million in 24 hours. Subsequently, these fund-raising "Tea parties" grew into the Tea Party movement, which dominated conservative American politics for the next two years, reaching its peak with a voter victory for the Republicans in 2010 who were widely elected to seats in the United States House of Representatives.

Actual tea

The American Antiquarian Society holds in its collection a vial of actual tea-infused harbor water from 1773.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party

---------------------------------------------------------

On This Day: FDA approves "the pill", providing greater reproductive freedom to American women - May 9, 1960
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377219

On This Day: Joan of Arc transcends gender roles at Orleans, gaining recognition as savior of France - May 8, 1429
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377185

On This Day: Sinking of passenger ship Lusitania switches the position of many U.S. pro-Germany supporters - May 7, 1915
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377157

On This Day: Pop. of Rome falls to 10,000 after sacking, atrocities, famine, plague, flight - May 6, 1527
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377104

On This Day: 6 fatalities from Axis action in continental U.S. during WW2 - May 5, 1944
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016377037

Profile Information

Member since: Thu Jun 30, 2022, 12:37 AM
Number of posts: 944

1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72 Next »