Conclusion There were however differences and similarities in both; feudal system of Europe and Japan. The Feudal system of Japan and Europe are built on the system of hereditary classes. There is one major difference between Europe and Japan division of classes that this is based on the fact that in European feudal system, the peasants are placed at the bottom while in Japan structure of class; the merchants are placed at the lowest rung. Also another source of economy was the large amount of trade which was coming from the Eastern towns. However in Japan art was the very important source with the help of which the economy started to expand.
Communism favors well with them. Japan, on the other hand, had a much smaller population with a higher density of educated people who favored a democracy. The Japanese way of thinking also greatly differs from the Chinese way of thinking. Japan’s people are really into honor and respect, even if sacrifices must be made, but it seems as if China did what it did just to get what it wanted and just enough to survive at the time. I chose government and society as a theme because it is very important to know about the different governments and leaders in China and Japan to understand why they are the governments they are today.
This was marked by segregated schools in California and the West, their eligibility for naturalization was also narrowed while random violence was meted against them. As aliens, they were ineligible for citizenship. The exclusion of the Asians was due to the restrictions imposed by the National Origin Quotas of 1921 and 1924. Chinese Exclusion Act of 1982 was another notable form of economic and political disempowerment. This Act suspended all forms of Chinese immigration and the Chinese who were in the United States fought their ways to evade the labor and immigration restrictions (DeSipio Lecture One 3).
The Native elites used their power and positioning to get out of labor systems like the Mita because they could use their influence to get lower class Native to take their place. The legal system enabled further subdivisions of hierarchies within racial and ethnic hierarchies existed class hierarchies. This allowed the wealthy natives to subjugate fellow Natives just as the Spanish subjugate fellow Spaniards. We can see they Ayllu breaking down because of internal conflict between the Native nobles and the regular natives. We can also see this among Spanish elites and commoners.
This secured the gentry’s local status, and the samurai had to be well educated in order to act as political administrators and military warriors. Lower class rebellions plagued the rule of each elite group and were controlled and diminished. The main difference between these groups was the military status of the samurai. The gentry and yangban acted purely as government officials while the samurai possessed duties to the military as well. Overall, the main criteria met by all of the elite groups were prominent ancestral lineage and exorbitant amounts of money.
As slaves were legal property and a part of capital. They were bought, sold and sometimes killed, thus they became a means of production and were reduced to a commodity owned by slave owners (Ritzer; 2002:51/53). The relationship between slavery and capitalism can be seen in the context of the creation of the America’s. African and Afro-American slaves were vital for the development of the America’s. An example of this is after the American civil war, even though the North had fought to abolish slavery.
Nearly all Republicans, ranging from moder... ... middle of paper ... ...uction era, democracy in the United States was completely unsuccessful, and most of the reason for this failure can be attributed to Andrew Johnson. A democratic government is meant to be indirectly run by the people, thus it is essential for their views to be considered. However, Johnson completely disregarded their opinions, and strove in vain to accomplish his own objectives. By doing this he alienated potential allies and his entire plan for reconstruction was disastrous. “Andrew John’s greatest weakness was his insensitivity to public opinion.
The triangular trade emerged, allowing Europe and the American colonies to benefit, while exploiting blacks even further (to gain economically in Africa, one would have to take part in the trade by providing the laborers). The textile industry’s success was based on the use of slave labor, and without it, it’s questionable whether the U.S. would have become a major industrial power. Sons and grandsons of the earlier traders in slaves and slave-produced products benefited both directly (by becoming captains of the industries fueled by the slave trade) and indirectly (by the intergenerational transference of wealth). Americans not only gained economically, but also in terms of living conditions and life expectancies. Even the educational system (i.e.
Finally, the Spanish and New England colonies were largely similar yet somewhat different in their treatment of the indigenous people due to intermarrying with the tribes and forcing the natives into slavery. The Spanish colonies and New England had largely similar views on intermarrying with the native tribes. In the Spanish colonies, colonists started to form relationships with the indigenous people. With the almost completely male population of conquistadors being sent to the Americas from Spain, the conquerors began to marry and have children with the indigenous women. These children, with one Spanish parent and one native parent, were called Mestizos.
The Spoils System is defined in the U.S., as the practice of making appointments to public office and of giving employment in the public service on the basis of political affiliation or personal relationship rather than based on merit. It is an extreme form of political patronage and favoritism that originated during the colonial period but flourished in state administrations after the 19th century. The opposite of the spoils system is the merit system, established in the U.S. government system in 1883, which promoted and hired government employees based on their ability to perform a job, rather than on their political relationships. The spoils system has a negative impact on the government because it produces a corrupt government that is more concerned with political party favoritism than with the needs of the public. A merit system is ultimately better because it examines federal employees on their specialized skills and education in a way that filters out the incompetent workers and leaves only the most skilled workers.