Describe and analyze both Europes Thirty Years War and the Age of Japans

Warring States. What were the similarities and differences between these
two events?
Europes Thirty Years War started in 1618 with the defenestration of Prague,
which was provoked when Catholic Hasburgs tried to impede of the rights of
Bohemian Protestants. This leads the Hasburgs to unify Germany through
Catholicism. Emperor Ferdinand II with help from the Catholic league and
Spanish defeat the Protestants until 1629, when the Swedish king and
Frances chief minister supply aid to the Protestants. From 1635 to 1648
Spain and France were more involved, until the Peace of Westphalia brought
an end to the thirty years of fighting. Japans Warring States could best be
started in 1467 when a civil war within the Ashikaga family shogunate broke
out and daimyo, started battling each other with their samurai armies. In
1543, the daimyo are still fighting when the Portuguese arrive with firearms.
In 1549, Francis Xavier, a Jesuit, along with other western missionaries,
arrives and rapidly spread Christianity. In the 1560s, Oda Nobunaga, strives
to unite Japan. He seizes the Japanese capital in 1568 and ends the Ashikaga
shogunate in 1573. He dies in 1582, and one of his commanders, Hideyoshi,
takes over his goal of unifying Japan. At this point in time Oda had thirty two
of the sixty eight provinces. Hideyoshi finally unifies Japan and brings an end
to the era of Japans Warring States.
One similarity between the two events is the theme of unification. The
goal or motivation for both of these eras of war was this idea of unifying
multiple states or provinces together under one rule. Another similarity
between the two is how both wars started out with somebodys rights not
being fully met or being restricted. With the protestants in Bohemia, they
were essentially hanging onto rights that the previous ruler had granted, and
when their new Catholic ruler came in, he revoked those rights. This was the
notable moment in which we can say the war begun. For Japans Warring
States, you can look a little bit before the civil war in the Ashikaga family,
and interpret the lack of giving lands to samurai warriors by the Hojo
shogunate, that led samurai to fight for the daimyo armies instead. Samurai
warriors usually expected lands to be given to them as a reward for fighting/
winning battle, and when the Hojo shogunate failed to do so, they pissed off
the samurai, and this fueled daimyos strength and ability to fight for nearly
a century. Another similarity of the two is the idea of controlling groups of
people based off of religion. The Thirty Years War is all about Catholics trying
to control Protestants to unify Germany. For Japans Warring States, this
similarity is a little more subtle. When missionaries came in and gained lots
of converts, this growing group of people who were loyal to a distant,
unknown power (the pope) threatened Japans autonomy. This was the
justification for Hideyoshis, Japans chief minister, to expel the missionaries
from Japan.
Yes! There are differences between these two eras as well! First off the
goal of unification really only works out for Japan. Hideyoshi actually unifies
all of the provinces of Japan in 1582. Compare that to the Hasburgs failure to
unify Germany, instead every state ended up being religiously independent.
Second, The Thirty Years war had outside aid, unlike Japan. Sweden and
France kicked in help for the Protestants, and the Catholic League and
Spanish helped the Hasburgs. Japan was pretty much all self contained, there
was no outside help from anybody. Another difference is how the Thirty Years
War seemed to be more of a war against larger powers and the Warring
States were more individual/small. The way the chapter doesnt describe the
powers involved with the Thirty Years War as individual armies or divisions. It
describes them as just that, powers. Larger, more ambiguous powers that
fought. On the other side, they describe the unification of Japan as a one
man kind of effort. It was Oda Nobunaga and his army who started the
unification, and it was Hideyoshi and the same army who finished it. It felt
more specific in the description of the Warring States.

What combination of circumstances and insights led to the great scientific

advances of the 17th century? How and why did these advances contribute to
the quest for new perspectives on governance and society?
In Europe, before the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, majority of
scientific knowledge came from the Islamic world. This is until a handful of
people we all know well today started rocking the boat on preconceptions
and old ideas. Lets start with Copernicus in the sixteenth century. He argues
that the Earth is the not the center of the universe, and to us this may not
seem groundbreaking or even that offensive, but back in his time this
disrupts the idea that the Earth is the not the centerpiece of Gods creation.
Next we have Johannes Kepler in the seventeenth century who proposed that
the paths of the planets are elliptical and that there are relationships
between a planets distance from the sun and its speed, and this sort of
revives Copernicus hypothesis. Next we have Francis Bacon, who in the
seventeenth century writes Novum Organum, the first scientific
methodology, and it focuses on observing reality, the present, the now,
rather than studying the works of past scholars. This encourages the use of
the scientific method. Next lets look at Ren Descartes who basically
demands science grounded in math, measurements, quantification, formulas,
and equations. He also separates what can be studied and cannot, like
religion and spirit, and the real world. Then we have Galileo who discovered
the laws of acceleration and motion, which breathe life back into Copernicus
hypothesis. He also discovers that the universe is not perfect and finite. And
lastly we have Newton, a man so important he gets a fruity, breakfast snack
bar named after him. Oh and some laws of the universe or whatever. Newton
sees the universe as a mechanism that operates in accordance with
mathematical laws. He discovered the law of gravity. Eons of people before
him, and nobody could describe gravity. These people made waves in
history, and its no surprise that other scholars applied new ways of thinking
and rigorous thought to their own fields. Take John Locke for example, he
wrote in the Two Treaties of Government that the people have rights and
that it is the responsibility of whoever is in power to protect those rights, and
if they failed to do so, they could be unseated from power. John Locke did not
write this out of thin air, he built of the work of Thomas Hobbes who believed
in the idea of people surrender their freedom to the state in return for
security and order, creating an unwritten contract between ruler and
subjects. John Locke built off of Hobbes work, which is what Galileo and
Kepler did to Copernicus, they built off previous work to reach new ideas.
There was this idea of moving forward in thinking and also challenging
previously thought ideas instead of just rereading old material and past
thoughts.

Describe how the Great Awakening differed from the Enlightenment. How did
George Whitefield and other revivalist ministers change the religious scene
in the American colonies?
To be as minimalistic as possible, The Great Awakening was mainly about
new religious strides and the Enlightenment was focused on new intellectual
development throughout many aspects of life. To be more descriptive, the
Great Awakening began in the early eighteenth century where American
colonists went from religious to mega-ultra-super religious. It was more of a
religious reawakening (hint the name of the event) and was a period of time
where there were revival meetings and new denominations popping up.
These new denominations and meetings were influenced by ministers like
George Whitefield who started preaching tours and challenging church
powers and systems. By questioning church hierarchies, they developed their
own systems and beliefs which led to countless denominations. The
Enlightenment was a period of time where new scientific thoughts and
theories encouraged scholars in other fields to work forward and question
preconceived ideas. This led to changes of ideas in politics, justice, and
society. The Great Awakening was different from the Enlightenment because
the Enlightenment encouraged new ideas and more forward thinking, rather
than just new re-hashes of Christianity. The Great Awakening built more upon
Christianity rather than straying away from it. New denominations were
working with the same material but had different interpretations of it, while
the Enlightenment went on to create the idea of systematic observation and
challenging traditional ideals.

Choose one of the drug foods discussed during the lecture and provide a
detailed account of its transformation through history. Explain the economic,
social, and cultural ramifications it had on the world.
Tea. Brewed leaf water. Green, black, and the occasional white varieties. We
all know tea, and its history is much richer than the sad, thin paper sachets
of pulverized leaves sitting in your pantry. Lets start at the beginning. Tea
was just a simple peasant crop in China, used by Buddhist monks to stay
awake and to stimulate the mind. Until the mid nineteenth century, China
held the monopoly on tea, and they wanted to keep a strong hold so much so
that it was a crime to take tea trees outside of China. Tea was expensive, but
loved among many, but the most notable of them all was the British. We
tend to strongly associate the English with tea simply because of teas
impact as a drug food throughout history. In the eighteenth century, the
English imported about a pound of tea per person. Englands Indian colonies
brought them closer to their favorite import, and the Darjeeling Railway
opened up the area for the cultivation of tea. With the industrial revolution
taking place in England, tea became the drink of choice for workers for
breaks in-between shifts. Compared to alcohol, tea was the optimum drink
because it stimulated but didnt intoxicate, and it gave workers energy and
the ability to stay on the clock. Tea helped regiment work hours and work
days, helped start the day and keep you up throughout. What was once a
simple peasant crop fueled the industrial revolution, Englands national
identity, and the better part of English import.

Pick one of the three troubled areas listed below. Explain why this region is in
the news. Provide a detailed analysis of how its situation is affecting, not only
their region, but the world. What type of media coverage has the area
received regarding its problems? Has this coverage displayed any bias? Have
all relevant viewpoints been considered? Be sure to include specific
examples to support your analysis.

Why is Honduras in the news? Honduras is the most dangerous country for
environmentalists. How do I know this? The Guardians article, Why is
Honduras the worlds deadliest country for environmentalists? gives some
insight. One hundred and one murders have occurred in Honduras from 2010
to 2014, which is the highest murder rate for environmentalists in the world.
For some background, Honduras is rich in natural resources, and this has
invited multiple resource project companies to come in and do their nasty
thing. What is their nasty thing? These companies create mines, dams, and
plantations, at face value this doesnt seem terrible, but when you consider
the fact that these projects displace indigenous communities and other small
communities, they suddenly seem terrible. These companies are exploiting
natural resources but in doing so are pushing out indigenous groups. These
regional populations are victims of these companies projects, but other
citizens of Honduras are affected as well. There have been protests from the
citizens of Honduras, and activists have endangered their lives fighting for
their cause. Berta Cceres was one of those activists. She was assassinated
in 2016 following death threats over her protests against a dam project.
Little of the outside world is affected by this. While there has been
involvement from the U.S., like letters from senators calling on the Honduran
government to cease these projects, or another letter from fifty-two
members of congress urging the U.S. Secretary of State and U.S. Secretary of
Treasury to grant an investigation into the death of and murdered activist, or
another letter requesting funding for a human rights defense group, there
has been little involvement from outside regions. The coverage of these
events are abundant as you get closer to the dates of the murders. Three of
the articles I was using for my information was over a year old. The most
recent one was covering the legacy Berta Cceres left a year after her death.
These articles do present bias. They side and sympathize with the activists
and their causes, and the victims and their families. If we approach the idea
of viewpoints like we do the bias that may or may not be present in these
articles, we can say that the viewpoints of the companies that have started
the projects have not been presented.

Here are the articles that I used.

The Guardian: Berta Cceres, Honduran human rights and environment

activist, murdered
The Guardian: Why is Honduras the world's deadliest country for
environmentalists?
Stabroek News: "Berta is not dead": A year after Honduran activist's killing,
her legacy grows
FAIR: US Contribution to Death of Honduran Activist Goes Unmentioned in US
Coverage