It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. It wasnt exactly the best of times, but for many people it certainly was good times. It was the great age of literature, the golden age of sports, music, jazz. The 19th amendment to the constitution, which allowed women to vote in National Elections for the first time. Radio was becoming popular. It was the early days of hollywood, and certainly the age of the automobile, the model t. And automobiles were for almost every budget. Those are the good times which we will discuss. And it wasnt exactly the worst of times, although there were some very bad times. And it the failures of that decade led to the worldwide depression in the 1930s and helped the rise of fascism in europe. So lets begin with talking about the politics of the era. It was a republican decade. Three republican president s, harding, coolidge and hoover, and the republicans controlled the presidency from 1921 until 1933, and congress from 1918 or from the 1918 electio
Professor emeritus of history at Indiana University. Hes an awardwinning teacher and the author of many books including eli lilly, lynching in the heartland. Race and memory in america. And slinging doughnuts for the boys and American Woman in world war ii. His most recent book is hoosiers, a new history of indiana, which is on display outside. For many years, he coedited the Indiana University press series midwestern history and culture, which included a book he edited entitled comparative histories of the midwestern states. Jim says hes very proud, in a modest hoosier way that the midwest Mystery Association bestowed on him the Frederick Jackson turner Lifetime Achievement award. I have known jim many years, is many years, since i was a student at Indiana University. Ill testify that he has solid midwestern values, unfailing kindness, decency, unflagging work ethic and solid common sense. Jim represents the best of what it means to be midwestern, but he has never romanticized midwest
Developments shaped the civil war, and hopefully get a sense of whats going on outside, in the rest of the world. In some ways, this is not a new thing. People have been writing diplomatic histories of the civil war really since the years after the conflict ended. But the combination of the sesquicentennial, a new rethinking of 19thcentury globalization, and really the current context in which americans are sort of rethinking what it means to be part of a larger world, in a postcold war era, has generated a lot of rich scholarship that situates the u. S. Civil war in a broader context. Were fortunate to have three young, excellent scholars who will help guide us through this, and we of course look forward to your questions at the end. Im going to start here to my left. Dave thomson is assistant professor of history at sacred heart university, and is proud to acknowledge he was a High School Scholarship student some time ago. [applause] his research focuses on finance during the America
Called remaking political history. Its an hour and a half. Hi. My name is Jaime Sanchez jr. Our panel is making the case for latino political history. A theme that is central to the idea of remaking american political history. This is not to say no one has ever thought of or written about latinos in politics in history. The conversation follows in the foot steps of many major works and scholars. But instead it is about rethinking about what political historians Pay Attention to. In an earlier panel this morning, leah asked a question about the segregation of the american political history in which there was a barrier to what organizations and individuals are labeled as political or diplomatic actors. In a similar vein, this panel seeks to shift to seeing latinos as central to the development of modern american democracy. Forged in the fire of 19th century warfare, boosted by constant mass migration throughout the 20th, latinos have been part and parcel of modern americas social fabric.
Political history. This is not to say that no one has ever thought of or written about latinos in politics and history. The conversation follows in the footsteps of many major works and scholars. Instead is about rethinking what historians paid attention to. In an earlier panel they asked an essential question about segregation. There is a real barrier to what organizations and individuals are labeled as critical or diplomatic actors. This panel will shift the conversation towards a discourse other than peripheral. Their fortune the fire of the 19th century warfare and boosted by mass migration. They have an parcel of modern social fabric. Which will over 100 years of history in the United States. They have made a double mark on u. S. Politics. In the early legislative history at the selfless territories. They make u. S. Politics their own. And reading the major synthetic works of american political history we are hardpressed to find much representation of experiences and politics in m