History is a kind of introduction to more interesting people than we can possibly meet in our restricted lives; 
let us not neglect the opportunity.  ~Dexter Perkins
PEACE, LOVE, & MRS. C
  • HOME
    • APUSH BLOG
    • US HISTORY BLOG
    • WORLD HISTORY BLOG
  • APUSH
    • Essay& DBQ Resources >
      • Ebook
      • AP PowerPoints
    • Unit 1
    • Unit 2
    • Unit 3 >
      • Notes
      • Screen Casts
      • American Revolution Project
    • Unit 4 >
      • Notes
    • UNIT 5 >
      • TRANSPORTATION REVOLUTION
      • KING COTTON
      • 1824/1828 ELECTIONS
      • ANDREW JACKSON
      • WHIGS
      • HENRY CLAY
      • INDIAN REMOVAL
      • WAR OF TEXAS
      • IMMIGRATION
  • US History
    • PowerPoints
    • Module 1 >
      • Standards 1-5
      • Assignments
    • Module 2 >
      • Standards 6-7
    • STANDARDS 8,9,10
    • Standards 11-14
    • Standards 15-20 >
      • Roaring 20's Webquest
      • Great Depression WebQuest
      • World War II Work Stations
    • Standards 21-25 >
      • The Kennedys
  • World History
    • Fall of Rome Webquest
    • Ancient China Webquest >
      • Zhou Dynasty
      • Qin Dynasty
      • Confucianism
    • SSWH1
    • POWERPOINTS
  • PARENTS CLICK HERE
  • Econ Resources
  • SSWH 4 WEBQUEST

Bid Adieu- Washington's Farewell Address

9/24/2014

16 Comments

 
george_washingtons_farewell_address_blog_assignment.docx
File Size: 30 kb
File Type: docx
Download File

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp
Picture
Washington departed the presidency and the nation's then capital city of Philadelphia in September 1796 with a characteristic sense of how to take dramatic advantage of the moment.

As always, Washington was extremely sensitive to the importance of public appearance and he used his departure to publicize a major final statement of his political philosophy.WASHINGTON'S FAREWELL ADDRESS has long been recognized as a towering statement of American political purpose and until the 1970s was read annually in the U.S. Congress as part of the national recognition of the first President's birthday. Although the celebration of that day and the Farewell Address no longer receives such strenuous attention, Washington's final public performance deserves close attention.

The Farewell Address definitely embodies the core beliefs that Washington hoped would continue to guide the nation. Several hands produced the document itself. The opening paragraphs remain largely unchanged from the version drafted by James Madison in 1792, while most of the rest was penned by Alexander Hamilton, whom Washington directed to remove the bitterness from an intermediate draft that the president himself had written. Although the drawn out language of the Address follows Hamilton's style, there is little doubt that the core ideas were not only endorsed by Washington but were beliefs that he and Hamilton had developed together as the new nation's leading nationalists.

The Address opened by offering Washington's rationale for deciding to leave office and expressed mild regret at not having been able to step down after his first term. Unlike the end of his previous term, now Washington explained, "choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it." Washington was tired of the demands of public life, which had become particularly severe in his second term, and looked forward to returning to Mt. Vernon.


George Washington delivered his Farewell Address from Congress Hall in Philadelphia.
Although he might have closed the Address at this point, Washington continued at some length to express what he hoped could serve as guiding principles for the young country. Most of all Washington stressed that the "NATIONAL UNION" formed the bedrock of "collective and individual happiness" for U.S. citizens. As he explained, "The name of AMERICAN, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of PATRIOTISM, more than any appellation derived from local distinctions."

Washington feared that local factors might be the source of petty differences that would destroy the nation. His defense of national unity lay not just in abstract ideals, but also in the pragmatic reality that union brought clear advantages to every region. Union promised "greater strength, greater resource, [and] proportionately greater security from danger" than any state or region could enjoy alone. He emphasized, "your UNION ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty."

The remainder of the Address, delivered at CONGRESS HALL in Philadelphia, examined what Washington saw as the two major threats to the nation, one domestic and the other foreign, which in the mid-1790s increasingly seemed likely to combine. First, Washington warned of "the baneful effects of theSPIRIT OF PARTY." To Washington POLITICAL PARTIES were a deep threat to the health of the nation for they allowed "a small but artful and enterprising minority" to "put in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party."


George Washington's handwritten copy of his famous Farewell Address. Alexander Hamilton helped Washington edit his first draft.
Yet, it was the dangerous influence of foreign powers, judging from the amount of the Address that Washington devoted to it, where he predicted the greatest threat to the young United States. As European powers embarked on a long war, each hoping to draw the U.S. to its side, Washington admonished the country "to steer clear of permanent Alliances." Foreign nations, he explained, could not be trusted to do anything more than pursue their own interests when entering international treaties. Rather than expect "real favors from Nation to Nation," Washington called for extending foreign "commercial relations" that could be mutually beneficial, while maintaining "as little political connection as possible." Washington's commitment to NEUTRALITY was, in effect, an anti-French position since it overrode a 1778 treaty promising mutual support between France and the United States.

Washington's philosophy in his Farewell Address clearly expressed the experienced leader's sense that duty and interest must be combined in all human concerns whether on an individual level or in the collective action of the nation. This pragmatic sensibility shaped his character as well as his public decision-making. Washington understood that idealistic commitment to duty was not enough to sustain most men on a virtuous course. Instead, duty needed to be matched with a realistic assessment of self-interest in determining the best course for public action.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/17d.asp



 In your blog, answer the following questions. Remember you must also respond to at least two peers. 


1.       Identify major issues/topics in Washington’s Farewell Address. Cite excerpts from the text to illustrate your point. Chicago Manual Style for citations.

2.       What actions and/or advice does Washington offer in response to the three dominant issues confronting him in his second term in office? Again, cite excerpts from the text to support your response. Chicago Manual Style for citations.

3.       In light of what you know about the historical context, choose one of Washington’s “issues” and argue whether his action/advice was wise or fooilsh. Be sure to provide a rationale for your response.

4.       Warning about political parties and “entangling alliance” are two issues that tend to dominate the better part of his address. Explain how both of these issues relate to the present day and argue whether Washington’s advice is still applicable. (For example, think about the role political parties play in shaping public policy and the country fragile, newly formed international anti-terrorist coalition.)

Make sure you respond to at least two peers. Check back routinely to answer any questions your peers have posed to you. Remember the format. Do not simply agree or disagree with your peers. Pose questions to each of them. 


  • Acknowledge something SPECIFICthe individual has said.
  • Build on their commentary by addingYOUR personal experience, observations, or relevant course content.
  • Conclude with a critical thinking or Socratic question to the individual or class.




SOCRATIC QUESTIONS
1. Questions for clarification:
  • Why do you say that?
  • How does this relate to our discussion?
  • "Are you going to include diffusion in your mole balance equations?"

2. Questions that probe assumptions:
  • What could we assume instead?
  • How can you verify or disapprove that assumption?
  • "Why are neglecting radial diffusion and including only axial diffusion?" 

3. Questions that probe reasons and evidence:
  • What would be an example?
  • What is....analogous to?
  • What do you think causes to happen...? Why:?
  • "Do you think that diffusion is responsible for the lower conversion?"

4. Questions about Viewpoints and Perspectives:
  • What would be an alternative?
  • What is another way to look at it?
  • Would you explain why it is necessary or beneficial, and who benefits?
  • Why is the best?
  • What are the strengths and weaknesses of...?
  • How are...and ...similar?
  • What is a counterargument for...?
  • "With all the bends in the pipe, from an industrial/practical standpoint, do you think diffusion will affect the conversion?" 

5. Questions that probe implications and consequences:
  • What generalizations can you make?
  • What are the consequences of that assumption?
  • What are you implying?
  • How does...affect...?
  • How does...tie in with what we learned before?
  • "How would our results be affected if neglected diffusion?" 

6. Questions about the question:
  • What was the point of this question?
  • Why do you think I asked this question?
  • What does...mean?
  • How does...apply to everyday life?
  • "Why do you think diffusion is important?"
16 Comments
Jordan k
10/3/2014 01:26:03 am

1.well his man issues where he did not want the formation of political parties, he want a president to only server 2 terms and he did not want the united states to have any foreign alliance's or anything like that because it would rap the us into there problems

2.he offers his own opinion on what he thinks should be right he says no president for two terms because he could be corrupted and no foreign affairs because we could get involved with the easts problems and end up in a bad place and political because he said "its one of his greatest fears to see a country divided by power great parties


3. I think with the terms of presidents problem is good because we could have a president severing as many terms as he/she wants and the people not having another leader tell that person decides to stop and they could have problems that couldn't be fixed without a new president

4.i think his advice is still valid because both the republic and democratic parties are fighting over what they think is right and wrong and should this be passed and they threaten to shut down the government. and with entangling alliances its still valid because say if Austria got into a war with Belgium the us was allied with Austria they would ask for help maybe and if we refused it would hurt our relationship with them and if we got involved it would hurt the people and it would make Belgium angry at the us.

Reply
donmoniquef
10/8/2014 09:32:49 am

1. National unity & neutrality
2. The danger of political parties ; he believed they weakened the government and distracted the public
3. The policy of neutrality ; his advice was wise he cautioned Americans to stay out of European conflicts
4. Because if both weren't handled the way they were then America would be in great danger with the government, union, and Europe, etc now ; yes his advice is still applicable

Reply
Ivey K
10/16/2014 10:29:48 pm

I agree with Donmonique because the danger of political parties could weakened the government and distract the public

Reply
Vada A
10/20/2014 10:48:23 am

I agree with how America would be in great danger if it the warnings about political parties and "entangling alliance" weren't handled they way they were. This goes with the ISIS and how it wouldn't be handled they way it should be if the military army weren't out there and trying to get rid of them. What are you implying?

Reply
Alexis
10/21/2014 07:09:30 am

I agree with your answer for number two. Washington didn't feel it was a good idea to get involved in political parties. So why do you think people didn't really listen or heed his words?

Reply
Ivey K
10/13/2014 01:13:03 am

1. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discrimination's.
2.I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.
3.I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country Washington wanted the citizens to be safe and fight for justice
4.if we didn't have political parties or entangling alliance the world will be in terrible danger there will be chaos everywhere.

Reply
Devante d
10/19/2014 08:43:14 am

I agree with him cause he said if we didn't have political parties or entangling alliance the world will be in terrible danger.

Reply
Jordan R
10/19/2014 12:52:38 pm

overall ivey is on point until number three i have to disagree with him it looks like ivey took a quote from Washington rather then talk about the issues and i cant even tell wether the guy is wise or not

Reply
devante d
10/13/2014 10:54:14 am

1. No formation of political parities, Two Terms Only Of Four Years Of Presidency, No Foreign Alliances
2. he declared the Neutrality Proclamation.
3.Washington didn't believe in political parties and to some extent he was right. He felt that it would divide people instead of unite and that it would make it harder to govern. If we take a look at what we have he isn't too far off the mark.
4. President Washington warned against "foreign entanglements," by which he was referring to alliances with European powers that might draw the US into a European war. Is Washington advice applicable no because Associations that had been made for mutual benefit that resulted in countries being forced to go to war even if there was no good reason to it I wouldn't see his advice working in today's world.

Reply
Alexis
10/21/2014 07:11:59 am

i agree that he did create the Neutrality Proclamation, which really was applicable at the time and still can be to this day. How do you think he came up with this idea of neutrality?

Reply
Vada A
10/13/2014 11:09:56 am

1.) Discrimination between the North, South, Atlantic, and East. Washing, George, 1796, "it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western." Also doing destructive actions of the constituted authorities. Washington, George, 1796, "with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle."
2.) He offered public credit to have more security and strength. Washington, George, 1796, "As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit."
3.) The spirit of party are enough for wise people to discourage and prevent it. With so much resentment, the evil spirit could be gone once and for all.
4.) These two issues are sill related today because we still have wars going on with other alliances. Washington's advice is still applicable because without it, the would would be upside down and there would be no protection, no security, and no sympathy among other nations.

Reply
Devante d
10/19/2014 08:37:34 am

I agree with Vada cause Washington did offer public credit to have more security.

Reply
Jordan R
10/19/2014 12:46:51 pm

I agree with vada on this look what is happing in the middle east if it wasent no foreign alliance we would in a never ending war

Reply
Jordan R
10/19/2014 12:43:53 pm

1.He wanted a president to serve 2 trems and he didnt want a foreign alliance
2.Washiongton gives hes own opinion on topics at hand he he has a fear of a country were there divided by power of parties
3. personaly i dont no wether to go against or go with but Washington did have a point about the parties to a degree he felt that people would come apart instead of together
4.If you look at todays world we have wars with foreign alliance so in a way if it wasn't because of Washington there would not be a land of the free only valley death

Reply
Vada A
10/20/2014 10:52:31 am

I agree with how we still would have wars with foreign alliances if it weren't for Washington and his address. This goes with the Declaration of Independence and how the world would go into chaos if it weren't for Thomas Jefferson and his description about how all people are created equally. What generalizations can you make?

Reply
Alexis
10/21/2014 07:06:57 am

1.) The discrimination between the North,the South,the West, and the Atlantic. "it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western."
2.) He offered the public credit to have more security and strength rather than feel unsafe and vulnerable.
3.) Washington wasn't for either party really, he felt that having political parties the government would be bad and the people would be too involved in the politics part of the world rather than the problems they really need to face.
4.) These two issues are sill related to today because we still have wars going on with other alliances. Washington's advice is still useful because without it the world would be in utter turmoil there would be no protection, no security, and no sympathy among the other nations.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed


Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.