Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Differences between societies

"Free Western Societies"

What are they?
The largest western society is the United States of America. Great Britain and many European countries are western societies. New Zealand and Australia are western societies.

What is their political structure?
Western societies are democracies. This means that people over a certain age – usually 18 – can vote and elect a government that will make decisions on their behalf. If people are not happy with the government after 4 years they can vote for a new government in an election.

Why do western societies view themselves as free societies?
People in westerns societies have certain freedoms. They are free to:
- Criticise governments through; protesting, writing letters to newspaper editors, setting up their own political parties.
- Practise different religions and be critical of their own religions. People in western societies can also express the wish not to believe in God (atheism).
- Divorce and remarry, or live with partners without marrying. People of the same sex can live in partnerships.
Women in western societies are free to:
- Divorce and remarry, or live with partners without remarrying.
- Have abortions.
- Hold powerful positions in society.
- See themselves as equal to men.
- Wear any style of clothing.

Negatives about Western Societies:
- Babies (foetuses) die; ageing populations; gender imbalances eg China; low birth rates
- More STIs
- Getting arrested
- Women will take all the men’s jobs
- Religious hatred
- Exposure of bodies (male and female) eg painted bodies, “boobs on bikes”, limited amount of clothing
- Riots are more likely to happen because people can protest
- easy access to pornography, child porn
- adultery occurs
- divorce occurs and breaks the family up
- child abuse


Strict Islamic Societies

Why could some Islamic people think that Western societies are good?
- the punishments are less abusive and do not impose on human rights
- people can gain justice
- people are innocent until proven guilty
- western societies have a lot of freedoms eg the wearing of clothes.


Generalisations about Strict Islamic societies:
Most people in strict Islamic societies speaking about inequality get punished.

911 - Learning Outcomes

The learning out comes for this part of the unit are:

- Identify the causes of Militant Islamic Terrorism (Including Israel)
- Identify reasons why the twin towers was the target
- Explore the reactions to 911 of the American Public
- Explore the consequences of 911 (Afghanistan, London Bombings, NZ terrorism act)
- Identify the new world order
- Compare and contrast the new world order to the old world order.

The Berlin Wall

Please see the wikispace for notes about this.

Suffrage

Please see the wikispace for notes about this.

Monday, October 1, 2007

History Never Repeats

The new topic is.....


This album is powered by BubbleShare - Share your baby pictures


Women's Suffrage

Learning Outcomes

-----------------------------------------------
Suffrage
- Explain the factors which caused women to believe that they had the right to the vote
- Describe the actions to achieve this
- Identify the impact on societies of female suffrage

Changing nature of work
- Examine the changing nature of work for women
- Explore the positive and negative consequences of the changing nature of women’s work for individuals and society.


Concepts
-----------------------------------------------
Suffrage, Franchise, Vote, Campaign, Opposition, Bill or Act of Parliament, Birth Rate, Maternity Leave, Temperance Movement


Berlin Wall

Learning Outcomes
-----------------------------------------------
- Explain the differences between “communist” society and capitalist society
- Identify the factors that lead to the building of the Berlin Wall
- Compare and contrast life under the shadow of the Berlin Wall
- Identify the causes of the fall of the Berlin Wall
- Describe life in the Post
-Communist Era and the new world order

Concepts
-----------------------------------------------
Communist, Capitalist, Iron Curtain, World Order, East vs West


911

Learning Outcomes
-----------------------------------------------
- Identify the causes of Militant Islamic Terrorism (Including Israel)
- Identify reasons why the twin towers was the target
- Explore the reactions to 911 of the American Public
- Explore the consequences of 911 (Afghanistan, London Bombings, NZ terrorism act)
- Identify the new world order
- Compare and contrast the new world order to the old world order.

Concepts
-----------------------------------------------
Militant, Islamic, Terrorism, War on Terror

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Maori cheifs that signed and did sign...

Te Rauparaha
Te Rauparaha conquered many other tribes before 1840. In signing the Treaty he thought he was guaranteeing his ownership of the lands that he had conquered.

However, Te Rauparaha was not happy about European settlement on land that he had not sold. In 1843, he protested against Pakeha settlement by interfering with town planners at which fighting broke out. Te Rauparaha stayed defensive, and the British governor decided that Te Rauparaha could not be trusted. Te Rauparaha was imprisoned without charge.


Taraia Ngakuti Te Tumuhuia
Taraia did not sign the Treaty of Waitangi. It is likely he was present in Waitangi, but he refused to sign the Treaty. A consequence of this refusal to acknowledge the transfer of sovereignty to the Crown and therefore still believed that he could resolve disputes and arguments by force.

After 1840, he continued his disputes with rival tribes and refused to accept British authority, pointing out that he had not accepted the terms of the Treaty and therefore did not have to follow the laws of the British. He was opposed to selling lands and many disputes over land were to arise during the 1850s.


Tamati Waka Nene
Nene was one of the supporters in the debate at Waitangi over the Treaty, and he was among the first to sign. He argued that a treaty was necessary for peace and stability, given the lawless Pakeha who were already there. He felt that the situation in New Zealand had already passed out of the control of the Māori chiefs. During the debate he said that Māori should retain their customs and be allowed to keep their lands. His speech was a turning point in convincing other chiefs to also sign the Treaty.

Nene shared the concerns of other chiefs after signing the Treaty. However, he was not concerned about land loss. Nene helped to re-erect the flagpole that Hone Heke had chopped down, and guard the new one. When Hone Heke’s people chopped the flagpole down again, Nene took this very personally and ended up supporting the British to get back at Hone Heke.


Source: http://www.dnzb.govt.nz/dnzb/
To use this database you can search by occupation, age, sex etc or by person. To find out more about these cheifs you can serach them by name - their whole biography comes up. Skim read to the important aspects about the signing of the Treaty.

Reasons for NOT signing the Treaty of Waitangi

There were many reasons for Maori to not sign the Treaty of Waitangi. Many Maori chiefs refused to have their mana put under that of a woman (Queen Victoria). Some chiefs were worried that signing the Treaty with the Queen would result in the loss of even more land, and did not trust the missionaries, who were buying a lot of the land. Concerns were also raised over the fact that some Maori had heard about the extermination (killing), of many indigenous (native) people by the British in other countries, in particular the aborigines in Australia. Although over 500 signatures eventually appeared on the Treaty, many Maori did refuse to sign due to a variety of reasons.

Other reasons for why some people did not sign the Treaty of Waitangi:
- Chiefs might have lived in the interior, away from the coast, and the treaty is not brought to him for signing.
- Some were offended as Hobson did not provide them with a big feast to celebrate the signing of the treaty.
- Some wanted to keep full control over their affairs

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Reasons for signing the Treaty of Waitangi

Maori signed the Treaty of Waitangi for a variety of reasons. Some chiefs trusted the missionaries who told them that signing the Treaty would be the best thing for the Maori. Other chiefs believed that by signing the Treaty of Waitangi they would enter into an equal partnership between themselves and the British. In general most of the chiefs believed that their mana and rangatiratanga would be kept safe under the terms of the Treaty of Waitangi.
  • Read why Maori decided to sign
  • See where the Treaty was signed around New Zealand - this is an interactive map that actually goes into a lot of detail.

Reasons for signing the Treaty of Waitangi



Chief A: is friendly with missionaries and listens to them when they say Maori should sign the Treaty.




Chief B: believes the Treaty is a sacred bond between the chiefs and the British Queen.




Chief C: believes his mana and rangatiratanga will be kept safe by the Treaty.


Chief D: is keen to sell land to the Governor for European goods.


Chief E: hopes that the Treaty will bring permanent peace to New Zealand.

Chief F: hopes for material benefits such as more markets for his produce, more goods and more demand for Maori labour.



Chief G: hopes the Treaty will control Europeans who break Maori law and set a bad example to Maori.





Chief H: believes the Queen will be able to control the number of Europeans coming to New Zealand.

Testing the theories - The problems with Signing the Treaty

Today we made our own treaties in our groups. We then tried to get the whole class to sign the treaty we made.

Here are some of the issues we found:
  • We only had about 5 minutes to write a treaty. This was not long enough to really think it through.
  • While many people signed without reading the treaties(too friendly I think). They just trusted that the treaty to be fair.
  • Some people did not understand what people wrote.
  • Not all our class was present, so we could not get everyone to sign the Treaty.
  • The Queen would not sign any of the Treaties because she did not agree to them. They were to politically correct!
  • Not everyone would agree to and sign the different treaties.

These issues were similar to what Busby, Williams and Hobson faced when they were creating and trying to get Maori to sign the treaty.

  • Limited amount of time to write the treaty
  • Maori trusted the British to look after them
  • Maori did not understand the English version and therefore could not see if there were any differences. A new Maori word was also used in the treaty that Hobson created to describe Soverignity that chiefs would not understand
  • Not all the chiefs of New Zealand were present. The treaty was sent around New Zealand for other chiefs to sign. It is not known that all the chiefs of New Zealand signed the treaty.
  • Not all chiefs signed the treaty because they did not think that they would benefit from it.

Problems with the Treaty of Waitangi

  • The treaty is very short
  • Hastily drawn up by William Hobson and James Busby
  • Henry Williams translated it to Maori – this was the version that most Maori would sign


Williams inaccurate translation lies at the heart of the conflict over the Treaty today.


Article One – Maori Version

Maori would never have signed away their sovereignty – rangatiratanga .Williams created the word kawanatanga, which he said meant governorship.

  • 512 Maori signed Maori version
  • 30 signed English version

Not all important chiefs signed Eg. Potatou Te Wherowhero

  • Waikato chiefs did not all sign the Treaty
  • This was an important factor in later land wars of 1860’s


Article Two – Version

1) The Crown guarantees Maori can retain their land, forests, fisheries, taonga
2) Contradicts Article 1 (English version) Maori version uses the term rangitiratanga – therefore Maori understood they were the ultimate sovereign authority (able to continue to impose law and order) in their own lands.
3) Maori who want to sell their land are permitted to sell it to the Crown only.
- Hobson misused the word Pre-emption (English interpretation only)
4) Maori version uses the word pre-emption translated as hokonga correctly – first offer. (refer to learning guide)

Article Three

1) contradicts Article 2. (English version) Article 2 has taken away the equal right of Maori to sell their land to anyone they want to – a basic right of British subjects
2) Can be interpreted to contradict Article 2 (both versions) – implicit that Pakeha do not have an equal right to land/fisheries.

n.b. Missionaries emphasised the ‘protection’ that the Crown would provide them with (foreigners, inter-tribal warfare, badly behaved British settlers).

The differences in the translations

The main differences are...

Article 1:

In the English text of the Treaty, Māori leaders gave the Queen "all the rights and powers of sovereignty" over their land.

In the Māori text of the Treaty, Māori leaders gave the Queen "te kawanatanga katoa" – the complete government over their land.

Article 2:

In the English text of the Treaty, Māori leaders and people, collectively and individually, were confirmed and guaranteed "exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests, fisheries and other properties".

In the Māori text of the Treaty, Māori were guaranteed "te tino rangatiratanga" – the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands "wenua", villages "kainga", and all their property/treasures "taonga katoa".

In the English text of the Treaty, Māori yielded to the Crown an exclusive right to purchase their land.

Māori agreed to give first priority to selling land to the Crown, but if the Crown did not want the land, then Māori could sell it to anyone.

Article 3:

This is considered a fair translation of the English. However the idea of equlity for all is contradicted in the other Articles.

How was the Treaty of Waitangi Drafted?

On the 3rd of Feb 1840, Hobson with the help of Busby put together a draft Treaty.

It was up to the missionary Henry Williams and his son Edward who both spoke and new the Maori language, to translate the drafted document. They received the document on the 4th February and it was needed for the meeting of the chiefs the following day. This meant that they were rushed.

"Henry Williams realised that his role was critical. Like many others, he thought that Maori would be better off under British sovereignty. He knew that the chiefs would not agree if a treaty took too much power from them. The translation was key to getting Maori agreement. This may be why the words used in the translation had certain emphases and were not a mirror of the English but a particular type of missionary Maori language that would be familiar to the chiefs."

Source:
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/treaty/read-the-treaty/drafting-the-treaty

Why did British present Maori with a Treaty

In 1835 Maori chiefs made a Declaration of Independence. This declaration was acknowledged by the British government and signed by James Busby, the British government’s representative in New Zealand. The Declaration of Independence declared New Zealand a sovereign state and stated that the chiefs would meet every year to discuss the welfare of the country. Britain wanted New Zealand to become a part of its empire and in order for that to happen, they had to organise a treaty with New Zealand before any of the other powerful European countries like France or Germany did. William Hobson was sent to New Zealand to organise and get a treaty signed with the Maori chiefs. This would make New Zealand a colony of Britain.

Meanings of the words:
Declaration: Making an announcement
Acknowledged: recognised, accepted
Representive: someone who represents their country, community, school
Soverign: King or Queen
Welfare: the well-being of someone
Colony: A country that is under the governance and protection of another country.

The main reasons for presenting a treaty:
- Maori and the missionaries were worried about the lawless Europeans. They wanted the British to make New Zealand a colony so laws could be created that the Europeans would have to follow and be punished.
- The missionaries were worried that Europeans were buying the land unfairly and wanted there to be a fair system that protected the Maori from greedy land buyers from Europe.
- The British did not want France to have possession of New Zealand.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Effects of Early European Contact

What was pre European New Zealand like?

  • lots of land and plants
  • more flax land
  • green land
  • more sea creatures
  • less deadly diseases/pandemics

How did Māori respond to the early Europeans?
  • By killing them
  • Eating them
  • Threatening them/ being threatened by them
    Welcoming them
    Making friends
    Feeling scared, nervous, weird

What were the effects of early Europeans on Māori?

  • more equipment/tools
  • can trade
  • more European build houses
  • mixed marriages
  • sytem changed
  • more food and animals
  • more friends
  • caused musket wars
  • more enemies
  • learnt to read and write
  • learnt to speak English
  • learnt to grow crops/farming
  • full length clothes was introduced
  • loses of lives due to musket wars

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Trick or Treaty

Our new topic ladies and gentlemen is named "Trick or Treaty."

It is to do with the Treaty of Waitangi and how it has influenced New Zealand's society.

Today we sat a pre-test to find out just how much we do not know - thank goodness I still have a job as your teacher!

We also began watching a series of videos about the Treaty of Waitangi. We will continue to watch these tomorrow. I am showing you the whole story because I want you to have an understanding of the whole picture of New Zealand's history. I think that this will make it easier to understand the topic as we go through.

As we watched the videos, we were writing down answers to these questions...


1. What is a treaty?

2. When was the Treaty of Waitangi signed?

3. What was the main aim of the Treaty of Waitangi?

4. Why did some Māori chiefs not sign the Treaty of Waitangi?

5. What caused the New Zealand land wars?

6. Why is there debate over the Treaty of Waitangi today?


A helpful web site to look at is:
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/category/tid/133

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Exams...

I realise that we have not really used this BLOG yet as a class - but eventually we will. I promise.

Now one thing that is coming up next week is exam week. Make sure that you study hard for all your exams - not just Social Studies :)

What will be assessed in your Social Studies exam?

Your assessment will be divided into three sections: concepts, knowledge and skills.
  • The knowledge part will assess your knowledge and understanding of Human Rights, The Holocaust and Taking Action. Click on the link to find out exactly.
  • The concepts section will be do with the Holocaust and any other relevant word to the unit. Click on the link to find out exactly.
  • The skills section will test you on your ability to use the skills we have learnt in class. The information may or may not be about the Holocaust.
Here is how the assessment will be divided up:
Concepts - definitions of the key words learnt in the topic 10/50
  • Mix and Match 5/10
  • Definitions 5/10

Knowledge - 20/50

  • Multichoice 5/20
  • Short Answer 10/20
  • Visuals with captions 5/20

Skills - 20/50

  • Graphing 3/20
  • Generalising 2/20
  • Mapping 4/20
  • Paragraph Writing 4/20
  • Cartoon Interpretation 4/20
  • Values Exploration 3/20

You have all worked exceptionally hard on this unit of work and I am very proud of you. Well done.

I thoroughly enjoyed "O'Hagan Live" today (thanks Erik for the title). Just another example of how well you are doing. Keep it up :)

Monday, April 9, 2007

One good thing about the Holocaust!!!???!!!

One thing that comes out of war is innovation. Innovation is the creation of new and innovative ways of doing things. In war, one would want to keep ahead of the your enemy. In many cases, this could mean that you need to be more innovative than your enemy; whether this be by spying, weaponry, transportation, protection, tactics etc etc.

During both WWI and WWII, the level of innovation increased dramatically in so many areas, "computers" being one of them. This podcast states that IBM (a company that makes computer hardware) is said to have been involved in helping the Nazis process their information quicker.

Seems harmless?? Watch the podcast and research for yourself.



Should we believe everything we see? Research this for youself using the links supplied on the podcast. Post your thoughts on your blog.