Cherokee nation Essay Example for Free

Cherokee nation Essay Wilma Pearl Mankiller was born on November 18th in Tahlequah, the capital of the Cherokee nation, Oklahoma. She lived in Mankiller Flats till she was ten years old. Then her family was moved to California when the Indian Affair Relocation program took place. Her father Charlie Mankiller was a Cherokee whereas her mother Irene Mankiller was of Dutch-Irish origin. Wilma had four sisters and six brothers. Wilma’s great grandfather was one of the many Cherokees who along with Choctaws, Creeks, and other Indian tribes moved along the Trail of Tears to Oklahoma . This was during the removal period in 1830’s. Here in Oklahoma the family was allotted 160 acres of land in eastern Oklahoma at a place called Mankiller Flats, but the land was rugged and it was difficult to eke out a life from it. Thus the family was poor and when Wilma’s father inherited the land he found it difficult to give a good life to his family. He managed to make some money from growing strawberries, peanuts, berries and green beans, cutting timber and picking crops when seasonal work was available. Food for the family was from the vegetable garden supplemented by wild game. Thus when the government’s offer to relocate them once more cropped up Charlie Mankiller was tempted by the prospects of a better life. The family did not wish to move, nevertheless they reached San Francisco only to discover that the relocation program promises were not fulfilled and there was no money. Even employment was very often not available. The children did not like California and was homesick. In her autobiography â€Å"Mankiller: A Chief and her People† Mankiller wrote, â€Å"I experienced my own Trail of Tears when I was a young girl. No one pointed a gun at me or at members of my family. No show of force was used. It was not necessary. Nevertheless, The United States government through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, was once again trying to settle the ‘Indian problem’ by removal. I learned through this ordeal about the fear and anguish that occur when you give up your home, your community, and everything you have ever known to move far away to a strange place. I cried for days, not unlike the children who had stumbled down the Trail of Tears so many years before. I wept tears that came from deep within the Cherokee part of me. They were tears from my history, from my tribe’s past. They were Cherokee tears. † In California Wilma completed her high school and enrolled herself for higher studies. She attended Skyline Junior College and then Francisco State College. It was here that she met her future husband Hector Hugo Olaya. They had two daughters, Felicia born in 1964 and Gina born in 1966. While in college Wilma met the Native Americans who reclaimed the Alcatraz Island. for the Native American people. Many Indians made the bold move to move onto Alcatraz and Wilma got influenced by it. She cherished the thought that her mission in life was to serve her people. She longed for independence to work for her community and this involvement with the community was the reason for the conflict which arose in her marriage. In 1974, she and Hector Hugo were divorced. In the 1960’s there were many social and political movements in America. When Alcatraz was forcefully occupied Wilma Mankiller became aware that the Indians also had rights and these rights had to be protected. She became involved in it and wanted to serve her people to the best of her ability. After Alcatraz she got involved in helping the Pitt River tribe in northern California reclaim their ancestral land. For seven years she worked for them and this prepared her to return to Oklahoma. When her father passed away in 1971 due to kidney failure Wilma was shattered. It â€Å"tore through my spirit like a blade of lightening† she says in her autobiography. Though the family returned to Oklahoma for the burial of Charlie Mankiller, Wilma returned to California after the funeral. Wilma too soon became a prey to kidney failure and though initially it could be treated, she had to undergo surgery and in 1990 she underwent a kidney transplant. Her brother Donald donated his kidney for her. In 1976, two years after her divorce she had returned to Oklahama for good. Here she enrolled herself in a graduate course at the University of Arkansas. Wilma’s will to live and serve her people can be seen in her determination to get well, once when she was involved in a terrible accident and it was thought that she would not survive. Second time was when she developed a muscle disease known as myasthenia gravis. Her life was threatened but her strong will of survival made her fit again.

JOHN COLLINS WARREN (August 1, 1778- May 4, 1856) :: Essays Papers

JOHN COLLINS WARREN (August 1, 1778- May 4, 1856) Synapsis The scientific community experienced several advancements from the late 18th century through the mid-19th century. This time period is of primary focus to illustrate the era in which a well accomplished anatomist left an astonishing, but often overlooked, mark in history. John Collins Warren, a skillful surgeon and fine anatomist, influenced and helped re-shape world wide views with his work on comparative anatomy titled Comparative View of the Sensorial and Nervous Systems in Men and Animals. A look into his life, accomplishments, and the time period itself will allow a thorough understanding of the importance and impact left by this work; a work previously unviewed by the internet community. John Collins Warren, born August 1, 1778, was a native of Massachusetts. Warren’s earliest influence, his father, was active in the medical community as both a doctor and surgeon. Warren’s father was such a great influence that young Warren himself decided to pursue a medical career. Warren chose a medical career, coercion free, feeling it would be most beneficial (E. Warren 21). Warren showed early on that his life was full of commitment and willfulness; he readily applied these traits towards his own education. At the time Warren began his studies there was no hospital in Boston and after one year of American schooling, he ventured to Europe to continue his studies. Around the beginning of the 19th century, voyages overseas were not easily accomplished; Warren’s voyage lasted twenty-four days and confirmed his sense of dedication. While in Europe, Warren studied in both London and Paris. Studying overseas was, as Warren himself had predicted, very beneficial. It enabled him to establish life-long relationships with influential members of the scientific community. With help from others, Warren was able to attend lectures by the most prominent scientists in Europe. Several of Warren’s journal entries from Europe speak of lectures by well-established scientists Vauqelin and Hope (E. Warren 57). After spending a sufficient amount of time in Europe, Warren felt he was well-learned and returned to America to advance his career in medicine. Upon returning to America, Warren continued his studies at Harvard and Cambridge and was forced to embrace what seemed like a whole different world.

Segregation Gender in School will not benefit anyone

We all wonder if segregating boys and girls are the right thing to do. Studies show that boys learn at a slower rate than girls and that it would be fair if the boys learn separately and learn at a slower pace. I disagree; I don't believe that boys and girls should like segregate for various reasons. Some of the most important reason that can cause harm when segregating boys and girls is either negatively influencing children, learning experiences, or gender stereotypes (â€Å"Segregate Boys & Girls at School? â€Å"). A University Studies found that girls improve boy's grades at school. By not having a segregation it allow boys and girls to have a more effective learning experience and won't cause stereotypes among each other. Studies show that even if boys learn slower than girls, they start to learn equally once they reach university level. We also have to think about, is it fair for the girls if the boys are going to be taught easier because they are one year behind than girls. Is it true that boys will improve on their academic if there was a segregation, no, why? Because boys who have more classes with female peers show higher enrolment rates in both Advance math and science classes and benefits grades for both genders. By having girls in the same classes as boys, they will help them with their assignment and project because girls tend to not be lazy than boys and tend to finish on time unlike boys. Boys tend to not care about school as much as girls and tend to have lower grades. If boys are separate from girls, most likely their grade would fall, because there would no motivation for the boys. Also, if there is a segregation that occurs, there would be a lot of competition between the boys and girls which can lead to great success but also not so great. What I mean it's not so great; well think about it, if there is a competition between boys and girls academic, would boys actually work hard and win, most likely no because like I said most boys don't care about school, they slack on homework and such so why work hard now to win. I think it's best for boys and girls to be in the same classes working together, and help each other out so one another don't slack and be lazy. Boys and girls would learn more effectively because there will be chances for them to hear the opinions of their class mate, which can help them learn from others, other than the teacher. It would be fair if boys and girls are taught equal and with the same technique because when it comes to marking test and assignment, everyone is learning the same thing and the same way so no cheating will occur. When boys and girls work in groups, they can help each other and have their own opinions about the topic, this way it helps the student learn from one another and be able to work well later on in life. When they start working, it would be easy for girls because they know how boys think and can reflect on their opinions and understand them well. Communication is a big factor in our society, and mostly when learnt at a younger age in school so that boys and girls aren't socially awkward when they are older and if not it can cause a lot of difficulty to speak to other people. Boys and girls have to face the different gender in their life for example, dating and marriage, well of course they face the other gender at home and after school, but because we spend so much time at school; 6 hours, 5 times a week, it's easier and faster for them to face it during this period of time. They will learn to have a better communication skill at work place and other places involving a lot of talking with opposite sex. To improve on their communication skill, they are put in groups with equal part boys and girls and once they are put in those groups for assignment and such, they will have to learn to communicate with each other to get a decent mark in that class. Also presentation, they will have to learn to present both sides opinions to their classmates. It's also fair for the boys and girls because it allows them to communicate and understand each other better than having to only listen to only one gender opinion. Communication Therefore, I do not agree with segregating boys and girls because of those reasons I stated above. Like I said it would be more effective for both genders if they work together and hear one another opinion and not just the same sex opinion. By having girls in the same classes as boys will motivate them to work hard and to impress them, because what can I say, smart boys are attractive and when boys know that they tend to work harder. Also better communication skills with both genders because they're at school 5 times a week and 6 hours a day, so it's best for them to learn communication during those periods of time. Basically what I'm trying to say is that, it's not a great idea to segregate boys and girls, it's the nature of learning and growing up.

The French Revolution And The Revolution Of The Late 1700 S

The American Revolution, along with many revolutions occurring throughout Central America, were all directly inspired by the French Revolution of the late 1700’s. Evidence of this can be seen simply by looking back at world history. History shows that many philosophies of the American Revolution were actually ideas that either closely parallel or are directly taken from the writing of various French scholars, such as Voltaire and The Baron De Montesquieu. The very essence of American politics, Democracy, is in actuality, a French concept as well. Democracy was originally created following the French Revolution to replace the Monarchy. Voltaire, who was born Francois Marie-Arouet, was a French revolutionary thinker. (Voltaire, 1) He is†¦show more content†¦Among many other controversial topics, (Opposition of organized religion and a non-literal interpretation of The Bible, to name a few) (Mastin, 1) Voltaire was a prominent believer in Freedom of Speech, another cons titutional pillar of American society. Voltaire was once credited with saying â€Å"I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it until my death.† (Brainy, 1) Voltaire was not a very popular figure among feudal France. He often opposed the Catholic Church along with many other forms of organized religion, (Mastin, 1) even going so far as to address the Islamic prophet Mohammed as a â€Å"Fanatic.† (Voltaire, 135) Voltaire eventually passed away in Paris after returning for the first time in over twenty years after falling ill in late May of 1778. Despite his passing, he was not shown any sympathy from the Catholic Church. After passing, the church denied the many pleas of his family and friend for a proper Christian burial. Upon hearing the news of the death of Voltaire, an unnamed father of the church wrote a letter to a friend that read: â€Å"Thank God that our Arch-nemesis Voltaire has finally kicked the bucket†¦Ã¢â‚¬  However one could sympathize with the Catholic Church for holding such a vicious grudge, as Voltaire himself was reportedly spiteful to the church even on his deathbed. Although accounts of Voltaire’s dying days are scattered, one claims that when a priest asked him to renounce Satan mere