Three Midterm Questions, Assignments of United States History

Questions based off of book Give me liberty by Eric Foner & Voices of Freedom

Typology: Assignments

2024/2025

Uploaded on 01/26/2026

samantha-navarrete-3
samantha-navarrete-3 🇺🇸

5 documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Midterm
1. According to Foner, how did liberty expand from the colonial
period through 1815? How was it limited? Provide and explain
three examples total.
Throughout the colonial period to 1815, Americans began to view
themselves as a nation of liberty. People had more opportunities to
vote, there was more freedom of religion, and the philosophy of the
Enlightenment created a new conception of natural rights. But the
reality, as noted by Eric Foner, was that this expansion occurred
alongside profound exclusions on account of race, gender, and
class. A look at the growth of voting access, the Great Awakening,
and the Enlightenment philosophy suggests the ambivalence of
liberty in early America.
Perhaps the best example of the extension of liberty would be the
increased voting franchise for white men. By the middle of the
eighteenth century, the ability to vote had been extended to
between 50 and 80 percent of white men in the colonies, in contrast
to the mere 5 percent extending to England (Foner, Give Me Liberty!,
Vol .1, 5e , p. 111). This po ints to the incl usion of a wider secti on of
society in the political process. Yet, this inclusion was highly
restricted by race and class. In colonies like South Carolina, free
Blacks were stripped of the right to vote, despite being landlords
(Foner, Voices of Freedom, Vol.1, 4e, p. 84). While many white men
became included in the expansion of liberty, entire classes were
excluded.
The expansion of religious revivalism also contributed to broadening
1/25/26, 21:48
Page 1 of 4
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Three Midterm Questions and more Assignments United States History in PDF only on Docsity!

Midterm

  1. According to Foner, how did liberty expand from the colonial period through 1815? How was it limited? Provide and explain three examples total. Throughout the colonial period to 1815, Americans began to view themselves as a nation of liberty. People had more opportunities to vote, there was more freedom of religion, and the philosophy of the Enlightenment created a new conception of natural rights. But the reality, as noted by Eric Foner, was that this expansion occurred alongside profound exclusions on account of race, gender, and class. A look at the growth of voting access, the Great Awakening, and the Enlightenment philosophy suggests the ambivalence of liberty in early America. Perhaps the best example of the extension of liberty would be the increased voting franchise for white men. By the middle of the eighteenth century, the ability to vote had been extended to between 50 and 80 percent of white men in the colonies, in contrast to the mere 5 percent extending to England (Foner, Give Me Liberty!, Vol.1, 5e, p. 111). This points to the inclusion of a wider section of society in the political process. Yet, this inclusion was highly restricted by race and class. In colonies like South Carolina, free Blacks were stripped of the right to vote, despite being landlords (Foner, Voices of Freedom, Vol.1, 4e, p. 84). While many white men became included in the expansion of liberty, entire classes were excluded. The expansion of religious revivalism also contributed to broadening

the concept of liberty. The Great Awakening fighting during the 1730s and the 1740s stressed the idea of personal salvation rather than obeying the established hierarchies. Revivalists’ preachers encouraged colonial common folk to adopt a free-thinking attitude on issues of faith, which, as Foner points out, had “lasting political effects” (Foner, Give Me Liberty!, Vol.1, 5e, p.127). However, the concept of religious liberty was not fully embraced. Catholics, Jews, and dissenters were restricted from voting and holding office positions, the practice that shows how despite the establishment of new freedom, exclusion was part of American culture (Foner, Voices of Freedom, Vol.1, 4e, p. 85). Finally, Enlightenment philosophy deepened early American understandings of freedom. John Locke’s liberalism argues that individualism possessed natural rights no government could violate (Foner, Give Me Liberty!, Vol.1, 5e, p. 109). While Locke envisioned liberty primarily for the propertiered white men, his theories opened space for others– women, the poor, the enslaved Africans– to later challenge inequality (Foner, Voice of Freedom, Vol.1, 4e, p. 56). His influence showed that liberty was becoming central to American identity, even if its practice remained exclusive. To conclude, the notion of liberty grew politically with its influence and application as initially present within the colonies and other aspects such as religion and philosophy until 1815, but this process in the expansion of liberty was not entirely inclusive. Therefore, it can be evidenced that White men made the most out of it while the other groups such as women, Blacks, and Native Americans were further from the concept of being part of the so-called political nation. There was the idea of liberty, which can be seen as an

Additionally, they excelled at demonstrating that freedom for one party frequently meant freedom for another. Great Britain widened its empire during the Seven Years War, but they gave the Proclamation of 1763 prohibiting colonists from east of the Appalachian Mountains into ‘Indian country’ to minimize conflicts with the Native Americans (Foner, Give Me Liberty!, Vol.1, 5e, p. 158). The events indicated that the British had pretended to uphold the liberty of the colonists at the detriment of the Indigenous people. This notion was finding much sympathy with Zinn, as he claimed that liberty was inextricably intertwined with egregious acts of plunder and the dispossession of the land for another party (Zinn, A People’s History, p. 59).Both accounts reveal the double edged nature of freedom in early America. Nonetheless, when historians privilege single frameworks, they may also compromise their objectivity. Zinn tends to view events almost exclusively through the lens of class struggle, while Foner sometimes restricts discussions to the polarities of liberty and slavery. For instance, while Foner views the Hamilton– Jefferson debates as an elite conflict over liberty in the first order, Zinn sees a class struggle (Foner, Give Me Liberty!, Vol. 1, 5e, p. 197; Zinn, A People’s History, p. 94). According to Tosh, such a reductionist approach may disrupt the balance of plurality intrinsic to historical analysis. In sum, Zinn and Foner do well to recapture the voices of the marginalized and unearth the contradictions of the idea of liberty in early America. However, their reductionism calls for historians to remain cognizant of varying interpretations. Tosh illustrates how a history that strives to be cohesive should fit in complexity.