Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in American History, Vol. II / Edition 9

Paperback (Print)
Used and New from Other Sellers
Used and New from Other Sellers
from $1.99
Usually ships in 1-2 business days
(Save 92%)
Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (19) from $1.99   
  • New (2) from $70.00   
  • Used (17) from $1.99   
Close
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any BN.com coupons and promotions
$70.00
Seller since 2014

Feedback rating:

(136)

Condition:

New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

New
Brand new.

Ships from: acton, MA

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
$70.00
Seller since 2014

Feedback rating:

(136)

Condition: New
Brand new.

Ships from: acton, MA

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Close
Sort by

More About This Textbook

Overview

This reader, designed to introduce students to controversies in American history, covers topics such as Industrial Revolution, Pearl Harbor, and the influence of the civil rights movement on race relations. This title is supported by Dushkin Online, a student Web site that provides study support tools and links to related Web sites.
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780072430806
  • Publisher: McGraw-Hill Companies, The
  • Publication date: 12/1/2000
  • Series: Taking Sides Series
  • Edition description: Older Edition
  • Edition number: 9
  • Pages: 412
  • Product dimensions: 6.00 (w) x 9.20 (h) x 0.90 (d)

Table of Contents

PART 1. The Industrial Revolution: How It Changed Farms, Families, Cities, and the Workplace
ISSUE 1. Was John D. Rockefeller a "Robber Baron"?
YES: Matthew Josephson, from The Robber Barons: The Great American Capitalists, 1861-1901
NO: Ralph W. Hidy and Muriel E. Hidy, from History of Standard Oil Company (New Jersey), vol. 1: Pioneering in Big Business, 1882-1911
Historian Matthew Josephson depicts John D. Rockefeller as an unconscionable manipulator who employed deception, bribery, and outright conspiracy to eliminate his competitors for control of the oil industry in the United States. Business historians Ralph W. Hidy and Muriel E. Hidy argue that Rockefeller and his associates were innovative representatives of corporate capitalism who brought stability to the often chaotic petroleum industry.

ISSUE 2. Did Nineteenth-Century Women of the West Fail to Overcome the Hardships of Living on the Great Plains?
YES: Christine Stansell, from "Women on the Great Plains 1865-1890", Women's Studies
NO: Glenda Riley, from A Place to Grow: Women in the American West
Professor of history Christine Stansell contends that women on the Great Plains were separated from friends and relatives and consequently endured lonely lives and loveless marriages. Professor of history Glenda Riley argues that women on the Great Plains created rich and varied social lives through the development of strong support networks.

ISSUE 3. Did the Industrial Revolution Disrupt the American Family?
YES: Elaine Tyler May, from "The Pressure to Provide: Class, Consumerism, and Divorce in Urban America, 1880-1920", Journal of Social History
NO: Jacquelyn Dowd Hall, Robert Korstad, and James Leloudis, from "Cotton Mill People: Work, Community, and Protest in the Textile South, 1880-1940", The American Historical Review
Elaine Tyler May, a professor of American studies and history, argues that the Industrial Revolution in the United States, with its improved technology, increasing income, and emerging consumerism, led to higher rates of divorce because family wage earners failed to meet rising expectations for material accumulation. History professors Jacquelyn Dowd Hall, Robert Korstad, and James Leloudis contend that the cotton mill villages of the New South, rather than destroying family work patterns, fostered a labor system that permitted parents and children to work together as a traditional family unit.

ISSUE 4. Were American Workers in the Gilded Age Conservative Capitalists?
YES: Carl N. Degler, from Out of Our Past: The Forces That Shaped Modern America, 3rd ed.
NO: Herbert G. Gutman, from Work, Culture, and Society in Industrializing America: Essays in American Working-Class and Social History
Professor of history Carl N. Degler maintains that the American labor movement accepted capitalism and reacted conservatively to the radical organizational changes brought about in the economic system by big business. Professor of history Herbert G. Gutman argues that from 1843 to 1893, American factory workers attempted to humanize the system through the maintenance of their traditional, artisan, preindustrial work habits.

ISSUE 5. Was City Government in Late-Nineteenth-Century America a "Conspicuous Failure"?
YES: Ernest S. Griffith, from A History of American City Government: The Conspicuous Failure, 1870-1900
NO: Jon C. Teaford, from The Unheralded Triumph: City Government in America, 1860-1900
Professor of political science and political economy Ernest S. Griffith (1896-1981) argues that the city governments that were controlled by the political bosses represented a betrayal of the public trust. Professor of history Jon C. Teaford argues that municipal governments in the late nineteenth century achieved remarkable success in dealing with the challenges presented by rapid urbanization.

PART 2. The Response to Industrialism: War, Depressions, and Reforms, 1898-1945
ISSUE 6. Did Yellow Journalism Cause the Spanish-American War?
YES: W. A. Swanberg, from Citizen Hearst: A Biography of William Randolph Hearst
NO: David Nasaw, from The Chief: The Life of William Randolph Hearst
Journalist W. A. Swanberg argues that newspaper mogul William Randolph Hearst used the sensational and exploitative stories in his widely circulated New York Journal to stir up public opinion and to force President William McKinley to wage a war against Spain to free Cuba. Historian David Nasaw maintains that even if Hearst had not gone into publishing, the United States would have entered the war for political, economic, and security reasons.

ISSUE 7. Did Racial Segregation Improve the Status of African Americans?
YES: Howard N. Rabinowitz, from "From Exclusion to Segregation: Southern Race Relations, 1865-1890", The Journal of American History
NO: Leon F. Litwack, from Trouble in Mind: Black Southerners in the Age of Jim Crow
Professor of history Howard N. Rabinowitz suggests that racial segregation represented an improvement in the lives of African Americans in that it provided access to a variety of public services and accommodations from which they otherwise would have been excluded in the late-nineteenth-century South. Professor of American history Leon F. Litwack argues that "the age of Jim Crow", wherein efforts by whites to deny African Americans equal protection of the laws or the privileges and immunities guaranteed other citizens seemingly knew no bounds, created a highly repressive environment for blacks.

ISSUE 8. Did the Progressives Fail?
YES: Richard M. Abrams, from "The Failure of Progressivism", in Richard Abrams and Lawrence Levine, eds., The Shaping of the Twentieth Century, 2d ed.
NO: Arthur S. Link and Richard L. McCormick, from Progressivism
Professor of history Richard M. Abrams maintains that progressivism was a failure because it never seriously confronted the inequalities that still exist in American society. Professors of history Arthur S. Link and Richard L. McCormick argue that the Progressives were a diverse group of reformers who confronted and ameliorated the worst abuses that emerged in urban industrial America during the early 1900s.

ISSUE 9. Did the Women's Movement Die in the 1920s?
YES: William L. O'Neill, from Everyone Was Brave: A History of Feminism in America
NO: Anne Firor Scott, from The Southern Lady: From Pedestal to Politics, 1830-1930
Professor of history William L. O'Neill contends that the women's movement died following the success of the suffrage campaign because women were not united in support of many of the other issues that affected them and because the increasingly militant feminism of the Woman's Party alienated many supporters of women's rights. Anne Firor Scott, a professor emeritus of history, maintains that the suffrage victory produced a heightened interest in further social and political reform, which inspired southern women to pursue their goals throughout the 1920s.

ISSUE 10. Was the New Deal an Effective Answer to the Great Depression?
YES: Roger Biles, from A New Deal for the American People
NO: Gary Dean Best, from Pride, Prejudice, and Politics: Roosevelt Versus Recovery, 1933-1938
Professor of history Roger Biles contends that, in spite of its minimal reforms, the New Deal created a limited welfare state that implemented economic stabilizers to avert another depression. Professor of history Gary Dean Best argues that Roosevelt's regulatory programs retarded the nation's economic recovery from the Great Depression until World War II.

ISSUE 11. Did President Roosevelt Deliberately Withhold Information About the Attack on Pearl Harbor From the American Commanders?
YES: Robert A. Theobald, from The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor: The Washington Contribution to the Japanese Attack
NO: Roberta Wohlstetter, from Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision
Retired rear admiral Robert A. Theobald argues that President Franklin D. Roosevelt deliberately withheld information from the commanders at Pearl Harbor in order to encourage the Japanese to make a surprise attack on the weak U.S. Pacific Fleet. Historian Roberta Wohlstetter contends that even though naval intelligence broke the Japanese code, conflicting signals and the lack of a central agency coordinating U.S. intelligence information made it impossible to predict the Pearl Harbor attack.

PART 3. The Cold War and Beyond
ISSUE 12. Was the United States Responsible for the Cold War?
YES: Thomas G. Paterson, from Meeting the Communist Threat: Truman to Reagan
NO: John Lewis Gaddis, from Russia, the Soviet Union, and the United States: An Interpretive History, 2d ed.
Professor of history Thomas G. Paterson argues that the Truman administration exaggerated the Soviet threat after World War II because the United States had expansionist political and economic global needs. Professor of history John Lewis Gaddis argues that the power vacuum that existed in Europe at the end of World War II exaggerated and made almost inevitable a clash between the United States and the USSR.

ISSUE 13. Did the Civil Rights Movement Improve Race Relations in the United States?
YES: Robert Weisbrot, from Freedom Bound: A History of America's Civil Rights Movement
NO: Tom Wicker, from Tragic Failure: Racial Integration in America
Professor of history Robert Weisbrot describes the lasting achievements produced by the civil rights movement in the realm of school desegregation, the protection of voting rights for African Americans, and the deepening commitment to racial harmony. Political journalist Tom Wicker recognizes that legal segregation ended in the South in the 1960s but contends that in the 1970s and 1980s white animosity toward African American achievements drained momentum from the movement for true racial equality.

ISSUE 14. Was America's Escalation of the War in Vietnam Inevitable?
YES: Brian VanDeMark, from Into the Quagmire: Lyndon Johnson and the Escalation of the Vietnam War
NO: H. R. McMaster, from Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam
Professor of history Brian VanDeMark argues that President Lyndon Johnson failed to question the viability of increasing U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War because he was a prisoner of America's global containment policy. H. R. McMaster, an active-duty army tanker, maintains that the Vietnam disaster was not inevitable but a uniquely human failure whose responsibility was shared by President Johnson and his principal advisers.

ISSUE 15. Should America Remain a Nation of Immigrants?
YES: Reed Ueda, from "The Permanently Unfinished Country", The World & I
NO: Richard D. Lamm, from "Truth, Like Roses, Often Comes With Thorns", Vital Speeches of the Day
Professor of history Reed Ueda maintains that the sheer magnitude and diversity of immigrants continually reshapes the American character, making America a "permanently unfinished country". Former Colorado governor Richard D. Lamm argues that immigration should be severely curtailed. He contends that the most recent immigrants are members of the underclass who are culturally unassimilable and who take jobs away from the poorest citizens in an already overpopulated America.

ISSUE 16. Did President Reagan Win the Cold War?
YES: John Lewis Gaddis, from The United States and the End of the Cold War: Implications, Reconsiderations, Provocations
NO: Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry, from "Who Won the Cold War?" Foreign Policy
Professor of history John Lewis Gaddis argues that President Reagan combined a policy of militancy and operational pragmatism to bring about the most significant improvement in Soviet-American relations since the end of World War II. Professors of political science Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry contend that the cold war ended only when Soviet president Gorbachev accepted Western liberal values and the need for global cooperation.

ISSUE 17. Will History Consider William Jefferson Clinton a Reasonably Good Chief Executive?
YES: Lars-Erik Nelson, from "Clinton and His Enemies", The New York Review of Books
NO: James MacGregor Burns and Georgia J. Sorenson et al., from Dead Center: Clinton-Gore Leadership and the Perils of Moderation
Journalist Lars-Erik Nelson argues that President Bill Clinton is a sadly flawed human being but a reasonably good president whose administration was a time of peace and plenty for Americans. Political scientists James MacGregor Burns and Georgia J. Sorenson et al. argue that Clinton will not rank among the near-great presidents because he is a transactional broker who lacks the ideological commitment to tackle the big issues facing American society.
Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(0)

4 Star

(0)

3 Star

(0)

2 Star

(0)

1 Star

(0)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

 
Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

    If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
    Why is this product inappropriate?
    Comments (optional)