*insert witty title here*
I love Gruskin's class. Only in his class can I thrive on such convoluted run-ons as the following:
The divergent economic routes of the Southern and Northern States in the first half of the nineteenth century resulted in the embrace of the “peculiar institution” of slavery by the South in an effort to maintain an equal economic footing with the rapidly industrializing North, which logically led to political divisions of the once mass-based parties in favor of purely sectional polities, over highly volatile political issues which were ultimately tied to the financial interests of agrarian South, and often involved the newly conquered western frontier. In essence, South’s embrace of the agricultural and cash-crop based plantation economies resulted in a requirement of slavery, the South simply could not survive and prosper to the same degree that it did, without slavery, and thereby Southern politicians and influential wealthy aristocrats jealously guarded the “peculiar institution” on a political basis of State’s rights interpretation of the constitution, while northerners termed slavery a “moral abomination” and eyed it with ever more malicious glances and thoughts of abolition, finally attempting to enforce the idea that States were still subservient to the will of the Union, and thus a political majority has a right to enforce its moral beliefs upon a minority, thus opening the floodgate of Southern contempt that resulted in Secession and the Civil War.
Lol, two sentences, 204 words. only in Mr gruskin's class can i get away with filling up a whole page with only two sentences, lol. I love American History, I don't care what anyone else says. Although Gruskin's class should be termed "American history to the Civil War" because that's probably how far we'll get before the AP exam, lol.
haha, valentine's day tomorrow, should be fun :).
The divergent economic routes of the Southern and Northern States in the first half of the nineteenth century resulted in the embrace of the “peculiar institution” of slavery by the South in an effort to maintain an equal economic footing with the rapidly industrializing North, which logically led to political divisions of the once mass-based parties in favor of purely sectional polities, over highly volatile political issues which were ultimately tied to the financial interests of agrarian South, and often involved the newly conquered western frontier. In essence, South’s embrace of the agricultural and cash-crop based plantation economies resulted in a requirement of slavery, the South simply could not survive and prosper to the same degree that it did, without slavery, and thereby Southern politicians and influential wealthy aristocrats jealously guarded the “peculiar institution” on a political basis of State’s rights interpretation of the constitution, while northerners termed slavery a “moral abomination” and eyed it with ever more malicious glances and thoughts of abolition, finally attempting to enforce the idea that States were still subservient to the will of the Union, and thus a political majority has a right to enforce its moral beliefs upon a minority, thus opening the floodgate of Southern contempt that resulted in Secession and the Civil War.
Lol, two sentences, 204 words. only in Mr gruskin's class can i get away with filling up a whole page with only two sentences, lol. I love American History, I don't care what anyone else says. Although Gruskin's class should be termed "American history to the Civil War" because that's probably how far we'll get before the AP exam, lol.
haha, valentine's day tomorrow, should be fun :).