Jamestown was first created to grow crops and to find wealth in the land. However, the location as well as the strategy of survival the colonists tried to implement were not the most desirable to survive in the harsh surroundings. Given this fact, how did the people of Jamestown survive, where as the people of Roanoke failed? In both cases the groups had made the same obstacles (starvation, failure to provide adequate supplies for the winter, etc), yet one was able to hold out & the other disappeared.
U.S. citizens today usually look to one of our country's oldest documents, the U.S. Constitution. As a general run-down, we know that the constitution provides security, rights, and the ground-work for our laws. Why do people still look at a document that continues to remain stagnate within time, while time & society continues to evolve? For example, we know today through Abraham Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" that slavery was eliminated from the Constitution (Located Article I, Section II, Clause III). Why continue to use laws implaced on us & continue to uphold them? Should we not evolve each of them to represent the beliefs of the people of today? And, if we do, should those who wish for the change of the Constitution to be forced upon them? Where should be the compromise?
Throughout the U.S. history, we see US imperialism occur (For example, the taking over of Cuba, Philippines, under Teddy Roosevelt, etc. Looking back in time, shouldn't we allow emerging countries to also go through the same phase as us? As long as they follow the core US beliefs (democracy), why shouldn't we allow countries to make the same mistakes as us? We should only give advice and opinions, rather than force our beliefs and way on them. What do you think about this?
The US had a period of isolationism, in which the US had seen large economic prosperity and growth in industries. The US was also able to be self-dependent and self-sufficient. In the following decades, especially after WWII, the US had stopped becoming self-dependent, and instead took on the role of cooperating with the world. While certain aspects need to stay as it is now (as an international), which aspects (in your opinion) should return to our old ways (or being self-sufficient)?
The US has one of the largest military spendings in the world (~$1.6 trillion, the equivalent of the next 7 largest budgets in the world combined). While this is a good idea, do we really have an improvement within our national defense as to outside threats (such as terrorism & invasion), or should we delegate some of the funds to more economic-boosting & citizen-based (such as health related things (healthcare), growth of industries, economy, etc.)? Try to compare and contrast today's government spending with the past government spending. Do you think it is justified in today's terms? Or should we return to the policies on before, only tweeking it just enough to accommodate today's problems.
~
