"Those first settlers were not isolated pioneers but characters playing parts in a drama of global sweep — a struggle for empire that would range across the seventeenth century and around the globe, and which, for better or worse, would create the structure of the modern world" pg 8. do you agree or disagree?
I LOVE..I mean, LOVE that quote because it can be applied to such a variety of topics. Just imagine the courage it takes to be "a" pioneer no matter of what. The insecurity, fear, lack of experience, lack of schema...everything that can go wrong certainly COULD go wrong. And yet, to be able to say that a pioneer is a part of what would become a GLOBAL SWEEP is incredibly powerful. It means that every effort, every sacrifice, and all the blood, sweat and tears are 100% worth it. It also means that you could undoubtedly be a part of history: The world will remember your efforts and, perhaps, even your name. Most importantly, imagine setting the foundation to the world of the future. What an honor that would be. That is even more powerful. That quote is 100% true and certainly quite easy to agree with.
I would tend to agree with Pohnpei's post in that the island has been important for quite a long time because of its location, not necessarily because of the particular settlers that ended up there. And in some ways I also disagree with the representation because no matter how much of a common role they found themselves in along with other settlers in other locations, they were still isolated and alone, part of the challenge of settling places that hadn't been inhabited for some time before their arrival.
I agree with this part of the quote. It is hard to argue with the idea that Manhattan has become very central to the world's economy and has, therefore, helped to create the structure of the modern world.
However, I do not agree that the first settlers were any different than those who settled any other American city. It was not the settlers' attributes that made Manhattan important. Instead, it was the island's geographical location. So I accept what the quote says, but I disagree with Shorto's overall assertion made in this passage and the sentence immediately preceding it.