The French Impact On The American Revolution free essay sample

Essay, Research PaperGallic Impact on the American Revolution Jeremy Black writes in War For America that the Franco-American confederation wholly altered the war for Great Britain in the American Revolution. Merely as it is written in many historical histories of the American Revolution, Black points to Gallic intercession as a cardinal factor in the Rebels # 8217 ; triumph. American kids are taught in grade school that with the triumph at Saratoga came an confederation with France that aided well in the American war attempt. Although this theory has been widely accepted by many historiographers, others may reason that American triumph was inevitable and that France contributed small to the Rebels # 8217 ; cause. Such dissentient positions are augmented by trouble in Franco-American cooperation between generals and the absence of any important triumph until the latter phases of the war. The French did play a important function in the revolution though. Gallic intercession significantly altered British scheme while giving the American settlements a renewed sense of intent and assurance in their battle against Britain. We will write a custom essay sample on The French Impact On The American Revolution or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Read Also:Â  Types of RevolutionThis paper will discourse both sides of the argument and effort to explicate how Gallic intercession allowed the 13 settlements to interrupt away from England. A figure of fortunes existed in the radical battle that gave the American Rebels a distinguishable advantage over the British. These advantages lead some historiographers to believe that the American settlements would hold successfully broken away from England without the assistance of France. During the period between 1775 and 1778, the state of affairs in the American settlements mirrored the United States state of affairs in Vietnam thirty old ages ago. In both instances, an established universe power looked to take control of a developing state that wanted its independency. For the American settlements in the 18th century, the aim of military triumph and independency was clear. Victory for the settlers would intend that the settlers could so regulate themselves. For England the aim was non as clear though. A colonial resignation could go forth England with a disillusioned settlement that already had a anterior record of overthrowing English jurisprudence. The component of fright besides played an of import function throughout the revolution. The fright of licking was much greater for the American Rebels. If the Americans lost the war, their state # 8217 ; s hereafter would hold been erased. Americans # 8217 ; belongings was certain to be affected by the result of the war. On the other manus, with the exclusion of the Bourbons invasion in 1779, the island of England was non threatened throughout the war. Parliament and the English people prayed for triumph in order to keep the economic advantages of trade with the 13 settlements. The Americans had a touchable sense of urgency and intent to contend for triumph while England fought basically for the continued economic advantages of trade with America.The demand for political accomplishment exacerbated the job for England. Any military triumph would hold to be followed by a political colony with the rebellious settlements. Without such an understanding, the radical ardor of the settlers would non hold subsided easy. England needed both a military triumph on foreign sod and a difficult fought political understanding while the settlers had merely to contend for an English withdrawal.These advantages that the American settlements enjoyed made the undertaking of deriving independency easier. The Rebels had a distinct aim and were contending for their places every bit good as self-determination. England had the more hard undertaking of keeping a dominant yet friendly relationship with the settlements. This boggy aim did non let for widespread support at place in England and interfered with military scheme in the settlements. These advantages did non straight affect the war though. While they gave the settlers the will to contend while their English opposite numbers questioned what their ends were, they entirely did non straight weaken English forces. It was non until February of 1778 that a direct shooting was taken at English military strength in the American settlements.In order to seek retaliation for the Seven Years War and to weaken England # 8217 ; s international place of power, France allied with the Americans in their war for independency. France # 8217 ; s determination to organize the confederation was due in big portion to the Americans # 8217 ; triumph at Saratoga. Despite some early jobs between Gallic and American generals, the Franco-American confederation weighed to a great extent on the war. Not merely did it provide the Rebels with a much needed assurance encouragement, but besides it weakened England # 8217 ; s place in the colonies. France # 8217 ; s acknowledgment of America as a state should non be overlooked when seeking to decode France # 8217 ; s impact on the war. Although this act may be viewed as a mere formality of the confederation, it allowed the settlers to believe in themselves. The struggle had reached the international theater which gave the Americans increased motive to turn out themselves. In add-on, England pushed for peace instantly following the Franco-American confederation. They offered extremist grants but refused straight-out independency. This show of failing merely served to buttress the already spread outing colonial confidence.An increased American assurance was non all that the confederation caused though. Gallic entry into the war caused for the possibility of belligerencies between France and England in the Caribbean. Without significant military personnels, England could hold lost a important part of it # 8217 ; s settlements to their challengers the Gallic. This state of affairs entirely may hold been the largest factor in the displacement in power to the American settlements. George III really pondered wholly abandoning the settlements and get downing an violative in the Caribbean and so refocusing on the settlements. Although this thought was non used, it was declarative of England # 8217 ; s altering priorities.This displacement in precedences caused for a major restructuring of English scheme in the settlements. Five 1000 military personnels were ordered sent to St. Lucia, the Gallic West Indian Island. This withdrawal badly weakened the English General Clinton # 8217 ; s forces in the North. Additionally, England chose to concentrate its contending on the southern settlements of Georgia and South Carolina instead than New England so that English military personnels would be closer to the Caribbean should they be needed. This English accent on the Caribbean and the South besides caused for an English backdown out of Philadelphia. The backdown showed English failing and decreased the opportunities of English military success anyplace in the northern settlements. The English General Clinton became rather disillusioned with British opportunities of success in the settlements claiming that the withdrawals to the south badly weakened his army.The entry of France into the Revolutionary War significantly changed England # 8217 ; s military precedences. England shifted importance from stoping the American rebellion to keeping its international power over France. Although some historiographers claim that the state of affairs was such that English triumph was about impossible, it was the Gallic intercession that sealed England # 8217 ; s destiny. By coercing England to switch military personnels to the South and the Caribbean, America was able to derive assurance and triumphs against a diminished English armed forces. Although the English faced a hard undertaking in the settlements, success still remained possible if all of English might could hold been unleashed on America. Gallic intercession did non let this and therefore significantly aided in our independency.

Free Essays on What It Feels Like To Go Home

The Four of Us As I get out of my buddy Roe’s small, cramped, late model Integra, I thank him for the ride and grab my laundry bag out of his tiny trunk. My legs feel like I have weights on them, tired from the 3-hour ride home. I wave at Roe, and then walk through the front of the lobby of Silicon Valley Inn and Suites. I look out at the clean blue and gold sign on the front lawn. This is home. My parents manage a small hotel in Sunnyvale, California. As I walk through the elegantly decorated lobby towards our small apartment on the first floor, I pass the front desk and surprise my father. As my father looks up from his paperwork, I see his tired eyes open in disbelief. I feel so happy inside I almost forget to explain to him why I'm home and how I got here. He doesn’t question me, he is just happy to see me. As he walks me inside our apartment I find everything exactly how I left it. Walking towards my mother in the kitchen, I hear my father’s voice calling my mother so excitedly. His voice sounds so much more real in person than over a long distance telephone call. The first part of our apartment leads to our dining area. I can see the lines in our light blue carpet from where my mom had vacuumed just minutes ago. The chairs are pushed in exactly where they belong, on top of the carpet’s worn spots. The curtains are blue with little silver diamonds embroidered into them and match our carpet. When I think of home, the first thing I think of is our family meals in the dining area. This is where our family comes together to be close. The dining room is a favorite place for us to be even before meals since you can get a clear view of my mom preparing the meal. Since it is mid day almost lunch, the light is coming in through the kitchen window and the smell of lunch being prepared is in the air. The sharp smell of cut onions and bell peppers dominate th e room.! I stand with my father for a second as we watch my mother’... Free Essays on What It Feels Like To Go Home Free Essays on What It Feels Like To Go Home The Four of Us As I get out of my buddy Roe’s small, cramped, late model Integra, I thank him for the ride and grab my laundry bag out of his tiny trunk. My legs feel like I have weights on them, tired from the 3-hour ride home. I wave at Roe, and then walk through the front of the lobby of Silicon Valley Inn and Suites. I look out at the clean blue and gold sign on the front lawn. This is home. My parents manage a small hotel in Sunnyvale, California. As I walk through the elegantly decorated lobby towards our small apartment on the first floor, I pass the front desk and surprise my father. As my father looks up from his paperwork, I see his tired eyes open in disbelief. I feel so happy inside I almost forget to explain to him why I'm home and how I got here. He doesn’t question me, he is just happy to see me. As he walks me inside our apartment I find everything exactly how I left it. Walking towards my mother in the kitchen, I hear my father’s voice calling my mother so excitedly. His voice sounds so much more real in person than over a long distance telephone call. The first part of our apartment leads to our dining area. I can see the lines in our light blue carpet from where my mom had vacuumed just minutes ago. The chairs are pushed in exactly where they belong, on top of the carpet’s worn spots. The curtains are blue with little silver diamonds embroidered into them and match our carpet. When I think of home, the first thing I think of is our family meals in the dining area. This is where our family comes together to be close. The dining room is a favorite place for us to be even before meals since you can get a clear view of my mom preparing the meal. Since it is mid day almost lunch, the light is coming in through the kitchen window and the smell of lunch being prepared is in the air. The sharp smell of cut onions and bell peppers dominate th e room.! I stand with my father for a second as we watch my mother’...

Reaserch Proposal, outline and theoretical framework Thesis

Reaserch Proposal, outline and theoretical framework - Thesis Example With a Rs. 200 billion investment, the industry now gives a total production of 39 million tons against only 17 million tons in 2002. The cement manufacturers added 8 million tonnes to the capacity and the total production are expected to be 45 million tonnes by the end of 2010. Cement Industry entered in the export market in a big way in fiscal 2007-08. The domestic consumption too has doubled over the last few years because of buoyancy in housing sector. The biggest advantage of domestic cement industry is the availability in abundance of limestone, which is its primary raw material. Local coal may be able to replace imported coal and there is going to rise in demand, both at home and in export market. However, rising trend is expected to be short-lived due to higher interest rates and inflationary concerns are likely to make it disadvantageous for the investors to enter the construction industry. The cement industry also has challenges to face like rising fuel costs (furnace oil, coal) and political instability as a main contributing factor for pushing up production cost. Cost of utilities, labour, transportation and financial charges have also increased simultaneously. Moreover recent recession in the Financing Sector and financial crises has badly affected the projects financed by Financial Institutions and especially stretch the construction activities. This thesis intends to examine these issues and see how they will impact on the company Lucky Cement Limited. How far will Lucky Cement be able to overcome the challenges facing it as a result of the changing economic situation? Will the global economic slowdown, combined with high interest rates, inflationary concerns and political instability pose a series problem for the company? The problems facing Lucky Cement Limited are closely related to the changing economy and this thesis will attempt a financial analysis of the company in

MGMT Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

MGMT - Essay Example The transition from a senior Finance student to a young professional in a reputable organization is a challenging process. The preparation process for this big change involves searching for reputable companies that have programs for absorbing fresh graduates. The search led to a chance in a reputable financial institution that is willing to hire me once I finish my final year. It also entails analyzing factors like shelter and the most suitable area in terms of cost and access to essential infrastructure. Therefore, it is necessary to prepare some little funds to help in securing shelter and food before settling in the new job. The change signifies a big career development because it is the step sets a student on a path to achieving big goals in life. The greatest personal challenge in this change is the fact that I have to meet new people and adapt to a new environment. The uncertainty associated with success makes the process hard to manage. The greatest organizational challenge is fitting into new teams and forming good relationships in the company. I am not sure of many things, which makes it difficult to prepare for the first day when I get to meet everyone. It would take time to form frigid friendships. The achievement of my goal to become an established professional can be hindered by organizational issues like the lack of facilitating factors, ambiguity, and lack of teamwork. An organization that has no framework that supports young graduates makes it difficult to get a practical sense of being a Finance professional. I will propose for the organization leadership to start programs that prepare senior students on adapting to the professional world after school. The achievement of my objective to become an established professional will be an addition to the organization. The suggestion to start programs to recruit senior students provides the organization with a chance to get the best talents. I will

To what extent do you consider that women's political activism in the Essay

To what extent do you consider that women's political activism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries was predominantly concerened with women's suffrag - Essay Example The campaign to abolish slavery, the temperance unions, the property right reform movements, marriage and divorce legislation reforms, birth control awareness movements to socialist and Marxist causes all had substantial feminine influence and presence. Women leaders emerged in various fields and they by their example dispelled the notion of women as inherently weak beings. Despite this overwhelming tide of feminist causes, suffrage or the fight by women to enfranchise themselves held a truly unique position. It was the domineering demand of the time, as is evidenced in the literature of the era. The common belief was that the right to vote would enable women to attain all the other rights. The fact that the male political institutions were reluctant to grant enfranchise to women constantly reminded them of their second class citizenship within the state. The movement brought together women from all walks of life and drew supporters that belonged to the social high class, the working middle class, the lower classes and even people from the slums. The activists conducted rallies and marches that attracted overwhelming public support and sympathy. Organizations formed by women to advocate the cause of their suffrage were formed all over the world far outnumbering any similar associations for other reform movements. Women showed a sense of global sisterhood for championing the right to enfranchisement. When women won the vote in Australia and New Zealand, their counterparts in the United States of America and the United Kingdom argued their cases as examples before their legislatures. Leaders of the movement in both the sides of the Atlantic visited each other very often and exchanged ideas. Very early on in the movement it had become evident that women winning the vote in any one country of the industrialized west would pave the way for social taboos to be broken down everywhere else. This sense of unity,

History of the Concept of Hegemony and Power

History of the Concept of Hegemony and Power The concept of hegemony is notoriously difficult to quantify both in concrete political terms and in a less tangible philosophical manner. Moreover, in a world increasingly divided upon religious as opposed to ideological lines, the concept of hegemony has suffered from a certain crisis of relevance whereby it would seem that the preponderance of resources has indeed become the central precept for the paradigm per se; whereby, furthermore, economic and cultural imperialism have united to ensure the dominance of one geo political system within the international order in the vacuum created by the dissolution of ideology and the triumph of multi national capitalism. Yet all is not quite as it seems in the modern international sphere. Current events have a distinctly repetitive feel but, at the same time, the international relations landscape is changing and re configuring its boundaries with such rapidity and vigour that definitions and sweeping statements are deemed, correctly, to be o ut of place concerning any particular sphere of international relations. Certainly, the broader subject of hegemony and inter state communication is of utmost importance in the comprehension of the new world order, though keeping track of new theories is an essentially difficult, contradictory experience, particularly at the dawn of the twenty first century. As Benno Teschke (2003:1) explains in the opening chapter of his book, The Myth of 1648, the entire subject of contemporary international relations theory is in a constant state of flux, inspired by the death of the nation state and the advent of post modernity. â€Å"The classical Westphalian system, rooted in the primacy of the modern, territorially bounded sovereign state, is being replaced by a post territorial, post modern global order. The old logic of geopolitical security is being subordinated to geo economics, multi level global governance, or the demands of a multi actor international civil society. A fundamental transformation in the structure of the international system and its rules of conflict and co operation is unfolding before our eyes.† For the purposes of the essay, it will be necessary to analyse the concept of hegemony from its origins to see how it has evolved over time and where its relevance might lie within todays post structuralist society, taking a chronological view so as to see how its conceptual meaning has altered along the way. It will likewise be necessary to examine international economic realities and histories as well as political instances of hegemony to highlight the essential duality between continuity and change – in other words, how the past might help us to better understand the present and the future, yet also how the current world order presents unique problems that were of no relevance in the past, which necessarily makes an overall academic judgement more problematic. First a definition of hegemony must be attempted. Within the context of this essay, it is extremely important to comprehend the inherently different strands of hegemony: political, military, economic and cultural. Even more noteworthy is the general interchange that is apparent between the above factors – politics merges with economics and military helps to define any given national culture, which, in turn, means that hegemony is very difficult to quantify in the essentially narrow conceptual terms of simply a preponderance of resources. It will be shown that, throughout recorded history, nations and states have used a combination of factors to control other states, all designed to increase the security of the region and underwrite the strength of the dominant geo political power. Each nation and state that has enjoyed a period of relative dominance has chosen, either through external circumstances that have been thrust upon the rulers or via a conscious, calculated ideologica l choice, to use one of the above themes of hegemony to perpetuate its power base. When a group of people takes control over the fate of another it is never via only one of the above strands – political, military, economic or cultural. Rather, there always exists a concoction of more than one of the dominant conceptual themes to achieve the sum of hegemony and though much has changed throughout the course of history, this central precept remains difficult to ignore. The key player in any discussion pertaining to hegemony and the preponderance of resources has to be the state. Certainly, as far as G. John Ikenberry (1986:53) is concerned, the interaction between any given domestic and international political economy has always been at the epicentre of international relations theory and the comprehension of the rule of empire and state elites lies in understanding the ultimate power that the state has always possessed. â€Å"As administrative and coercive organisations, states are embedded in complex political and economic environments and have a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. Although they vary considerably, they have several elements in common. All states make exclusive claims to the coercive and juridical control of particular territories, and they also make special claims to the definition and representation of broad national interests.† In conceptual terms, hegemony is best understood as the expression of societys ruling classes over the majority of the nation or state over whom they propose to rule. Gramsci (1971:328), the interwar international relations academic and political prisoner who spent his final years behind bars in Mussolinis Italy, describes hegemony as, â€Å"a conception of the world that is implicitly manifest in art, in law, in economic activity and in all manifestations of individual and collective life.† Gramsci here describes cultural hegemony, which was of particular relevance when he was writing in the 1930s, in a world that was dominated by ideological concerns. This type of hegemony and cultural control is a constant political reality that has been a feature of culture and society since the first recorded migrations of man. Never has hegemony as an ideal simply been confined to the realms of natural resources and economic might; it has always been an intangible equation of political power expressed through the elite of any particular nation, state or empire. The much celebrated Athenians, for example, made hegemony an everyday feature of the ancient world, whereby people were defined via their status within the broader Greek political and cultural hierarchy. The Greeks underscored their cultural ideal of hegemony with language and politics, especially the concept of citizenship, which remains a key feature in the study of political and cultural hegemony today. The United States today uses its visa system, for example, to differentiate between alien visitors from within the wider plates of the hegemony that it has created. In the ancient world, Plato and Aristotle grouped the various bands of hegemony together to form what they saw as civilisation. Therefore, to be an Athenian Greek was to be a civilised member of the hegemony of the nascent nation state; to be a barbarian was to be an uncivilised member of the outposts of society, the parts where hegemony had hitherto failed to penetrate as a paradigm and as a cultural and economic force. This phenomenon has since been mirrored in the twenty first century with President Bushs with us or against us stance to global terrorism, where hegemony is once again used as the primary force in the perpetuation of the dominant military, political and economic power of the epoch. Ancient cultures used the acquisition of foreign resources to underline their superior military and cultural power, although it should be noted that the technology and logistics did not then exist to ensure the movement of goods and services across inter state borders so that the preponderance of resources could not become the only outlet of hegemony as a concept. The Middle East trade route, for instance, remained a largely autonomous cultural, political and economic region in spite of the combined power of the Greek and Roman Empires, curtailing efforts at building an Empire from the sole premise of a sound economic base. Therefore, in the ancient world, hegemony meant much more than a preponderance of resources. It implied tangible political and citizenry rights and access to a pre defined status quo that was welded by the elite members of the state and continually updated and re defined by the men and women who had access to power within the machinations of the state. Indeed, the central role of the human actors within the state system remain as relevant today as they were in the ancient world and to dismiss their relevance as secondary to the preponderance of resources would be to misinterpret the dynamics of inter state governance. Individual diplomats, ministers, parties and politics will always have a bearing on the future of both international relations as well as the concept of hegemony where economic resources are only one factor in a much larger pyramid of political and economic concerns. It thus becomes apparent that hegemony must co exist with the broader notion of empire, which is itself constructed upon the solid foundations of economic dynamism garnered through the procurement of resources. The notion of empire altered irrevocably during the dawn of modern history where industrialisation proved to be the catalyst for the significant, seismic shift in the view of hegemony as cultural, economic and political benchmark. The nineteenth century was indeed a watershed in terms of the re drawing of the conceptual parameters of hegemony. The Victorian era saw the traditional European empires of France, Belgium, Britain and Germany use their vast military and economic superiority to carve up the undeveloped world amongst each other with the procurement of raw materials and economic resources utilised as the main motivation for extra territorial action. Without doubt, it is at this juncture in world history that the preponderance of resources becomes the pre eminent factor in the power of hegemony and cultural imperialism. The Scramble for Africa, for instance, constituted a devouring of the worlds finest natural resources and raw materials; resources that were unavailable in Europe were discovered in seemingly endless abundance in Africa and the poor political and social infrastructure of the indigenous tribes meant that, militarily, it was a case of simply buying off the key local decision makers and men of influence to ensure European preponderance of locally based economic wealth. Furthermore, unlike the false promise of El Dorado that hampered the conquistadores in Latin America, the lure of previously unimaginable wealth in Africa was the determining factor behind the unprecedented and swift carving up of the African continent. The impulse for hegemony, in this instance, was therefore the possibility of individual accumulation of economic empire as well as the broader national acquisition of another nations indigenous wealth. Charles Tilly (1985:172) explains how the extraction of resources from local producers and traders in Africa was the most important development for the edification of European hegemony in the undeveloped world and for the structure of the contemporary world order today. â€Å"The quest inevitably involved them in establishing regular access to capitalists who could supply and arrange credit, and to imposing one form of regular taxation or another on the people and activities within their sphere of control.† Industrialisation was therefore the central difference between nineteenth century views of imperial hegemony and that which was witnessed in the ancient and medieval worlds. Resources became, for the first time, the main concern of empire builders. This period in world history is also important for what it implies about the motives of the European leaders and rulers who embarked upon their scramble for Africas resources. What is immediately noticeable when reading the primary sources of these explorers was the way in which they attempted to hide their true (economic) motive from view. The first British travellers to the dark continent promulgated the view that the Europeans were on a civilising mission to save the Africans from a life of pagan sin. Moreover, they said, their religious and missionary zeal would inevitably rub off on the political and economic mood of the continent so that, in effect, the Africans would wish to copy their European partners in order to better help thems elves in the long term; politically, economically and socially. To achieve this end, the Europeans thus tied the notion of political territorial acquisition to the preponderance of resources by controlling the mechanisms of the fledgling states as well as the production of raw materials and natural resources. The nineteenth century partition of the undeveloped world by the most powerful industrial states of the age thus left a legacy that is of the utmost relevance for the topic of hegemony in todays twenty first century society. As economic resources become increasingly scarce in the contemporary world, the major Western powers must find ways of securing the holding of resources while covering up the raw economic reasons for doing so. One can see, as Chomsky and Vidal attest, a certain similarity between the contemporary US symptom of national security and the war on terror and the Victorian ideal of a missionary zeal. Significantly, both propaganda spins fail to recognise that the preponderance of resources is the real reason why these states have found themselves fighting foreign wars and stationing troops so very far from their own national borders in the recent past. Of added significance was the fact that the Victorian experimentation with imperialism showed, for the first time, how a state might achieve supreme power with resources and capital based outside of the national territorial borders. Susan Strange (1988:2) sees this as the most important step in the development of true imperial hegemony in the West; the point where a modern nation has the ability to dictate key economic policy far beyond its own national, geo political borders. â€Å"The location of productive capacity is far less important than the location of the people who maker the decisions on what is to be produced, where and how, and who design, direct and manage to sell successfully on a world market.† At this point it makes sense to shift the focus of our investigation from a broader viewpoint of historical instances of hegemony to a dissection of the most important contemporary topic within the confines of the essay title. The key contemporary actor within the study, without a doubt, must be the United States, the source of the preponderance of twenty first century economic resources and the still the most potent post modern military force on the planet. As the eminent British historian, E.H. Carr (1992:292), writing on the eve of the Second World War, testified, hegemony is a by product of realism; an essentially Darwinist view of politics that suggests a discernibly detectable survival of the fittest in international affairs. The unassailable American hegemony of the post modern age is best understood within this wholly realist context. â€Å"To attempt to ignore power as a decisive factor in every political situation is purely utopian. It is scarcely less utopian to imagine an international order built on a coalition of states, each striving to defend and assert its own interests.† Since 1945 the USA has built its empire upon the twin pillars of the military and its insatiable consumer economy, even going so far as to re model the state to the tune of the desires of the political economy. The National Security Act (1947), for example, which oversaw the formation of the CIA, was the first in a long history of decrees and acts designed to ensure the longevity of the republican model and the destruction of all of its ideological enemies in the process. Gore Vidal (2004:95 96) explains the dynamic nature of American national security policy, post 1945, a policy that deemed aggression as the best form of political and economic defence. â€Å"When Japan surrendered, the United States was faced with a choice: either disarm, as we had done in the past and enjoy the prosperity that comes from releasing so much wealth and energy into the private sector, or maintain ourselves on a fully military basis, which would mean a tight control over our allies and such conquered provinces as West Germany, Italy and Japan.† It is important to understand that Washington wishes its control of the globe not to be limited to its dominance of world economic resources; rather, hegemony, as it is understood in 2005, is a varied political, economic and cultural phenomenon that wishes to export the very ethos of the United States as well as importing the wealth generated by the nations pre eminent economic position. To date, the United States has used language, technology and the military to acquire its vast array of economic resources and likewise uses its dynamic corporate ethic to underpin the strategies of the imperial national government. Therefore, to see the preponderance of resources as the only specific aim of American hegemony in the twenty first century is to miss the point entirely. As previously outlined, the American government understands the essential interplay between the various features of hegemony. Certainly, the USA has used economics as its basis for the extension of power witnessed since 1 945 but the ideology of the most awesome capitalist country on the planet has been held in place via the spread of its symbolic features to every corner of the globe (except, of course, for large swathes of the Middle East, which is a source of much of the antagonism between the two diametrically opposed sections of the new global economy). Various international relations commentators have noted the way in which imperial America uses brand names such as MacDonalds and Nike to increase the economic and cultural hegemony of the US Empire, leaving fast food restaurants and designer clothes chains as castles by proxy. As Chomsky (2003:13) succinctly puts it: â€Å"The goal of the imperial grand strategy is to prevent any challenge to the power, position and prestige of the United States.† Theories have abounded concerning the so called decline of American hegemony, largely circulating since the oil crisis in the 1970s, which first highlighted the fragility of the preponderance of key natural resources in the post modern world. Susan Strange disagrees fundamentally with international relations commentators such as Nye, who see Americas decline as an inevitable by product of the notion of both hegemony and Empire, essentially dictating that from Rome to Byzantium to Britain any attempt to secure global pre eminence must end in the destruction of that political and economic model. She argues that the USA is a unique case that shows no signs of the fragmentation that beset its historical precedents. Essentially, this means that US notions of hegemony are not solely tied to economic factors pertaining to the preponderance of resources; its survival and indeed growth rests upon the fact that the USA ideal of hegemony is far more flexible than many critics give it credit f or. As Cox (2005:21) underscores, the issue of American hegemony entails far more than a swelling of the national treasury at the expense of extra territorial economic resources. â€Å"One of the more obvious objections to the idea of a specific American empire is that, unlike the real empires in the past, the United States has not acquired, and does not seek to acquire the territory of others. This in turn has been allied to another obvious objection: that the United States has often championed the cause of political freedom in the world. How then can one talk of empire when one of the United States obvious impulses abroad has been to advance the cause of national democracy and self determination?† The issue of hegemony in contemporary times is further hampered by the ambiguity and uncertainty that surrounds the ultra contentious geo political and economic topic of globalisation. Not only have scholars found globalisation extremely difficult to define but it also poses unique problems of conceptual bracketing. It is supposedly an economic question (intrinsically tied to the preponderance of resources) yet in practice, globalisation appears to be little more than an extension of American political hegemony, namely the spread of democracy to every reach of the globe as the initial platform on which to launch a visionary global hegemony. Whereas the nineteenth century European empires formulated the concept of the preponderance of natural resources as the most vital step on the way to the establishment of their brand of hegemony, the Americans in the twenty first century have used technology, particularly their corporate dominance of new media and the Internet to strengthen their dominant position in the world economy. Globalisation therefore is tantamount to Westernisation, which is itself a direct descendent of Americanisation. According to Sinclair et al (2004:297), â€Å"world patterns of communication flow, both in density and direction, mirror the system of domination in the economic and political order,† and in this way it can be shown how US hegemony is built upon sterner raw materials than the mere preponderance of economic resources. Indeed, logic dictates that if the USAs global hegemony was only standing upon the prevalence of resources, then its position would be nothing like as contentious as it is in the broader world order, constituting the front line of the new global disorder, as Robert Harvey describes it. Indeed, Harvey (2003:455) already views the concept of global hegemony as outdated, requiring five separate but interconnecting strands of economic and politic pro action to keep the status quo alive in the future. â€Å"These then are the five great areas of change necessary to avoid a state of global political economic anarchy: the establishment of superpower policing to combat terrorism and to prevent conflicts breaking out all over the world, through an efficient system of regional alliances and deterrents, backed up by the threat of major superpower intervention; the widening and deepening of global democracy; the regulation of the global economy through co operation between the three economic super states of the next few decades – America, Europe and Japan – in co operation with regional groupings of the rest of the world; a gigantic government primed stimulus for demand and development in the three quarters of the developing world untouched by globalisation; and reform from within of the capitalist corporation.† Conclusion The analysis of hegemony and power bases throughout history shows that the prevalence of resources is but one factor in a multi faceted chain of command that requires a strong military and political infrastructure as well as a flourishing economic base to prevail. The upsurge in interest that the topic of hegemony has generated in recent years has been due to the power of the worlds one remaining superpower alone. Hegemony has become synonymous with Americas quest for global dominance and various commentators have cited the contemporary â€Å"war on terror† as nothing but a smokescreen for the increasing garnering of resources, particularly oil in the Middle East. Indeed, Vidal (2004:7) compares the â€Å"war on terror† to a â€Å"war on dandruff†; such is his confusion over what the notion actually means. There is no doubt that it is this perceived neo imperialism that is at the heart of the current negativity surrounding the concept of hegemony and its continued association with solely (Western) economic motives. However, it should be noted that a significant change in the global order is currently under way, one in which the Americans will have to broker what Strange (1988:17) refers to as a series of â€Å"New Deals† with autonomous international states in order to remain a leading economic force. The advent of China, in particular, as the twenty first centurys most potent consumer and industrial society will undoubtedly challenge the very ideal of American and Western hegemony and will necessarily require a re drafting of the USAs preponderance of resources. Hegemony must, in effect, adapt to a discernible duality and spirit of inter state co operation that the concept has not known in the past. The concept of hegemony therefore has value far beyond the preponderance of res ources as the evolving concept of globalisation is in the process of emphasising. As globalisation begins to take hold as an economic, cultural and political reality, the effects of hegemony will be felt in all areas of the world that wish to be part of the dissolution of the concept of the nation state and the embracement of a new political and economic world order. History of the Concept of Hegemony and Power History of the Concept of Hegemony and Power The concept of hegemony is notoriously difficult to quantify both in concrete political terms and in a less tangible philosophical manner. Moreover, in a world increasingly divided upon religious as opposed to ideological lines, the concept of hegemony has suffered from a certain crisis of relevance whereby it would seem that the preponderance of resources has indeed become the central precept for the paradigm per se; whereby, furthermore, economic and cultural imperialism have united to ensure the dominance of one geo political system within the international order in the vacuum created by the dissolution of ideology and the triumph of multi national capitalism. Yet all is not quite as it seems in the modern international sphere. Current events have a distinctly repetitive feel but, at the same time, the international relations landscape is changing and re configuring its boundaries with such rapidity and vigour that definitions and sweeping statements are deemed, correctly, to be o ut of place concerning any particular sphere of international relations. Certainly, the broader subject of hegemony and inter state communication is of utmost importance in the comprehension of the new world order, though keeping track of new theories is an essentially difficult, contradictory experience, particularly at the dawn of the twenty first century. As Benno Teschke (2003:1) explains in the opening chapter of his book, The Myth of 1648, the entire subject of contemporary international relations theory is in a constant state of flux, inspired by the death of the nation state and the advent of post modernity. â€Å"The classical Westphalian system, rooted in the primacy of the modern, territorially bounded sovereign state, is being replaced by a post territorial, post modern global order. The old logic of geopolitical security is being subordinated to geo economics, multi level global governance, or the demands of a multi actor international civil society. A fundamental transformation in the structure of the international system and its rules of conflict and co operation is unfolding before our eyes.† For the purposes of the essay, it will be necessary to analyse the concept of hegemony from its origins to see how it has evolved over time and where its relevance might lie within todays post structuralist society, taking a chronological view so as to see how its conceptual meaning has altered along the way. It will likewise be necessary to examine international economic realities and histories as well as political instances of hegemony to highlight the essential duality between continuity and change – in other words, how the past might help us to better understand the present and the future, yet also how the current world order presents unique problems that were of no relevance in the past, which necessarily makes an overall academic judgement more problematic. First a definition of hegemony must be attempted. Within the context of this essay, it is extremely important to comprehend the inherently different strands of hegemony: political, military, economic and cultural. Even more noteworthy is the general interchange that is apparent between the above factors – politics merges with economics and military helps to define any given national culture, which, in turn, means that hegemony is very difficult to quantify in the essentially narrow conceptual terms of simply a preponderance of resources. It will be shown that, throughout recorded history, nations and states have used a combination of factors to control other states, all designed to increase the security of the region and underwrite the strength of the dominant geo political power. Each nation and state that has enjoyed a period of relative dominance has chosen, either through external circumstances that have been thrust upon the rulers or via a conscious, calculated ideologica l choice, to use one of the above themes of hegemony to perpetuate its power base. When a group of people takes control over the fate of another it is never via only one of the above strands – political, military, economic or cultural. Rather, there always exists a concoction of more than one of the dominant conceptual themes to achieve the sum of hegemony and though much has changed throughout the course of history, this central precept remains difficult to ignore. The key player in any discussion pertaining to hegemony and the preponderance of resources has to be the state. Certainly, as far as G. John Ikenberry (1986:53) is concerned, the interaction between any given domestic and international political economy has always been at the epicentre of international relations theory and the comprehension of the rule of empire and state elites lies in understanding the ultimate power that the state has always possessed. â€Å"As administrative and coercive organisations, states are embedded in complex political and economic environments and have a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. Although they vary considerably, they have several elements in common. All states make exclusive claims to the coercive and juridical control of particular territories, and they also make special claims to the definition and representation of broad national interests.† In conceptual terms, hegemony is best understood as the expression of societys ruling classes over the majority of the nation or state over whom they propose to rule. Gramsci (1971:328), the interwar international relations academic and political prisoner who spent his final years behind bars in Mussolinis Italy, describes hegemony as, â€Å"a conception of the world that is implicitly manifest in art, in law, in economic activity and in all manifestations of individual and collective life.† Gramsci here describes cultural hegemony, which was of particular relevance when he was writing in the 1930s, in a world that was dominated by ideological concerns. This type of hegemony and cultural control is a constant political reality that has been a feature of culture and society since the first recorded migrations of man. Never has hegemony as an ideal simply been confined to the realms of natural resources and economic might; it has always been an intangible equation of political power expressed through the elite of any particular nation, state or empire. The much celebrated Athenians, for example, made hegemony an everyday feature of the ancient world, whereby people were defined via their status within the broader Greek political and cultural hierarchy. The Greeks underscored their cultural ideal of hegemony with language and politics, especially the concept of citizenship, which remains a key feature in the study of political and cultural hegemony today. The United States today uses its visa system, for example, to differentiate between alien visitors from within the wider plates of the hegemony that it has created. In the ancient world, Plato and Aristotle grouped the various bands of hegemony together to form what they saw as civilisation. Therefore, to be an Athenian Greek was to be a civilised member of the hegemony of the nascent nation state; to be a barbarian was to be an uncivilised member of the outposts of society, the parts where hegemony had hitherto failed to penetrate as a paradigm and as a cultural and economic force. This phenomenon has since been mirrored in the twenty first century with President Bushs with us or against us stance to global terrorism, where hegemony is once again used as the primary force in the perpetuation of the dominant military, political and economic power of the epoch. Ancient cultures used the acquisition of foreign resources to underline their superior military and cultural power, although it should be noted that the technology and logistics did not then exist to ensure the movement of goods and services across inter state borders so that the preponderance of resources could not become the only outlet of hegemony as a concept. The Middle East trade route, for instance, remained a largely autonomous cultural, political and economic region in spite of the combined power of the Greek and Roman Empires, curtailing efforts at building an Empire from the sole premise of a sound economic base. Therefore, in the ancient world, hegemony meant much more than a preponderance of resources. It implied tangible political and citizenry rights and access to a pre defined status quo that was welded by the elite members of the state and continually updated and re defined by the men and women who had access to power within the machinations of the state. Indeed, the central role of the human actors within the state system remain as relevant today as they were in the ancient world and to dismiss their relevance as secondary to the preponderance of resources would be to misinterpret the dynamics of inter state governance. Individual diplomats, ministers, parties and politics will always have a bearing on the future of both international relations as well as the concept of hegemony where economic resources are only one factor in a much larger pyramid of political and economic concerns. It thus becomes apparent that hegemony must co exist with the broader notion of empire, which is itself constructed upon the solid foundations of economic dynamism garnered through the procurement of resources. The notion of empire altered irrevocably during the dawn of modern history where industrialisation proved to be the catalyst for the significant, seismic shift in the view of hegemony as cultural, economic and political benchmark. The nineteenth century was indeed a watershed in terms of the re drawing of the conceptual parameters of hegemony. The Victorian era saw the traditional European empires of France, Belgium, Britain and Germany use their vast military and economic superiority to carve up the undeveloped world amongst each other with the procurement of raw materials and economic resources utilised as the main motivation for extra territorial action. Without doubt, it is at this juncture in world history that the preponderance of resources becomes the pre eminent factor in the power of hegemony and cultural imperialism. The Scramble for Africa, for instance, constituted a devouring of the worlds finest natural resources and raw materials; resources that were unavailable in Europe were discovered in seemingly endless abundance in Africa and the poor political and social infrastructure of the indigenous tribes meant that, militarily, it was a case of simply buying off the key local decision makers and men of influence to ensure European preponderance of locally based economic wealth. Furthermore, unlike the false promise of El Dorado that hampered the conquistadores in Latin America, the lure of previously unimaginable wealth in Africa was the determining factor behind the unprecedented and swift carving up of the African continent. The impulse for hegemony, in this instance, was therefore the possibility of individual accumulation of economic empire as well as the broader national acquisition of another nations indigenous wealth. Charles Tilly (1985:172) explains how the extraction of resources from local producers and traders in Africa was the most important development for the edification of European hegemony in the undeveloped world and for the structure of the contemporary world order today. â€Å"The quest inevitably involved them in establishing regular access to capitalists who could supply and arrange credit, and to imposing one form of regular taxation or another on the people and activities within their sphere of control.† Industrialisation was therefore the central difference between nineteenth century views of imperial hegemony and that which was witnessed in the ancient and medieval worlds. Resources became, for the first time, the main concern of empire builders. This period in world history is also important for what it implies about the motives of the European leaders and rulers who embarked upon their scramble for Africas resources. What is immediately noticeable when reading the primary sources of these explorers was the way in which they attempted to hide their true (economic) motive from view. The first British travellers to the dark continent promulgated the view that the Europeans were on a civilising mission to save the Africans from a life of pagan sin. Moreover, they said, their religious and missionary zeal would inevitably rub off on the political and economic mood of the continent so that, in effect, the Africans would wish to copy their European partners in order to better help thems elves in the long term; politically, economically and socially. To achieve this end, the Europeans thus tied the notion of political territorial acquisition to the preponderance of resources by controlling the mechanisms of the fledgling states as well as the production of raw materials and natural resources. The nineteenth century partition of the undeveloped world by the most powerful industrial states of the age thus left a legacy that is of the utmost relevance for the topic of hegemony in todays twenty first century society. As economic resources become increasingly scarce in the contemporary world, the major Western powers must find ways of securing the holding of resources while covering up the raw economic reasons for doing so. One can see, as Chomsky and Vidal attest, a certain similarity between the contemporary US symptom of national security and the war on terror and the Victorian ideal of a missionary zeal. Significantly, both propaganda spins fail to recognise that the preponderance of resources is the real reason why these states have found themselves fighting foreign wars and stationing troops so very far from their own national borders in the recent past. Of added significance was the fact that the Victorian experimentation with imperialism showed, for the first time, how a state might achieve supreme power with resources and capital based outside of the national territorial borders. Susan Strange (1988:2) sees this as the most important step in the development of true imperial hegemony in the West; the point where a modern nation has the ability to dictate key economic policy far beyond its own national, geo political borders. â€Å"The location of productive capacity is far less important than the location of the people who maker the decisions on what is to be produced, where and how, and who design, direct and manage to sell successfully on a world market.† At this point it makes sense to shift the focus of our investigation from a broader viewpoint of historical instances of hegemony to a dissection of the most important contemporary topic within the confines of the essay title. The key contemporary actor within the study, without a doubt, must be the United States, the source of the preponderance of twenty first century economic resources and the still the most potent post modern military force on the planet. As the eminent British historian, E.H. Carr (1992:292), writing on the eve of the Second World War, testified, hegemony is a by product of realism; an essentially Darwinist view of politics that suggests a discernibly detectable survival of the fittest in international affairs. The unassailable American hegemony of the post modern age is best understood within this wholly realist context. â€Å"To attempt to ignore power as a decisive factor in every political situation is purely utopian. It is scarcely less utopian to imagine an international order built on a coalition of states, each striving to defend and assert its own interests.† Since 1945 the USA has built its empire upon the twin pillars of the military and its insatiable consumer economy, even going so far as to re model the state to the tune of the desires of the political economy. The National Security Act (1947), for example, which oversaw the formation of the CIA, was the first in a long history of decrees and acts designed to ensure the longevity of the republican model and the destruction of all of its ideological enemies in the process. Gore Vidal (2004:95 96) explains the dynamic nature of American national security policy, post 1945, a policy that deemed aggression as the best form of political and economic defence. â€Å"When Japan surrendered, the United States was faced with a choice: either disarm, as we had done in the past and enjoy the prosperity that comes from releasing so much wealth and energy into the private sector, or maintain ourselves on a fully military basis, which would mean a tight control over our allies and such conquered provinces as West Germany, Italy and Japan.† It is important to understand that Washington wishes its control of the globe not to be limited to its dominance of world economic resources; rather, hegemony, as it is understood in 2005, is a varied political, economic and cultural phenomenon that wishes to export the very ethos of the United States as well as importing the wealth generated by the nations pre eminent economic position. To date, the United States has used language, technology and the military to acquire its vast array of economic resources and likewise uses its dynamic corporate ethic to underpin the strategies of the imperial national government. Therefore, to see the preponderance of resources as the only specific aim of American hegemony in the twenty first century is to miss the point entirely. As previously outlined, the American government understands the essential interplay between the various features of hegemony. Certainly, the USA has used economics as its basis for the extension of power witnessed since 1 945 but the ideology of the most awesome capitalist country on the planet has been held in place via the spread of its symbolic features to every corner of the globe (except, of course, for large swathes of the Middle East, which is a source of much of the antagonism between the two diametrically opposed sections of the new global economy). Various international relations commentators have noted the way in which imperial America uses brand names such as MacDonalds and Nike to increase the economic and cultural hegemony of the US Empire, leaving fast food restaurants and designer clothes chains as castles by proxy. As Chomsky (2003:13) succinctly puts it: â€Å"The goal of the imperial grand strategy is to prevent any challenge to the power, position and prestige of the United States.† Theories have abounded concerning the so called decline of American hegemony, largely circulating since the oil crisis in the 1970s, which first highlighted the fragility of the preponderance of key natural resources in the post modern world. Susan Strange disagrees fundamentally with international relations commentators such as Nye, who see Americas decline as an inevitable by product of the notion of both hegemony and Empire, essentially dictating that from Rome to Byzantium to Britain any attempt to secure global pre eminence must end in the destruction of that political and economic model. She argues that the USA is a unique case that shows no signs of the fragmentation that beset its historical precedents. Essentially, this means that US notions of hegemony are not solely tied to economic factors pertaining to the preponderance of resources; its survival and indeed growth rests upon the fact that the USA ideal of hegemony is far more flexible than many critics give it credit f or. As Cox (2005:21) underscores, the issue of American hegemony entails far more than a swelling of the national treasury at the expense of extra territorial economic resources. â€Å"One of the more obvious objections to the idea of a specific American empire is that, unlike the real empires in the past, the United States has not acquired, and does not seek to acquire the territory of others. This in turn has been allied to another obvious objection: that the United States has often championed the cause of political freedom in the world. How then can one talk of empire when one of the United States obvious impulses abroad has been to advance the cause of national democracy and self determination?† The issue of hegemony in contemporary times is further hampered by the ambiguity and uncertainty that surrounds the ultra contentious geo political and economic topic of globalisation. Not only have scholars found globalisation extremely difficult to define but it also poses unique problems of conceptual bracketing. It is supposedly an economic question (intrinsically tied to the preponderance of resources) yet in practice, globalisation appears to be little more than an extension of American political hegemony, namely the spread of democracy to every reach of the globe as the initial platform on which to launch a visionary global hegemony. Whereas the nineteenth century European empires formulated the concept of the preponderance of natural resources as the most vital step on the way to the establishment of their brand of hegemony, the Americans in the twenty first century have used technology, particularly their corporate dominance of new media and the Internet to strengthen their dominant position in the world economy. Globalisation therefore is tantamount to Westernisation, which is itself a direct descendent of Americanisation. According to Sinclair et al (2004:297), â€Å"world patterns of communication flow, both in density and direction, mirror the system of domination in the economic and political order,† and in this way it can be shown how US hegemony is built upon sterner raw materials than the mere preponderance of economic resources. Indeed, logic dictates that if the USAs global hegemony was only standing upon the prevalence of resources, then its position would be nothing like as contentious as it is in the broader world order, constituting the front line of the new global disorder, as Robert Harvey describes it. Indeed, Harvey (2003:455) already views the concept of global hegemony as outdated, requiring five separate but interconnecting strands of economic and politic pro action to keep the status quo alive in the future. â€Å"These then are the five great areas of change necessary to avoid a state of global political economic anarchy: the establishment of superpower policing to combat terrorism and to prevent conflicts breaking out all over the world, through an efficient system of regional alliances and deterrents, backed up by the threat of major superpower intervention; the widening and deepening of global democracy; the regulation of the global economy through co operation between the three economic super states of the next few decades – America, Europe and Japan – in co operation with regional groupings of the rest of the world; a gigantic government primed stimulus for demand and development in the three quarters of the developing world untouched by globalisation; and reform from within of the capitalist corporation.† Conclusion The analysis of hegemony and power bases throughout history shows that the prevalence of resources is but one factor in a multi faceted chain of command that requires a strong military and political infrastructure as well as a flourishing economic base to prevail. The upsurge in interest that the topic of hegemony has generated in recent years has been due to the power of the worlds one remaining superpower alone. Hegemony has become synonymous with Americas quest for global dominance and various commentators have cited the contemporary â€Å"war on terror† as nothing but a smokescreen for the increasing garnering of resources, particularly oil in the Middle East. Indeed, Vidal (2004:7) compares the â€Å"war on terror† to a â€Å"war on dandruff†; such is his confusion over what the notion actually means. There is no doubt that it is this perceived neo imperialism that is at the heart of the current negativity surrounding the concept of hegemony and its continued association with solely (Western) economic motives. However, it should be noted that a significant change in the global order is currently under way, one in which the Americans will have to broker what Strange (1988:17) refers to as a series of â€Å"New Deals† with autonomous international states in order to remain a leading economic force. The advent of China, in particular, as the twenty first centurys most potent consumer and industrial society will undoubtedly challenge the very ideal of American and Western hegemony and will necessarily require a re drafting of the USAs preponderance of resources. Hegemony must, in effect, adapt to a discernible duality and spirit of inter state co operation that the concept has not known in the past. The concept of hegemony therefore has value far beyond the preponderance of res ources as the evolving concept of globalisation is in the process of emphasising. As globalisation begins to take hold as an economic, cultural and political reality, the effects of hegemony will be felt in all areas of the world that wish to be part of the dissolution of the concept of the nation state and the embracement of a new political and economic world order.

The Great American Experiment Essay -- U.S. Politics

Yes we can, the rallying cry for the democratic candidate in the 2008 elections could be seen as a foreshadowing of what was to come. That candidate went on to win the election by nearly a 7 point margin, partially thanks to an overall higher voter turnout especially amongst the Hispanic, black and young demographics. Barack Obama’s 2008 victory is an example of how concentrating on voter turnout can lead to great success. In the wake of such a clear indication of the potential power of an increased voter turnout, one would assume that both parties would be doing everything they can to build on that trend; this however may not be the case. Does each party want higher turnout? Since nearly the beginning of our nation, the idea of higher voter turnout to elections has been a pet cause of one politician or another; each assuming such an increase would be to their benefit. This idea cannot be claimed by any one party either, as it shifts with the very political tides that guide much of politics. Usually it is the party out of power that perceives the greatest potential benefit in increasing turnout, and thus, changing the structure of the electorate. This pattern, however, has seemed to break apart in the latest elections. A new strategy has come into view recently, which may result in actually reversing the trend of increasing the electorate outright. So far in 2011, 14 states have enacted 19 new laws and 2 executive orders placing new restrictions on voting and registration, which could diminish voter turnout in 2012 (Weiser and Norden 2011). These laws cover a wide array of issues; ranging from restrictive voter registration and voter id laws, to even reducing the days which people were able to vote. The Brennan Center for Jus... ...n the multitude of ways both parties have to directly target and promote the turnout of their bases, there is no need for such retroactive tactics. We should all work towards improving participation in this great American experiment. Bibliography Ginsberg, Benjamin, Theodore J Lowi, and Margaret Weir. We The People, an introduction to american politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Co Ltd, 2011 Latinos for Reform. Don't Vote Latinos For Reform. October 18, 2010. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKFAiMbm1Fc U.S. Census Bureau. Newsroom: Voter Turnout Increases by 5 Million in 2008 Presidential Election. July 20, 2009. http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/voting/cb09-110.html Weiser, Wendy R, and Lawrence Norden. "Voting Law Changes in 2012." Brennan Center for Justice. 10 3, 2011. http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voting_law_changes_in_2012

Myths of the American Revolution

The American Revolution is a pivotal point in United States history, considering it was a main event in the creation of the United States itself. However, there are many myths surrounding it that are widely believed to be true. The main information we remember from elementary school and a lot of what textbooks and history teachers have taught us is at least partially incorrect. The main myth of the American Revolution is something that all US Americans, as a general rule, believe and agree with.It is something that forms the basis for our entire governmental system and policy of freedom as a country. According to A People’s History of the United States, Thomas Paine visualized the government presented in the Constitution would have a great common interest. He thought it would benefit all people equally, and in doing so, as Howard Zinn put it, he â€Å"lent himself perfectly to the myth of the Revolution. † That myth was that the Revolution was for the welfare of a unite d people.Contrary to what most US citizens believe and actively support, the United States was not separated from England because people wanted equality. The delegates who made the decision to declare independence and the ones who would most benefit from that were all basically middle-aged, property owning white men. These people made up a relatively small percentage of the population, and therefore the actions they took cannot be defined as for a united people.The people were not, in fact, united at all, but simply following the actions of the Continental Congress and acting out of self-interest for want of money and profit. There were even people who did not want to separate for Great Britain at all and were against independence. The wishes of these people were ignored, and so the idea of the US starting with equality that we all were brought up to believe, is in fact a myth caused by people who were lucky enough to get some land and wind up in a decision-making situation.

Does 16 and Pregnant Promote or Prevent Pregnancy? Essay

Many have seen or heard of the television series â€Å"16 and Pregnant.† In 2009 this series began with the intention to show teens how difficult it is to be a parent. While â€Å"16 and Pregnant† has been playing for many years now, the debate has been sparked whether the show promotes or prevents pregnancy. Many people think that â€Å"16 and Pregnant† promotes pregnancy. The show makes being a parent look more glamorous then difficult. They make it look easier and even more â€Å"fun† to be a teenage parent. Many teenagers who watch the show see girls becoming more and more famous. The girls start other shows or even end up in magazines. When young people see this it makes them think that they could become famous if they have a child. The show gives teenagers false hope that they will also get to be on a TV show if they have a baby at a young age. As the show goes on you see the teen parents with new houses, cars, and even new wardrobe and style. The â€Å"16 and Pregnant† stars get paid at least $75,000 a season depending on their contract. When teenagers see all the new things that they could have they get the idea that getting pregnant could reward them with many new things. The stars say they can’t finish school, and get a job because of the difficulty of caring for a child interferes with their time to do so. With the salary that they have they don’t have to worry much about getting a job. Teenagers might not want to have to work so they will think that if they get pregnant they won’t have to worry about it. When teenagers see the stars in magazines they will want to get pregnant so they could also be in magazines and on multiple shows. I believe that â€Å"16 and Pregnant† prevents pregnancy. The show is mostly accurate in showing how parenting is. It shows the actual difficulties of being a parent or having to deal with the decision of adoption. The young parents have to come to unwanted agreements with their child’s other parent and deal with custody through courts. It also shows how babies and children actually act and how difficult it is to take care of a child. There has  been an increase in the use of birth control and a drop in the amount of teenage births. â€Å"Social networking posts including the words ‘birth control’ increased by 23 percent.†(Kristof) Internet searches on birth control also increased. Regions where the show is watched more had â€Å"more of a drop in teen births† and there is overall â€Å"20,000 fewer teen births each year.†(Kristof) Those who say â€Å"16 and Pregnant† promotes pregnancy can agree that there has been an increase in the use of birth control. Also they can agree that there has been a decrease in teen pregnancy cases. Although these are true, there could be a different factor correlated to the increase in use of birth control. With an increase in the use of birth control there has been less cases of teen pregnancy. Many schools have sex education which helps teenagers understand the use of contraception. This could be a factor of the increase in birth control. Also, after watching â€Å"16 and Pregnant† many teenagers may have been persuaded to start using contraception. The increase of contraception use is preventing more teenagers from becoming pregnant. Reference Kristof, Nicholas. â€Å"TV Lowers Birthrate (Seriously).† The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 Mar. 2014. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.

Compare The Awakening To Madame Bovary Essays - Madame Bovary

Compare The Awakening To Madame Bovary Essays - Madame Bovary Compare The Awakening to Madame Bovary Kate Chopin's The Awakening and Gustave Flaubert's Madame Bovary are both tales of women indignant with their domestic situations; the distinct differences between the two books can be found in the authors' unique tones. Both authors weave similar themes into their writings such as, the escape from the monotony of domestic life, dissatisfaction with marital expectations and suicide. References to "fate" abound throughout both works. In The Awakening, Chopin uses fate to represent the expectations of Edna Pontellier's aristocratic society. Flaubert uses "fate" to portray his characters' compulsive methods of dealing with their guilt and rejecting of personal accountability. Both authors, however seem to believe that it is fate that oppresses these women; their creators view them subjectively, as if they were products of their respective environments. Chopin portrays Edna as an object, and she receives only the same respect as a possession. Edna's husband sees her as and looks, "...at his wife as one looks at a valuable piece of personal property which has suffered some damage." (P 2 : The Awakening) Chopin foils their marriage in that of the Ratignolles who, "...understood each other perfectly." She makes the classic mistake of comparing one's insides with others' outsides when she thinks, "If ever the fusion of two human begins into one has been accomplished on this sphere it was surely in their union." (P 56 : The Awakening) This sets the stage for her unhappiness, providing a point of contrast for her despondent marriage to Mr. Pontellier. She blames their marriage for their unhappiness declaring that, "...a wedding is one of the most lamentable spectacles on earth." (P 66 : The Awakening) She sees their lifetime pledge to fidelity and love as merely a social trap; the same forces that bind them oppress her. Simultaneously, Mademoiselle Reisz, who "...sent a keen tremor down Mrs. Pontellier's spinal column..." which perhaps is the tremor that marks the beginning of Edna's self discovery. "A certain light was beginning to dawn dimly within her, - the light which, showing the way, forbids it." (P 13 : The Awakening) As she explores her world, other men, swimming, and her other romantic pursuits, she experiences her epiphany; she finds that the world has much to offer and kills herself in the lamentation of that which she cannot truly have. Edna finds herself filled with "An indescribable oppression, which seemed to generate in some unfamiliar part of her consciousness...She did not sit there inwardly upbraiding her husband, lamenting at Fate, which had directed her footsteps to the path which they had taken." (P 6 : The Awakening) Edna takes an active part in finding happiness within her world. She pursues her swimming and other men in the interest of ending the monotony she lives with as a result of her being confined into her aristocratic society. Emma Bovary, being both protagonist and antagonist, by contrast experiences her epiphany solely at death. She takes the arsenic when she realizes all that she will not get from what she already has. Her light of discovery is found only in the darkness of her death. She laments not what she does not possess, but what happiness her world does not give her. Hers is a story of spiritual emptiness and foolish idealism. "...Emma tried to find out what one meant exactly in life by the words bliss, passion, ecstasy, that had seemed to her so beautiful in books." (P 24 : Madame Bovary) She searches for that which is found in the fantasy world of books in her own world and falls short of her expectations. Charles, her husband, she takes for granted as "She would have done so to the logs in the fireplace or to the pendulum of the clock." (P 44 : Madame Bovary) Flaubert allows her to see Charles as an object just as Mr. Pontellier sees his wife as an object. Although the characters are of the op posite sex, leaving both of the women displeased with their men, and moreover, their lives. Edna and Emma both use people (Emma is also used herself) when needed, and are discarded when they have outlived their usefulness: "Charles was someone to talk to, an ever-open ear, an

Addictions in the 21st Century Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Addictions in the 21st Century - Essay Example The main trends incorporate internet surfing, pornography viewing, video gaming and social media. It can involve a single habit or a compilation of several habits within the same range. Addiction is experienced when the participants are constantly plugged into these devises. He states that anything else comes as a distraction. Alexander identifies the â€Å"tragically cool† group as the group that heavily relies on digital technology in their day-to-day life. Their daily interactions involve such activities; hence, they are the most prone to addiction. Indeed, Alexander’s assertions about addiction type 3 are valid. This is because of the increasing numbers of peoples checking into rehabilitative support groups, and the increased legal cases involving internet games addictions. An example was the litigation of the NCsoft Company, a manufacturer of video games. Smallwood sued the company because of his addiction to the Lineage II game. The case was not dismissed as a frivolous suit; thus, the judges found it valid to go through trial. Additionally, countries such as China and Korea consider video games addiction as the primary cause of health complications in their country. Moreover, Addiction 3 factors are gaining commendable attention from researches, medics and the legal world. There are more video game cases on litigation in the subsequent years. Online game producers are also compelled to display warning signs to the members. There are also compelled to derive safer methods to playing these games. Learning institutions and work places have installed devices to obstruct social sites and internet games. This is because of the perceived concern of the effects of internet addictions on time management and work quality. The human nature is viable to irrepressible compulsion thus everyone can easily be addicted. He asserts that addiction is an extrapolated human condition

Professional Practice (PGCE) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words - 1

Professional Practice (PGCE) - Essay Example The teachers understood me as a student and that gave me a valuable lesson - that interacting, communicating and engaging ones students in a dialog helps in sharing of ideas and experiences and enhances our knowledge about the subject (Steffe & Gale, 1995). Such interaction also helped me realize the significance of active learning whereby students can learn merely through communicating with one another and through exchanging of ideas. It also taught me to be responsible and responsive to my students. The collaborative learning approach used in classrooms enabled holistic learning and development of the students (Cohen, Brody and Sapon-Shevin, 2012) and helped in reflecting on the concepts learned. The effectiveness with which the course was designed encouraged me to experiment with diverse ideas and approaches, which can be used in class while teaching and also equipped me with adequate knowledge and skills to address the various challenges that I would encounter during my role as a teacher. During the course of my study I had an opportunity to observe other teachers as well as be observed by other teachers and in the process I learned the various teaching approaches and the implication of using them in a classroom setting. I also learned to develop lesson plans and completed five modules which includes Introduction to teaching and learning, planning and assessing, applying theory to practice, reflective practice, curriculum and professional practice. Teacher observation helped me learn about skills such as classroom management, and the benefit of a student-focused approach. It helped in the overall professional development as a teacher. Through this course I realized the significance of observation and the manner in which it helps in self-reflection and influence the way we teach, since it exposes the teachers to new innovative methods of teaching and help in creating a professional learning environment with the