Innate Evil and the Temptations of the Devil Essay -- American Literat

Early American literature is unique in that it is abundantly influenced by Biblical themes and ideas. Being that this country was founded by the strict, fundamentalist Puritans, it seems obvious that the literature would be pervaded by such things as the presence of evil and its impact on goodness and holiness. The â€Å"evil† that is found in Melville and Hawthorne is interesting because it reflects the Biblical idea of evil tempting good and attempting to convert it rather than simply destroy it. The stories of Poe reflect the turmoil and evil that is contained within a person and tempts him or her to commit evil acts. What is fascinating about this literature is that in Billy Budd, The Scarlet Letter, â€Å"The Imp of the Perverse,† and â€Å"William Wilson,† evil is always victorious. In today’s society, it is tempting to read stories and watch films in which good always prevails and the characters live happily ever after; however, at the time of these writings, there was still an air of Calvinism and the lasting idea that mankind is innately evil. Modern society is uncomfortable with the term â€Å"evil,† but at the time of this literature, it was a common term that was used freely and had clear definitions. Therefore, because of the strong Biblical influence, the aforementioned tales are centered on this presence of evil and its temptation and torturing of that which is holy until goodness is overcome. Melville’s Billy Budd is a tale in which the Biblical influence is quite obvious. There are many images of snakes and serpents, which is often symbolic of Satan. Many critics read the story as an allegory to the Christ story in which Billy and Claggart â€Å"play the roles of Jesus and Judas† (Wright 133). There is imagery throughout th... ...he adultery and temptations in The Scarlet Letter, and the murder in both â€Å"The Imp of the Perverse† and â€Å"William Wilson† all were easily classified as evil. Today, many of these actions would be subscribed to the doers’ childhoods or to other traumatic experiences and the people themselves would not necessarily be held responsible. It is difficult in today’s society to classify good and evil because those areas are no longer black and white; however, in early American times, evil was easy to identify and was seen as the influence of the devil. The aforementioned literature of Melville, Hawthorne, and Poe all contains tremendous influence from the Bible and therefore displays this evil temptation from the devil himself. Sadly, in each of the stories, evil always seems to triumph, and the characters are forced to realize their own wickedness and depravities.

The United States Hypocrisy

The United States hypocrisy is evident when the â€Å"land of the free and home of the brave† came at the cost of Native American cultural genocide and near physical destruction. The term genocide was first used by Polish Journalists Raphael Lenin in his book â€Å"Axis Rule in Occupied Europe.† which was published in 1944. Lenkin defined genocide as the intentional mass killing of members of a nation and/or executing acts with the intention of destroying the basic foundations of life, aiming to destroy the group as a whole. The term â€Å"basic foundations of life† refer to the culture, language, religion, established public and social institutions, liberty and personal safety, health and dignity. After coining the term, Linken petitioned the United Nations to criminalize genocide, which they did in 1948. The United Nations coined their own term. Defining genocide as the intentional killing of or causing serious physical or mental harm to members of a group, deliberately inflicting life conditions calculated to bring physical destruction to a group, preventing births and transferring children forcibly from one group or another. Both definitions are broad, but the use of â€Å"intention† has lead to controversy regarding Native Americans and the atrocities committed by the United States and their government. Whether the U.S intentionally slaughtered Natives with the intention of extermination is of great controversy. Simply because there was no official decree passed by Congress calling for their demise. However, the US demonstrated genocidal mentality on multiple occasions that resulted in the massacre of hundreds of indigenous people. This mentality was exhibited by Secretary of War, Henry Knox in 1790 when he ordered the US army to â€Å"extirpate, utterly, if possible,† a group of natives refusing to cede their land in Ohio. President Jefferson also demonstrated the same mentality a few years later when faced with the altercations with different Indians. â€Å"If we are ever constrained to lifting the hatchet against any tribe, we will never lay it down till that tribe is exterminated or driven beyond Mississippi.† Later adding â€Å"They will kill some of us, we will kill all of them.† Both the Secretary of State and President of the US made it perfectly clear extermination was the only option when Natives refused to give their land. But this was not the first case of a president exhibiting such intolerant views. In 1799 the US declared war on the Haudenosaunee tribe for raids that had set back colonial settlement. â€Å"The objective of this war was â€Å"the total destruction and devastation of their settlements. † – George Washington. In this war, the US directly murdered 200 natives (Natives). When the topic of settlers and native American interactions arise, the common legend of Smallpox infested blankets being distributed to Natives by the settlers is widely debatable due to lack of hard evidence. Some argue it never happened, but on June 23rd, 1763 Captain William Trent wrote in his journal â€Å"We gave them two blankets and a handkerchief out if the Smallpox hospital†¦ I hope it will have its desired effects. † As a result, 60-80 Native died of Smallpox (Smallpox). It is clear that from the early years' colonial settlement that the high ranking US officials possessed a genocidal mentality regarding the indigenous people who resided there first. On May 28th, 1830 Congress passed the Indian removal act. This policy, was vigorously promoted by Andrew Jackson, provided the opportunity for the US to negotiate with the natives for their land with the promise of compensation. Instead of buying the land, The US used brute force to obtain it. The five â€Å"civilized tribes', Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole, creek, and Cherokee initially refused to negotiate. Many members of these tribes were trying to assimilate into American society. In 1835 self-appointed representatives from the Cherokee tribe drafted the Treaty of Echota. The treaty proposed trading of all Cherokee lands East of Mississippi River for five million dollars along with relocation assistance and compensation for lost property. The federal government agreed to these terms but most of the Cherokee felt betrayed. BY 1838 only two thousand had left for the reservation (Native), in response the government appointed General Winfield Scott and seven thousand other soldiers to handle the altercation. Their method of peace was to remove the natives and loot their homes. Afterwards, they forced the Natives to march 1200+ miles west, During this excruciating journey, they were not given food water or supplies. Over five thousand died from starvation, malnutrition and several flue epidemics including Whooping Cough, Typhus, Dysentery and Cholera. This journey was known as the Trail of Tears, and twenty-five per cent of these tribes died. Despite relocating the Native Americans and seizing land, the US still possessed presenting feelings towards natives. In the 1850s California Gold Rush natives were still being persecuted against and then enslaved. Should they not comply with treaties colonists would â€Å"make war..which must of necessity be one of extermination to many of the tribes.† stated by Californian Governor John McDougal in 1851 (Natives). A prime example of Native enslavement was exhibited on John Sutter's private mill, where gold was discovered. Sutter was one of the most influential landowners at the time, enslaving hundred of natives who resided on his property and controlling them with fear. The Natives were used for labour and as a makeshift militia to protect Sutter's 50,000 acres and trading centre. Sutter treated the native people horrendously. He was friendly at first but began to interfere with tribe customs and marriages. A former employee, Heinrich Lienhard accused Sutter of forming a Harlem and molesting young native girls. HIs method of control was fear. He was not hesitant to whip or kill noncompliant natives. Visitors noted â€Å"Sutter keeps 600-800 Indians in a complete stage of slavery†, feeding them leftover bread wheat from troughs while they slept in locked rooms without furniture. (Jeffery). The use of Native labour during the gold rush was common, even more so was the sale of indigenous people between farmers. Enslavement was a popular form of oppression during the gold rush, but it was not the only ordeal Native Americans faced. One particularly revolting act was Californian Governor John B Wells rendering funding for the Eel River Rangers. The Eel River Rangers was a group of twenty or so white men who hunted down and slaughtered Indigenous women and children. (Natives )The State government of California provided finances needed to take the lives of innocent women and children. Of course when discussing homicidal acts perpetrated by the United States one cannot forget the Indian Wars. The Indian Wars were U.S army campaigns that targeted smaller groups of tribes to send a message to the rest of the population. The U.S army intentionally slaughtered hundreds of Natives on three separate occasions. The first massacre occurred near Preston, ID in 1863. Named the Bear River massacre an estimated 384 Shoshone Indians were open fired on. The second massacre occurred January 28th,1870. Two hundred natives, mostly women and children, were murdered. The issue pertaining to their deaths was the altercation between Malcolm Clarke and Owl child when Clarke accused Owl Child of stealing his horses and whipping him brutally as a punishment. After the whipping, Owl Child gathered several allies and they murdered Clarke, fleeing afterwards. This issue led to a massive outcry and the federal government appointed Major Eugene Baker to retaliate. When looking for Owl Child and his allies, baker and his men came across a band of peaceful Indians. The band consisted of women, children and elderly men. When informed this was the wrong tribe Baker replied: â€Å"That makes no difference, one band or another, they are all Piegans (Blackfeet) and we will attack them.† On that day 37 men, 90 women and 50 defensless children were open fired on. Additionally, Baker captured 140 woman and children as prisoners. But when finding that the majority were infected with smallpox he abandoned them with no food or other supplies (Olster). Baker was clearly more focused on seeking revenge than bringing justice to the guilty. He was not concerned with what was right or wrong. He deliberately massacred defenceless people, knowing their innocence, because he despised natives. This genocidal mentality proceeded by Owl Child's cries resulted in their demise. As revolting as Baker's actions were, they were still considered mediocre to the Wounded Knee Massacre. On December 15, 1890, colonists attempted to arrest Cheif Sitting-Bull. A fight erupted and Cheif Spotted elk led the band of natives to the Pine Ridge Reservation. On December 28th natives encountered a US cavalry that escorted them to Wounded Knee Creek. After being disarmed the natives commenced a â€Å"Ghost Dance†, a ceremonial dance that they believed would protect them from the American's bullets. This agitated the US cavalry. Attempting to stop the natives resulted in a scuffle in which more than 60 women were killed. US cavalry suffered casualties of 31 dead, 333 wounded out of 500. (Olser). These massacres were messages to the larger population. Attempts to disrupt and destroy smaller members of a nation to cripple or at least communicate the homicidal intentions that would be met with further resistance or retaliation. The massacres exhibited the immense hatred the colonists possessed by slaughtering innocents as reparations for the guilty. In all cases, natives were disarmed, defenceless and completely innocent of violence against colonists. By attacking communities instead of armies the US army demonstrated intentions of destroying basic foundations fo life within the nation. When examining Native American oppression and the US government it is crucial to note the direct action US Congress took against the indigenous people. In this case, the United States established Native Americans on conditions precalculated to result in their deaths. On November 29th,1864 Cheif Black Kettle and Cheif Niwot led their band to Fort Lyon in compliance with provisions of a peace treaty established earlier that year in September. The Chiefs and their people were asked to relocate with the threat of their safety. To demonstrate friendliness to any Americans they may encounter the Natives hung a large American flag and a smaller white flag beneath it. John Chivington led the attack against the natives. Claiming â€Å"They were of the same tribes with those who had murdered many persons and destroyed valuable property on the Platt and Arkansas Rivers.† (Olster). Estimated casualties in this massacre vary, Chivington claimed â€Å"500 -600 warriors were killed.† But John S.Smith, an eyewitness general under Chivington's command estimates 135 deaths, 105 being woman and children. Smith also accounted for the scalping of women and infants and further mutilation fo the deceased. The Cheyennes lost many women and children. Chiefs White Antelope, Yellow Wolf, Big Man, and a number of others, many who advocated for peace with the colonists, were killed. Chivington had no legitimate reason to believe these natives a threat. They had flown an Amercian Flag and the universal flag for peace yet he still chose to slaughter them. his actions expose the premeditated murder of these people. Chivington had no intention of letting the natives escape, these conditions resulted in the inevitable deaths of innocent indigenous people. From scalping women and infants to completely abolishing their millage and even murdering Smith's â€Å"Hald breed † son Jack, Chivington displayed no compassion. Instead, he demonstrated brute force and barbarism towards natives. Unfortunately, the Sand Creek massacre wasn't the finale occurrence of premeditated lethal conditions. On September 28th,1862 the American Government tried 392 Idginieos prisoners, sentencing 303 to death and giving 16 prison terms. Because this trial was a military trial President Lincoln reviewed the commissioner's findings and found that 303 deaths seemed to genocidal. So he revised the criteria for the death penalty to those who had been convicted of rape, which lowered it to two. This number was still unsatisfactory so the criteria changed to those who had participated in the civilian massacres. December 26th, 1862 39 natives were sentenced to death. 38 were hanged and one was given a reprieve at the last minute. What makes this event so heinous was the conditions in which the trial was executed. The trial was conducted in English, the natives were unrepresented and unfamiliar with court proceedings. Also, the war that prompted these â€Å"war crimes† occurred in a sovereign state and those men who have surrendered were entitled to treatment of such. The disadvantages of the hearing completely abolished any chance of the natives having a fair trial and the possibility of them being found innocent. By placing them in that biased, tainted courtroom the American Government sealed their fate with no chance to defend themselves. The reason for the war? Two years prior to the trial the US failed to meet treaty obligations. In retaliation, Dakota warriors raided stole food and killed five settlers. After the sentencing and executions, it was found that two natives had been hung by mistake and a letter written by Cheif Wabasha stated the Americans had promised no innocent natives would be punished if they followed the advice of General Sibley (Trials). The Us clearly deceived the Natives, placing them in a premeditated, biased courtroom with less than fair trial conditions that would ultimately result in their deaths. In 1887, the American Government passed the Dawes Act. A policy that aimed to â€Å"safely guide natives from the night of barbarism to the fair dawn of Christian civilization.† Assimilation consisted of natives converting to Christianity, learning and speaking English, wearing western clothes and hairstyles, and living a typical American lifestyle. The act also stated that Indian Reservations were to be distributed to individuals and that land could not be sold for 25 years, land left over from distribution could be sold to outsiders. This allowed native land to be purchased by Americans as if Americans didn't have enough already. And it doesn't stop there. In 1930 the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could disperse native land without Indian consent. And in 1924 The Citizenship act was passed. This Act granted citizenship to all Native Americans. Unfortunately, the desired effects were not seen as natives were forced to send their children to boarding schools for their education. In these schools children are often taught false information and censorship reigns supreme. Other nasty consequences of this act were the denial of rights to vote and extreme poverty. Most Indigenous people residing in inadequate housing with limited healthcare. While the United States failed in completely exterminating all Native Americans, no one can deny they had the mentality to do so. And this mentality, combined with artillery support led to the demise of hundreds of Natives. But even the slaughter of their people wants enough. Not only did we take their lives and their land, but we also stole their culture. Demanding them to replace their customs with our own or face death and discrimination. The United States failed in physical genocide but was successful in the demise of a cultural genocide.

How does the inclusion of the witches in Macbeth heighten the dramatic impact of the play? Essay

Macbeth is a play written by the renowned playwright William Shakespeare in the early 17th century. Originally produced for the King of Denmark, the play explores themes such as ambition and betrayal through the actions of the main protagonist Macbeth. The play’s other significant figures include three witches whose practice of sorcery attracted a lot of controversy towards the play. At the time, their inclusion heightened the dramatic impact on the audience; primarily because of the public’s view of witches. Also referred to as the ‘’weird sisters’’, they form a fundamental element of the play because it is their input that shapes the play into action. During this period of time, the mainstream population of Europe was Christian and superstitious, therefore belief in witchcraft was at its peak and so-called ‘’witches’’ were persecuted. Supposedly, witches (along with Satan) were part of a collective of evil and were blamed for a lot of wrongdoing in society. For instance, political dissidents who opposed the King were thought to be under the influence of black magic. This was because there was commonly held believe that the King had the divine right to rule; thus anyone challenging the King was basically challenging God (which was considered blasphemy and punishable by death). The inclusion of the witches and amount of media coverage they received along with the public’s superstition helped to heighten the dramatic impact of Macbeth on a Shakespearean audience. Today, however, due to the secularisation of society, religious morals are diminishing and witchcraft is seen as nothing more than simple entertainment; this is certainly not how Shakespeare intended it to be. Furthermore, television programmes such as W.I.T.C.H. and books such as the Harry Potter series are depicting witches in a much more positive light. On the other hand, a small number of possible offshoots of witchcraft such as Wicca and Freemasonry are still being practiced despite it being punishable by death in some extremely religious cultures. In this day and age, the general view about witches lessens the dramatic impact significantly because it is seen as a comedy routine therefore Macbeth doesn’t strike fear into the hearts of the audience like its original purpose. In Act 1 Scene 1, as shown in the stage directions; the witches are the first performers when they enter an ‘’open place’’ with ‘’thunder and lightning’’. By being the first performers on stage, they intensify the dramatic impact because the audience focuses their attention towards them. Also, Shakespeare specifically chose the weather in this scene to be threatening, to reflect the negative view of witches at the time and to elevate the dramatic impact by making them see more powerful (witches were associated with the ability to manipulate the weather). The technique of using elements of nature to express mood is known as pathetic fallacy. In this scene, the first impression that the audience are given of the witches is that they are unattractive. For instance, the quotes ‘’your beards’’ and ‘’skinny lips’’ suggests that the witches are ugly and depict them as being unnatural due to having masculine characteristics. Shakespeare has done this to add to the negative interpretation of witches, which in turn heightens the dramatic impact (because the realistic appearance of the witches would frighten the audience). He also uses other characters to highlight the appearance of the witches and therefore raise the dramatic impact on the audience. For instance, Banquo describe the witches as being creatures ‘’ that look not like th’ inhabitants o’ th’ earth’’. He is suggesting that they do not resemble other humans and that they are abnormal; perhaps beings from another world. Shakespeare uses dialogue between the witches to heighten the dramatic impact on the audience. For example, in Act 1 Scene 3, one of the witches says to the others ’‘I’ll drain him dry as hay, sleep shall neither night nor day’’. This line heightens the dramatic impact because it portrays witches as evil because of the reference to torturing someone by depriving him of water. Also the words ‘’hay’’ and ‘’day’’ rhyme, during the Shakespearean era this was related to the spells chanted by witches, therefore the audience would have instantaneously assumed that the lines were malicious; thus increasing the dramatic impact. The lines spoken by the witches also include a rhythm. For example in Act 1 Scene 3, the three witches start their lines with ‘’all hail†¦ all hail†¦ all hail’’, this promotes the idea that the witches have the same thoughts and gives the impression that they are insane because they speak in a different pattern to the other characters. The witches also speak in riddles to scare and confuse the audience, for example, the line ‘’when the battles lost and won’’ may be referring to Macbeth or it could be talking about the struggle for the throne of Scotland. This intensifies the dramatic impact because the audience are left unsure and given the impression that the three witches know something that they don’t. Once again, the witches are depicted as being unnatural because of their ability to prophesise the future. Imagery is used cleverly in many ways by Shakespeare to show the witches in a negative light and add to the dramatic impact. For example, in Act 4 Scene 1, the 1st witch says ‘’round and round the cauldron go, in the poisoned entrails throw’’. This quote emphasizes the popular belief (at the time) that witches chant around their cauldrons which consisted of nauseating ingredients such as rats (creates the image that witches are sick). Also, the witches simultaneously say ‘’double, double toil and trouble, fire burn and cauldron bubble’’, this makes the spell resemble a song more and consequently it increases the dramatic impact. To conclude, the inclusion of the witches in the play undeniably helps to heighten the dramatic impact on a Shakespearean audience. This is mainly because of his successful methods, for example when using pathetic fallacy. Today, however, his masterpiece has not been as popular and effective at creating a negative image of witches because of the enormous change in the public’s view of witches.

Biography of Franklin Delano Roosevelt Essay

The 32nd president of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, accomplished many things during his three terms in office. Being the only president ever elected to more than two terms, it is easy to suppose that he was a well-rounded president. His leadership, success in getting programs passed, management of economic and domestic policy, foreign policy, and role as Chief Party Leader all contribute to an overall grade of an A for his presidency. First off, as the symbol of the country and the presidency, Franklin Delano Roosevelt gets an A. He showed great character and leadership with his thirty â€Å"fireside chats† on the radio. With these, he was able to soothe the thirty five million people listening. It was successful too, in that, after his first in which he assured the safety of keeping money in a reopened bank, confidence was restored and the banks began to open up. His ability to master the press contributed strongly to his overall public opinion and showed he had good character. Also, in WWII conferences such as Casablanca and Teheran, Roosevelt represented the country well in his efforts with the Allies to stop Nazi Germany. His leadership of the country and his character are the reason that he was the only president ever to be elected to four consecutive terms as the leader of the country. Particularly with the New Deal, FDR was rather successful as a policy and legislative leader. With the nation in the midst of the Great Depression, there was a lot of pressure on the president to take immediate action. Beginning with â€Å"the first hundred days,† Roosevelt shut down the banks and met with Congress. He was able to get 15 major bills approved regarding the economy in attempts to get it back on track. With such turmoil happening in the country, FDR was very efficient in getting bills passed by Congress, which is why he deserves an A. Though the actual success of each program may be questioned, his quick action and role as a policy and legislative leader was executed well. The same is true for when the United States became involved in WWII. This situation again demanded quick action and Roosevelt pulled through by passing various acts such as the Lend Lease Act and Neutrality Acts. Though again these may not have always had the best outcomes, his initiative and f air thinking are what gets him an A for this category. FDR’s most noted domestic policies while in office were those of the New Deal. With a nation pressuring the president for change, Roosevelt developed a plan called the New Deal. The principal acts were done during his first hundred days, as mentioned earlier, in attempts to achieve his goals of relief, recovery, and reform. Regarding the economy, Congressed passed the Glass-Stegall Banking Act which established the FDIC, a very important act after the crises leading up to the Great Depression. By stopping the bank runs, he was able to steer the economy in the right direction, creating a corporation that is still used today. In addition, under his presidency, the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was established, giving jobs to young men while at the same time conserving both human and natural resources. With the young men being able to send the money back to their families, it was a way to decrease unemployment and boost the economy. Another important issue was his repeal of t he Prohibition through the 21st amendment. This gave much needed revenue to the country and provided employment. Despite these successful acts of domestic policy, Roosevelt was not always so brilliant. The Agricultural Adjustment Administration, one of the New Deal agencies, increased unemployment, frustrated farmers, and was eventually deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. His intentions and theories to end overproduction were good, just not executed well. Another of Roosevelt’s reforms is Social Security. This is perhaps one of the most controversial of his policies. Some loved it and some hated it. In fact, the benefits of this administration are still debated over today with people calling into question the longevity of its existence. One problem that Roosevelt seemed to face was his long-running battle with the Supreme Court. Consisting of older aged, ultraconservative men whom Roosevelt had not appointed, the Supreme Court was something the president wanted to change. To fix it, he asked Congress to permit him to add up to 15 justices to the Supreme Court. This attempt to â€Å"pack† the court cost Roosevelt severely in the eyes of the public. It was his away of going around the Constitution in order to be able to keep more of his programs and agencies from the New Deal. In total, despite also several failures, many of FDR’s domestic policies were good. They helped relieve some of the stress set on by the depression. However, that’s all they did – relieve. His policies and the New Deal did not cure the country of the Great Depression, only temporarily masked the problems with only of his agencies still existing after his presidency. For these reasons, I give Roosevelt a B for his domestic policy. In the beginnings of a second world war, Roosevelt had important foreign policies that were crucial to the United States’ welfare. With an attempt to end the Depression, Roosevelt was initially going to send a delegate to take part in the London Conference. However, upon a second look, he decided that international agreements about the value of the dollar might restrict him in domestic recovery. This begins a trend toward increased nationalism and eventually to the United States’ views on isolationism. Though we are unable to tell what might have come out of the conference, it seems like a poor decision for Roosevelt to leave America totally on its own from other countries. Along with this idea of isolationism, through the Tydings-McDuffie Act, the United States freed the Philippines (after 12 years). This act was more beneficial for the United States than the actual freed country because of less foreign competition for sugar, as well as fewer people competing for jobs. Overall, it did help the U.S.; however, it also kind of abandoned the Philippines with not-so-nice economic terms. In contrast to these inward-looking acts, Roosevelt also created the Good Neighbor Policy with Latin America. He focused on consultation and nonintervention in hopes to unite the Western Hemisphere against any powers on the other side of the world. This was a smart move after withdrawing ties from Europe and Asia. It was a good idea that ended up being very successful for him and Roosevelt ended up with the title of â€Å"traveling salesman for peace.† In such fear of war, Congress passed the Neutrality Acts so as not to be brought into the violence like had been done in WWI. However, Roosevelt later changed these Acts to mean that an arms embargo be established for both Loyalists and rebels. As far as Roosevelt’s foreign policies go, this one was really bad. So scared of war, they basically aided in Franco’s taking over of the republican government of Spain. This in turn led to the strengthening of the European dictators, leading to the second world war. For this reason, Roosevelt’s grade goes down. Then, in 1941, neutrality had its meaning changed again. Really, it was thrown out the window with passing of Lend-Lease Act. The reasoning behind it was very understandable. Arm the other fighting democracies with weapons to defend against Hitler, or allow them to fall and have the U.S. face them alone. Knowing the risk, and after many debates, it was finally approved. It also set up the United States for war production when they did fight. However, the Lend-Lease Act ultimately was what brought them into the war once they had to start using armed Destroyer ships to take them to Britain. Roosevelt’s idea was good, however the consequences were bad. Later in the war, Roosevelt met with Churchill and Stalin for the Teheran Conference. Here, the three agreed upon a plan to attack Germany from the East as well as from the West. This was an incredibly important part of Roosevelt’s foreign policy since it was the beginning of the end for Nazi Germany. The Allies were able to recover France from the Nazis and continue their fight with Germany. Though Roosevelt died a month before V-E Day, his position as Commander in Chief for the past twelve years caused the United States and the Allies to defeat Germany. Though nobody is perfect, Roosevelt was able – through all decisions, good and bad – to stop the Nazis and ultimately save Europe. For these reasons, Roosevelt gets an A as Commander in Chief. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was strong in communicating with the public was well as dictating foreign and domestic policy. For this reason, his party grew during his presidency and so he deserves an A as Chief Party Leader. He started the â€Å"FDR Coalition† for his first term to get votes. Throughout his successes in the beginning, he was able to change many Republicans into Democrats, strengthening the Democratic Party for years to come. In addition, he also aided more Democratic candidates in all areas of government into office. With Roosevelt in office, the party grew both in voters as well as representation in Congress and other branches of government. His role as Chief Party Leader was done well and that is why he gets an A. Franklin Delano Roosevelt came into office at first having to deal with the struggles of the Great Depression. He was then later faced with the challenges of World War II, attempting to protect the United States as well as all Democratic countries from Nazi takeover. Anyone faced with these difficult challenges would have their ups and downs. FDR, on balance, was a good president and gets and overall A for his role as a country symbol, legislative leader, manager of the economy, Global leader, Commander in Chief, and Chief Party Leader. Works Cited Bailey, Thomas Andrew, David M. Kennedy, and Lizabeth Cohen. The American Pageant. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1998. Print. Hughes, L. P. â€Å"†FDR AS NATIONAL LEADER†Ã¢â‚¬  Austin Community College – Start Here. Get There. 1999. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. . Mintz, S. â€Å"The First 100 Days.† Digital History. 2007. Web. 01 Apr. 2011. . http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=468 (80%) http://www.austincc.edu/lpatrick/his2341/fdr.html (shrink 90%, page 4)

Textual Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words - 1

Textual Analysis - Essay Example Morten did not listen and Inger dies. Johannes comes back to bring back Inger to life. Johannes explains that Inger can be brought back to life but this depends on faith and prayer to God. He says that this can only happen if the family has faith and if they ask God to bring back Inger to life. He is saddened by the fact that all of them have little faith and do not believe that this can be done. Out of all the people, it is Inger’s daughter alone that expresses her faith and she does this by taking Johannes hand and tells him to raise her mother from the dead (Wahl, 2012, p. 32). The young girl’s faith puts the adults at an awkward position because one would expect adults to know God better than a little girl and understand how faith works. From this, we expect that adults should be the ones to express faith even if it is a little faith. However, no one among them even bothers to do that. This represents the difference between adults and children. This scene shows that knowing has a different link with faith and that matters of the heart and mind may sometimes be different. From the adults’ point of view, knowing too much could affect one’s ability or trust in faith. On the other hand, from the child’s perspective, knowing a little information coupled with hope and trust can help one to believe or at least have trust in faith. The little girl only had hope and wish that her mother would come back to life and her little knowledge about God made her believe that He could bring her back through Jesus Christ. This made her have trust in Johannes prayer to God through Jesus Christ that Inger’s life be brought back (Milne, 1971, p. 156). The ordet is not a film with a long plot. However, it is a turbulent and intense poem that has several motifs, which are harmonized by the resurrection of Inger. The scene has many pauses in between the words spoken. In addition, the speakers in the scene who are mainly Morten, Johannes and the young girl speak in few words. The pauses in the dialogue are full of movement and reactions. The characters in the scene hear each other in a manner that they never do in normal films that are always marked by lots of conversations words and arguments. Here, one character talks followed by a pause then either he or she continues or another character picks up but the pauses are present. The pauses mark the movements that occur in the scene. This pauses help to create the mood in the scene, which is a somber mood marked by tone of optimism and pessimism. This mood can only be achieved when the scene is slow and is marked by little and slow movements that are well captured by Carl Dreyer, the director of film. In the scene, there is a distinctive resonance of the voices of the characters in the room helps to reinforce the impression of the physical presence of the voices (Schrader, n.d.). The characters that are in the scene are haunted by the fact that they do not acknowledge som ething that cannot necessarily be reduced to God. The importance of this fact is realized in the slowness of the movements of the characters and the slow movement of the camera as it captures the movement in the scene (Wakeman, 1988, p. 271). The scene where Johannes comes back to bring back Inger to

Foreign Policy Conflict Between Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians in Term Paper

Foreign Policy Conflict Between Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians in 1790's - Term Paper Example In this environment, the two positions were antithetical and their opposition extended into the darkest corner of every issue, foreign policy included. Thomas Jefferson, the most well known proponent of Anti-Federalism, along with Alexander Hamilton, the most well known proponent of Federalism, often made their views clear in letters written to friends and associates. From these first-hand accounts, historians can piece together the political divides that fragmented early American politics, placing them in context and measuring the relevance of what they had to say to today’s heated discussions. Indeed, any study of 1790s American politics will reveal a deeply polarized discourse. In fact, one historian has remarked that today’s polarized politics is â€Å"mild by historical standards† (Rawls 89). Indeed, from its inception, American democracy saw the rise of fundamentally opposed political parties, in particular the Federalists and Anti-Federals. Just from the n ames ascribed to these political groups, one can tell that their beliefs were opposites on many levels. Deeply opposed convictions spurred vicious trading of barbs between politicians and newspapers, which we highly critical of their opponents (Daniel 6). However, as historians today note, the strength and productivity of American democracy â€Å"also comes from the parties† (Rawls 95). ... Anti-Federalists strongly opposed to the Constitution, believing that it gave too much power to a central governmental institution—a federal government. The president, whom they branded as a â€Å"military king,† they believed, would become a tyrant who would rule over â€Å"the lives, the liberties, and property of every citizen of America† with â€Å"uncontrolled power† (Marshall 251). This fear was based primarily on the ideal that liberties should not be swallowed up to build a more powerful, glorious nation. In arguing for a stronger federal government, the Federalists relied on two powerful arguments in favor of the Constitution: first, that Congress had no leverage against the empires of France, Britain, and Spain because it could not regulate foreign commerce, and second, that restrictions on Congress interfered with its basic duty to provide for a national defense (Marshall 234). Both of these arguments are germane to a nation’s foreign aff airs, which places the topic of foreign affairs central to the debates between Federalists and Anti-Federalists raging in the 1790s. The most visible face of Federalism in the United States during this period was Alexander Hamilton, who took part in organizing a forceful defense of the Constitution in The Federalist Papers, a collection of 85 essays designed to convince the people of New York to ratify the new Constitution. After the Federalist movement, which was intended primarily to see the Constitution ratified (which it was in 1789), the Federalist Party emerged—guided by the policies of Hamilton in the early 1790s (Berkin 208). John Adams, the second President of the United States and only President elected from the Federalist platform, took office in 1789. The election of Adams and the rising

Explain the importance of consistency between firms in various Essay

Explain the importance of consistency between firms in various countries in keeping standard accounting practices. Where possible give examples to illustrate your answer - Essay Example Most importantly, it can be affirmed that the significance of consistency between firms in varied nations in the context of keeping standard accounting practices lay in raising transparency of financial reporting procedure (Securities and Exchange Commission, 2008). With this concern, the prime intent of this essay intends to analyze and discuss the importance of consistency between firms in terms of standard accounting process relating to cross-border transactions. Moreover, appropriate examples will also be provided while elaborating the above stated aspect. Standard accounting practices are regarded as structured accounting processes that aid in measuring the financial position and status of an entity. The prime objective of preparing financial statements for any business organization is to make economic decisions more accurately. Based on the viewpoints of Holloway (2011), standard accounting practices assist business entities in keeping proper record of their respective assets, liabilities, income as well as expenses along with equity and cash flow among others (Holloway, 2011). According to the report published by Governance across Borders (2013), it can be ascertained that fair presentation is highly essential for ensuring rising transparency by keeping and following varied standard accounting practices. At the same time, it can be affirmed that faithful representation of transactions can also ensure greater consistency between firms in case of cross border business operations (Governance across Borders, 2013). According to the viewpoints of Ramanna & Sletten (2009), varied standard accounting practices such as IFRSs assist global nations as well as organizations to maintain fairness in the accounting transactions. At the same time, these practices ensure keeping consistency between firms by representing realistic figures of assets, liabilities, income and expenses of a firm during the conduct of business