Essay on civil rights
Why did a mass Civil Rights movement emerge in the late 1950's? The importance of civil rights for Black Americans was at an all time high within in the late 1950s.Black Americans having been oppressed not only within in their rights of freedom yet also in terms of education and employment felt that it was time for a major change. Thus various civil right movements had to be implemented. However, it is key to understand the reasons why a civil rights movement did not occur earlier on for it allows us to gain an insight into the levels of segregation and lack of opportunities that Black Americans faced. During the inter-war year period of 1920 to 1941, Black Americans amongst other minorities suffered from the racial segregation that had deemed to govern the way in which they would live their lives. During the year known as the 'Roaring Twenties' America was enjoying unprecedented prosperity having become the worlds leading industrial nation. However, this affluence was only shared mainly by the white Americans, whilst conditions for Black individuals only seemed to get worse; arguably discrimination, prejudice and racism reaching a peak during these years. Moreover, the latter was upheld by a radical groups known as the Ku Klux Klan made up of different individuals some possessing a great deal of power such as governors and police officers. They felt that segregation of
Andrew Jackson was an effective and vigorous president, who acted upon a few key convictions,
I feel the statement, "Andrew Jackson was an effective and vigorous president, who acted upon a few key convictions," is a poor description of Andrew Jackson's presidency. While Andrew Jackson confronted a few major issues, such as removing some of the men that had hold been holding office for many years, about 1 in 10 men were removed. He also passed a few protective tariffs in an attempt to help the American economy. Even with these few accomplishments I few that President Jackson was not a very effective president. President Jackson made many choices based upon his political goals, not for the American people. He also, fought against the second back of the United States causing more problems for the nation. Jackson may have felt that he knew what was best for the nation's future, but he made many poor choices. He had promised to fix the corrupt government, but he vetoed twelve bills during his two terms, while the six men before him had only vetoed nine bills, mostly for unconstitutional issues. President Jackson vetoed bills if they conflicted with his agenda. The tariffs he passed also had problems. They favored the North. The South would have to pay more for got with the high taxes on imported goods, and they strongly opposed them. They even attempted to nullify the tariffs. Another problem with the tariffs was that the favored the average people much more than the
Was Roosevelt's foreign policy a success or failure
Was Roosevelt's foreign policy a success or failure? Roosevelt did many things in his foreign policy including: the building of the Panama Canal, the Spanish - American war. In this essay I will explain the failures and successes and then come up with a conclusion as to whether or not Roosevelt's foreign policy was a success or failure. After Japan showed its strength against Russia the US became distrusting of them; as they were worried about the threat in which Japan showed to the Philippines. However the distrust was mutual and was widened by racial ammonites on the west coast of America. A San Francisco school board ordered that students of oriental descent were to attend a separate school. This 'yellow peril' as it was known in 1906 caused relations between US and Japan to become sour. Japanese government protested and eventually Roosevelt managed to change the school boards mind. However this was only after ensuring that Japanese would not issue passports for its labourers. The gentlemen's agreement between Roosevelt and the Japanese government halted the influx of Japanese immigrants. "Yellow Peril" is another situation which Roosevelt demonstrated his ability to protect foreign relations and at the same time get what he wanted in terms of what was best for America and himself. However even though Roosevelt dealt with the problem it was still an extremely
How effective was the early civil rights movement in advancing Black Civil Rights in the period 1880-1945?
"How effective was the early civil rights movement in advancing Black Civil Rights in the period 1880-1945?" The 13th Amendment was passed by the Senate in 1884 and put into practice on December 6th 1865. The amendment abolished slavery in the United States, making President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation part on the US constitution as it was previously based on was powers and therefore, did not abolish slavery in Border States, these being; Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri and West Virginia. This new ruling meant that anti-abolitionists had to accept the end of slavery. However, this did not mean that freed slaves had the same opportunities and rights as whites, in the South "black codes" were quickly implemented. These laws limited the human rights and civil liberties of African Americas thus keeping them inferior. They continued to emphasise the superior position held by whites it society, this was highlighted particularly in the state of Texas as Texans feared that without the codes blacks would not work. In reaction to the Black Codes the 14th amendment was passed in 1868. This stated that all free men shall be protected and enjoy equal treatment under the law. The idea was to protect the African American population, making them citizens thus forcing the federal Government to be responsible for them. If rights were denied by any States, the State in question
To what extent did the US president hinder rather than help the development of African American civil rights in the period from 1865-1992?
To what extent did the US president hinder rather than help the development of African American civil rights in the period from 1865-1992? It can be argued that over the period 1865-1992 the majority of the presidents hindered the development rather than help as the presidents Johnson to Cleveland actively slowed down the civil rights. However, it can also be said that some of presidents did help the African Americans to a large extent, for example in the 1960s Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson actively help the African American’s through their policies. Presidents at the start of the time period might have hindered the development because of their white supremacist views, prioritising reconstruction and the need to maintain white Democrat support in the South. Presidents between Cleveland and Kennedy and after Ford can be categorised as passive relating to the issue of Civil Rights. They were distracted many events such as the Great Depression, Vietnam and the Cold War which lead to hinder the development of African American. Although most hindered the development and were passive, by 1992 presidents had created Civil Rights for African Americans. In this essay I will be discussing the both side of the argument in which I will include the Presidents who helped the development of African American and those who hinder the development. Presidents hindered the development of
"I was within the circle: so that I neither saw nor heard as those without might see and hear
"I was within the circle: so that I neither saw nor heard as those without might see and hear." (Frederick Douglass) What was the significance of the slave narratives and their authorship? Anti-slavery writings and slave narratives were undeniably significant and helpful in the abolitionists' fight against slavery. Many called them "the abolitionist movement's voice of reality." As they were first hand accounts of slavery from the African American slaves themselves. They depicted life as a slave and life after, and disproved the opinion that life as a slave was a happy one. They showed the "reality" of what was happening to slaves, and the mistreatment they were suffering at the hands of their masters. William Lloyd Garrison, David Walker, Harriet Jacobs and Frederick Douglass were some of the most important abolitionist writers. Each of these writers had different experiences with slavery, but they all had one thing in common: they tell of the abominable institution of slavery and how greatly it affected their lives. Frederick Douglass wrote his own slave narrative - Narrative in the life of Frederick Douglass, (which went on to become the biggest and best selling slave narrative still today) to give north Americans a closer account of slavery, it told about sexual, physical and mental abuse, the horrors of family separation and the inhuman workload at the hands of his
"In its intervention in South East Asia in the years 1950-1964, the USA was more concerned with defending its economic, than its ideological, interests"
"In its intervention in South East Asia in the years 1950-1964, the USA was more concerned with defending its economic, than its ideological, interests" The Cold War is infamous as an ideological battle ground, in relation to American beliefs, the clashes of ideology could be seen to an extent as economic in nature; communism Vs capitalism and thus the two reasons are inextricably linked. Yet as America's longest war, it follows that the conflict was a complicated one. The contributing factors of American involvement changed as the war progressed. The initial reasons the U.S.A became involved were not the reasons that kept them there over 15 years later and thus the reasons America entered Vietnam changed over time. America primarily became involved out of fear of communism and the domino effect, having 'lost' china to communism, and observing the U.S.S.R as a monolithic threat, the U.S believed they could not afford to allow another area in the region to turn communist. It seems then that the intervention was ideologically motivated. However, interest in the region was not only due to the desire to protect 'freedom', it was also an economically important region. Japan has been described as the 'corner stone' of American involvement in South East Asia and thus it was important to protect it. The Vietnam War was based on assumptions by the U.S.A. The initial and most cited
"Alfred the Great strikes back".
"Alfred the Great strikes back" By: Philip F. Cala III Michael Carr's article "Alfred the Great strikes back" gives a lot of information on the life of Alfred the Great. It gives a good bit of information about his back ground and the way he ruled. In 878, he was a king without a kingdom, hunted in the marshes of Somerset. In the year 878, Danish forces had conquered most of England and driven the Saxon king of Wessex, Alfred, westward into the Somerset marshes. The second Danish army landed on the southwestern English coast and besieged a small Saxon force at Countisbury Hill. Then Alfred the Great planned to strike back with fellow Saxons who greeted him as if he had returned from the dead.1 If defeated, the remaining Saxons would be absorbed into the Danelaw. Alfred, with most of his allies having surrendered or fled to continental Europe, would be hunted down like a fugitive, and the history of the English would end. Alfred gathered his remaining forces and began a brilliant campaign that would enable him to reconquer his lands and resurrect a single English kingdom from the ashes of the old Anglo-Saxon nations2. Alfred the Great was a ruler that was not only a good one, but he was a well respected one. Alfred rebuilt towns and forts and gathered an army for the coming war. But a force of Danes secretly crept into Wessex late in 875. Before Alfred could rally his
"Both Yohannis IV and Menelik II failed in the objectives they had set out to achieve." How far do you agree with this assessment?
"Both Yohannis IV and Menelik II failed in the objectives they had set out to achieve." How far do you agree with this assessment? I would say that Yohannis IV failed, but not Menelik. Yohannis IV was only put in as King of Kings after Tewodros because the British had left him a vast arsenal of arms and ammunition, and therefore pressured every other province king into electing him. His politics where weak, it seemed that he did want Ethiopia to be united, but did not do anything because he did not want to upset some provincial kings. The only thing these provincial kings had to do was to recognize him as King of Kings, and pay him an annual tribute. It was when Yohannis was in power that the first foreign Colonies came and wanted to take over Ethiopia. He had the Egyptians from the north, and the Italians on the coast line. Khedive Ismael, was the king of Egypt at this time and wanted more land. Yohannis would not let this happen so they went into war. Yohannis and his troops won the battle against the Egyptians and signed the treaty of Adowa. The Italians had taken over the port of Massawa, and where now threatening to go inland and take Ethiopia as their colony. At the same time, the Mahdist of Sudan where attacking and wanted to take over Ethiopia as well. The Mahdist launched a Jihad on Ethiopia , they invaded Ethiopia. They attacked some of the local kings and
What lay behind the horrors of the slave trade.
The slave triangle worked like this. Firstly the people in Britain made goods like guns, alcohol, and iron bars, which were made very cheaply. All the goods were then carried to the docs in Glasgow, Liverpool or Bristol. All these goods were then boarded on to the ships and were taken to West Africa to be traded for slaves. The people bought only the strong looking slaves, both men and women. They took them to a market and placed them into chains, and were marched to the coast. They slaves were once again examined to see whether they were healthy, and if they were they were usually branded high up on the shoulder or high up on their backs. The branded slaves were taken to the barraoon and were placed on the ships. Men were separated from the women. The ships were packed with 600 or ore slaves. They were tightly packed in the warm, dark airless holds below the deck. They were placed there for the entire voyage across the Atlantic Ocean, which lasted for several weeks. Not surprisingly, many slaves died during this time. The slaves who survived were taken to South Africa, West Indies or North America depending on where the slaves were needed. The slaves were traded for sugar, rum, tobacco or cotton. Europe then bought the goods from the countries and the slave trade continued working like this. People in Britain were in involved in many ways, example of people who were
