Did Britain become a Classless Society after 1945?
Did Britain become a Classless Society after 1945? Matthew Woodward - The Road from 1945: Britain since the Second World War Social class in Britain played a key factor in determining a citizen's wealth, political power, education opportunities and more generally a person's lifestyle. The Cambridge International Dictionary of English defines class as "a group of people within society who have the same economical and social position" whilst Karl Marx argued that class was an 'economic category'1. Towards the end of the Second World War it was becoming increasingly suggestive that the British social classes were beginning to merge together in order to form what for former Prime Minister Harold Wilson once described as a 'classless' society. Social classes in Britain are traced back as far as the Industrial Revolution, seeing that it provided different parts of the country with various speeds of progress. The struggle of the working class and the dominance of capitalism highlighted class importance all throughout the nineteenth and most of the twentieth century. Since 1945, political events, traditions, national characteristics and consequences of the war all had an impact on the forms of class. Social analyst Michael Young argued that 'the lower classes no longer have a distinctive ideology with the ethos of society'2 suggesting that there was no reason for the British working
A look at the Origin, Stigma/Discrimination and Government Involvement with AIDS in the United States of America and African Countries
AIDS Anyone can have it, Internationally feared, Deadliest Sickness A look at the Origin, Stigma/Discrimination and Government Involvement with AIDS in the United States of America and African Countries Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, AIDS, is now known as being one of the most deadliest and incurable viruses in the world. AIDS snuck into America in the beginning of the 1980's, then exploded in what seemed a matter of moments. America would soon learn that this was not just a health problem in the "immoral" cul-de-sacs of American but an international epidemic affecting all types of life. Today's youth see's a constant fight in curing and eliminating AIDS around the world; however, this has not always been the case. AIDS has been most publicized in the United States and African countries. This paper will compare the origin of AIDS, the stigma and discrimination of AIDS and the government involvement with AIDS in the United States and African countries. Individuals who first appeared with AIDS in America during the early 1980's were diagnosed with Pneumocystis Pneumonia (PCP), which is usually found in people with poor immune systems. 1 However these individuals who were sick did not have poor immune system, but the individuals were homosexuals. As more and more homosexual males appeared to have the disease, it became labeled as GRID (gay related immune
AIDS Epidemic in Africa
Dani Jessee May 2, 2010 African Health/Illness Essay 4 HIV/Aids Epidemic in Africa One of the greatest challenges that our generation is facing has spread like wild fire, becoming one of the worst epidemics in only the last couple decades. The devastation of HIV/Aids has lasted far longer than the influenza epidemic, small pox, or the black plague, "All these epidemics clearly differed from HIV/Aids in their greater infectiousness, their short incubation period, the speed with which they killed, and their brief but dramatic impact" (Iliffe, pp. 59). HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) is a virus that attacks the immune system and breaks it down leaving the body more susceptible to illness. Without treatment, most people infected with HIV become less able to fight off germs that we are exposed to every day. AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) is a late stage of HIV infection. An HIV positive person is diagnosed with AIDS when their immune system is so weakened that it is no longer able to fight off illness. People with immune deficiency are much more vulnerable to infections such as pneumonia and various forms of cancer. HIV can be transmitted person to person through unprotected sexual intercourse with infected person, transfusion of infected blood or blood products, infected mother to her baby during pregnancy, birth process and through breastfeeding, use of
"Khrushchev's leadership was a failure," Do you agree?
"Khrushchev's leadership was a failure," Do you agree? There is a lot of debate about Khrushchev being a good leader. There is no doubt that Khrushchev was much less ruthless than Stalin, but was he a good leader? I will look further into this statement and then come to a conclusion if Khrushchev's leadership was a failure. Khrushchev started out well; he knew he couldn't carry on Stalin's ruthless regime, so he separated himself from Stalin by making the secret speech in February 1956, "Stalin used extreme methods and mass repressions at a time when the revolution was already victorious." Even though this was a risky move by Khrushchev and he made a lot of enemies, it showed the sense of character of Khrushchev. The Virgin Land scheme was a good idea for Khrushchev, but made a big mistake, after a good first season the failure to rotate crops and use fertilisers to feed the earth which caused soil erosion. Windstorms were partly to blame for this, but rightly Khrushchev was heavily blamed. Harvests in 1963 were so bad the USSR had to buy large amounts of grain from the US and Canada. Khrushchev made big steps into the unknown which was space. A race with the US to get into space first was won by the USSR. In 1957 the USSR launched two space satellites into space, Sputnik 1 and Sputnik II. Four years later Khrushchev got the first man into space, Yuri Gorgerin.
The Algerian revolution was the culmination of the Algerian War of Independence (19541962) and led to Algeria's independence from France. It was a hugely significant milestone in the decolonisation of North Africa.
Assess the significance of the Algerian Revolution The Algerian revolution was the culmination of the Algerian War of Independence (1954-1962) and led to Algeria's independence from France. It was a hugely significant milestone in the decolonisation of North Africa and remains no doubt until present times as one of the great events of the 20th century. The conflict itself consisted of a plethora of varying factors of war; guerrilla warfare as well as planned military skirmishes, alleged 'terrorism' against civilians and thus counter terrorism on behalf of the French Army and use of profuse torture on both sides. The war led to the igniting of sentiment regarding independence within Algeria on a gargantuan scale, furthermore anti-colonialist sentiment at the time was rife within the world and mass support sprouted internationally in the form of uproar and protest for the plight of the Algerians and their right to independence. The French were largely divided on the question of 'French Algeria' some were in favour of maintaining the status quo, which was a political purgatory between independence and full integration into France, whilst others supported granting full independence and being completely apart from Algeria as a nation. Ultimately the French army was victorious militarily, however an irreversible shift in the socio-political environment had taken place and Algerian
Why did George Bush lose the presidency in 1992, given that he was vastly experienced in foreign policy-making and had already "won" the Cold War and the Gulf War?
Why did George Bush lose the presidency in 1992, given that he was vastly experienced in foreign policy-making and had already "won" the Cold War and the Gulf War? George Herbert Walker Bush - the foreign policy genius with experience as an ambassador to the United Nations, then as United States envoy to China, and if that was not enough as director of the CIA.1 Next, when he ran for president in 1988 and won, Bush's principal focus became foreign affairs. With all the experience he has had, why not? However, what President Bush did not expect was the constant change that would take place during his presidency: from Panama to the end of the Cold War to the win in the Gulf War. Looking at the four successful years of President Bush's foreign affairs, the math just does not add up when it comes to his loss in 1992. What exactly happened to his popularity or rather were his policies actually successful enough for a re-election? One of the basic arguments throughout George Bush's presidency was that the United States foreign policy needed a modification after the Reagan years. It mostly needed focus. However, George Bush did not seem to be the kind of president who could do it, although he had enough experience dealing with international issues. President Bush stressed stability and prudence when it came to foreign policy throughout his campaign in 1988. It even could have
How and why did America's role in the world change in the 20th century?
Michelle Winship Year 1 Themes in American History and Culture Tutor: Dr. C. Kitching Tuesday 13th May 2003 Essay: How and why did America's role in the world change in the 20th century? How and why did America's role in the world change in the 20th century? During the 20th century it can be seen that America's role in the world changed from an isolationist role to one of intervention. The main change can be seen in America's changing foreign policy. Events that happened in Asia and Europe caused the United States to remake its foreign policy and adapt is role in the world accordingly. It is impossible to assume that America's role in the world will stay how it is today; the role of the United States in global affairs is still under fire. America now appears to have abandoned its policy of isolation, and has seen its role in the world change immensely over the past century. The Monroe Doctrine had been set up by US President James Monroe in 1823. The U.S. promised to not intervene in the internal affairs of Europe and in return Europe should not intervene in American affairs. At the beginning of the 20th century it can be seen that American foreign interests were concentrated on relations with Latin America. After the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1898 America dominated Cuba until US troops left in 1902. The Platt Amendment, authorised America to establish a
BRITISH PRESS
BRITISH PRESS Ventspils Augstskola 999 Table of contents: Introduction ..............................................................3 History ....................................................................3 National papers...........................................................4 Two types of national papers...........................................4 Sunday press..............................................................5 Politics.....................................................................5 Scandal.....................................................................7 Weekly and periodical press............................................7 Local and regional press.................................................8 Freedom of the press.....................................................9 Conclusion ..............................................................10 Introduction. Despite the development of motion pictures early in 20th century, of radio broadcasting in the 1920s, and of television in the 1940s, newspapers remain a major source of information on matters ranging from details of important news events to human-interest stories. British people are reported to be the worlds most dedicated home-video users. But this does not mean that they have given up reading. The British buy more newspapers than any other people except the Swedes
How and why did Castro in Cuba come to power? For what purpose and with what success did Castro use the power he had won?
Tim Bell History HL 28/11/05 How and why did Castro in Cuba come to power? For what purpose and with what success did Castro use the power he had won? Born in 1926, Fidel Castro was a second generation Spanish interested in the fields of history, sociology, geography, and agriculture. For 400 years, the Spanish had control of Cuba until the 1890's when the Spanish-American War forced the Spanish to leave. From then on, the USA dominated Cuba both politically and economically. In 1933, Machando, the dictator of Cuba, was overthrown in a revolt with Batista as the new head of state. Under Batista, opposition formed such as the 'Autenticos' party which was led by Grau as well as the 'Ortodoxes' also known as the Cuban People's Party which had broken from the 'Autenticos' in 1947. Due to pressure from the opposition, Batista was forced to step down whereby the leader of the 'Autenticos', Grau, was able to take power. The popularity for the 'Ortodoxes' grew larger through the dissatisfaction of the current government - the 'Autenticos'. Castro himself, was a member of the 'Ortodoxes' but later joined the left wing split group - Accion Radical Ortodox. When Castro attempted to run for Congress in 1952, Batista revolted and overthrew the government once again. From this year on, Castro was determined to make a change to Batista's regime and published 'The Accuser' in seek for
The New Rationality.
Hist. 12 F Banu Kocal Cold War 2/27/04 The New Rationality The 1950's were the years of "limited conflict" this was due to the change of technology of warfare. The more weapons that were created, the longer peace would last as both sides were greatly aware of the dangers of the weapons created, trying to form a co-existence between themselves. Though there were events in which each was pushed towards the use, they were cautious as to find other means. One such example is the US's response towards Soviet satellites, "Such use of military force would in all probability start a global war. This alternative is not in accordance with current US policy and must therefore be rejected..." (July 1956)1 Alternatively, in the USSR's case, telling Anatoly Dobrynin, "...would not actually risk war, but would only bluff to gain concessions. War was inadmissible." Though both sides tried to reduce arms budget, there was still an increasing amount of arms, as well as tension. As confrontations grew, West Germany, Korea and Yugoslavia each side rearmed worrying that the other would start war. Yet with the change of leaders, policies changed and greater measures were taken to limit spending and the dependence on nuclear weapons, as both worried about the strain on their economies. Having made such weapons a constant question was just what good it actually