Resignation of US Attorney's
The Role of the United States Attorney and the Recent Firings The resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on September 17, 2007 came nearly eight months after the firings of eight United States Attorneys. Gonzales' resignation has temporarily stalled the political fall-out from the firings of several United States Attorneys last year. However, Congress has vowed to continue their investigation into this hot button issue regardless of who remains in office as the curtains start to close on the Bush Administration. Over the past two years, eleven of the 93 United States Attorneys have resigned. Eight of those were confirmed forced resignations, while the circumstances for the three other resignations are said to be similar to the firings. Rarely, over the past decade has so much attention been brought to this judicial office. Usually, United States Attorneys will appear in the news briefly to highlight the prosecution of an infamous criminal or the defense of the United States against civil lawsuits. Yet, these recent firings have shed light on the prestigious position and caused many Americans to wonder if any position in the government is free from political influence. The position of the United States Attorney was established in the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Act allowed for an appointment of a "Person learned in the law to act as attorney for the United
North Korea
Unnecessary Death A series of events in the 1990's caused the death of 3,000,000 North Korean people. The selfish acts of government officials combined with natural disasters led to the crippling of a once strong nation. These events caused North Korea's agricultural yield to aggressively decline. The result was a massive country-wide famine killing millions of people. The ideology of juche (pronounced "joo-cheh"), or "self-reliance", which became the countries foundation during the rule of Kim Il Sung, had proven to be its downfall. The North Korean famine can trace its roots back to the establishment of the country over 50 years ago. After a fight for independence against Japanese colonial rule Kim Il Sung, the future dictator of North Korea, began to establish a national rule following the central-planned economy created by Stalin of the Soviet regime. Under this communistic structure all decisions were to be created and carried out by governmental leaders in order to best assist the people. The governmental structure was well received by the people of North Korea. It gave them a sense of pride and sovereignty that they had yearned for. They did not comprehend at that time independence would be given to the country and not to the people. Their loyalty would cause great suffering in the near future. Soon after the official establishment of North Korea, Kim Il
What does the celebration of heroes reveal about attitudes to the past?
On What the Celebration of Heroes Reveals About Attitudes to The Past The historical figures of Ludwig van Beethoven, Captain Scott and Genghis Khan, would not be a grouping one would typically consider, but they do have something critical in common, they all, to differing degrees, have a fan base and are considered heroes to some people. Seldom has the annals of history recorded the lives of regular people, instead prefers to look at specific notable individuals. Throughout human history there has been an apparent urge to revere certain people. Though the original definition meant bold, heroic has come to encompass a myriad of criteria; perhaps a set of moral standards people like such as Jesus’ preaching of “love thy neighbour” or Oscar Schindler’s selfless acts, perhaps martyrs like Joan of Arc or Martin Luther King, perhaps militaristic leaders like Lord Nelson and General Custer - it is clear the term heroic can mean a vast array of positive attributes to a historical figure. Great difficulty arises when using a hero as a model of his or her time because as much myth can surround individuals as fact. As such, the hero is a deeply problematic entity in historiography, as they are not a realistic insight into the life of regular people (social history). Instead, hero celebration is a valuable historical tool for assessing the mind-set at the time and since.
Why, if at all, is History important to society?
Why, if at all, is History important to society? “Every human being at every stage of history or pre-history is born into a society and from his earliest years is moulded by that society.”[1] History in turn moulds society creating a sense of national unity. Therefore it can be argued that history is vital to the individual, creating a sense of self and unity with the nation. Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt and Margaret Jacob support this view arguing “History and historical evidence are so crucial to a people’s sense of identity.”[2] This need for identity and the natural curiosity of humans has led to the development of history and an interest in our past. It is argued by some historians that the past repeats itself. Therefore it is important to study history to prevent mistakes in the past from being repeated, it provides the roots for certain ideas, laws, customs and political ideas. Helping people make sense of how things came to be today and how the past has moulded the present. However it is also seen by some historians that the developing age has changed too dramatically to repeat itself and that “history does not repeat itself. The historians repeat one another.”[3] Some argue that history is losing its importance after having been “shaken down right down to its scientific and cultural foundations”[4] as questions about its reliability and the historians
To what extent were ethnic tensions the primary cause of the Rwandan genocide?
To what extent were ethnic tensions the primary cause of the Rwandan genocide? This essay will explore the history of relations between the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda in order to determine whether or not ethnic rivalries were the primary cause of the 1994 genocide. The impact of colonialism and racism will be investigated along with the importance of French interests in the country following independence. It will be shown how financial interests had a profound influence on events as did the rousing of ethnic tensions for political pragmatism by both the Belgian colonizers and their Rwandan successors. Propaganda also played a prominent role in which the Tutsis were dehumanized and the Hutus were radicalized in order for them to carry out the genocide. This paper will conclude that as Habyarimana's regime and the interests of his foreign supporters was threatened by the power-sharing agreement contained in the Arusha Peace Accords; genocide was instigated in order to remove the opposition posed. First of all, a brief outline of the genocide itself will be given. The genocide began within hours of the presidential assassination of Presidents Habyarimana of Rwanda and Ntaryamira of Burundi. Their plane was shot down with a surface-to-air missile on 6 April 1994 as they were returning from an international meeting in Dar-es-Salaam at which Habyarimana "had finally agreed
Is History a Nightmare
'History' Stephen said, 'is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake' (James Joyce, Ulyssess). Is history a 'nightmare' and, if so, is it possible to awake? History has been represented by some as a triumphal march. As a progressive, unlinear, emancipating process. Fukyama, for instance, has heralded liberal democracy as the 'end of history'; while orthodox Marxism also posits a liberating 'end goal' in the form of 'communism'. History is understood as teleological and determined; a dream. It will be argued that history is more accurately understood as a 'nightmare'; as contingent and determined by conflict or struggle within specific networks of power-relations. In this respect, crude, reductive, teleological understandings of history are rejected, in favour of those that analyse history as based on contingent inter-relationships between structure, agency and discourse. Paradigms such as historical materialism, post-structuralism and critical-discourse analysis will be drawn on to show how relations of power and domination are constructed through conflict. It is these relationships which are the 'nightmare' of history; the nightmare of 'power' and the 'conflict' over it.1 Historical scholarship in historicising social relationships, de-naturalises relationships of power and showing the agency of historical actors can act as a critique to past and present
Is there such thing as a Peasant Community
Reality is just a word that begins with r and ends in y' (Carol Shields) should Historians expunge the word 'reality' from their vocabulary? The concept of 'reality' in historical studies is a contested one: 'history's anxiety now hovers over the status and meaning of the word 'reality''.1 Much historiography is grounded in 'realist' or 'foudationalist' methodology; that is scholarship that explicity attempts to reconstruct a past 'reality'. Indeed, history was given 'scientific' status by a number of scholars. Bury's inaugural lecture as Regius Professor at Cambridge reflects this now outdated positivism: history is a 'science' that has particular 'claims' and 'laws'.2 Historical reality, in this view, is attainable; it can be described and analyzed. However, the notion of 'reality' has been convincingly challenged by scholars influenced by the linguistic turn.3 Scholars such as Jenkins and Harlan have adopted the tenants of post-structuralism and have undermined the epistemological and ontological assumptions guarding the concept of 'reality'.4 History becomes a 'shifting, problematic discourse' unable to make claims of veracity.5 Scholars such as Jenkins dissolve the distinction between 'historical narrative' and 'fictional narrative' undermining the distinction between 'honest' scholarship and propaganda. In Chariter's words, 'all capacity to choose between the
Indigenous australia
Student: Floor Botden Student nr: 22895183 Unit: Australian Idol: Exploring Contemporary Australia Tutor: Mr. Laurie Steed Submission date: 16th August 2010 Word count: 1195 Indigenous Australia: facing the key issues Throughout history Australia's oldest inhabitants, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, have battled for social, economic and political equality with their fellow - white - Australians. Although it seems perfectly normal to have equal rights, social security, education and health care in a modern country such as Australia, these primary needs and equal rights for all is in fact anything but normal for today's Indigenous Australians. Australia today is still struggling with a prominent gap between indigenous Australians and white Australians which leads to adverse ratings on a number of social indicators, including health, education and unemployment. This paper explores these key issues facing indigenous people in contemporary Australia. Understanding these starts with the understanding of Indigenous people's place and rights in Australia's society. In fact, Aboriginal people were not even accorded basic citizenship rights until only a few decades ago. Up until 1967, Australia's original inhabitants were not even counted as citizens. 1 For ten thousands of years, the continent of Australia was considered to be a no one's land, also known as