King Argues Church Must Oppose Vietnam War for Moral Reasons

Stalin Was More Effective Than Any Other Ruler of Russia...
Stalin was more effective than any other ruler of Russia in the period 1855 – 1964 in dealing with
opposition. How far do you agree?
During the second half of the 1920s, Joseph Stalin set the stage for gaining absolute power by
employing police repression against opposition elements within the Communist Party. The
machinery of coercion had previously been used only against opponents of Bolshevism, not against
party members themselves. The first victims were Politburo members Leon Trotskii, Grigorii
Zinov'ev, and Lev Kamenev, who were defeated and expelled from the party in late 1927. Stalin
then turned against Nikolai Bukharin, who was denounced as a "right opposition," for opposing his
policy of forced collectivization and rapid ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Often situated in cold and remote regions, they housed millions of prisoners, especially in the late
1930s. Conditions were inhumane and death rates were high for the prisoners. They were still
heavily used after 1945 though fell into disuse after Stalin's death.
Narodniks were socially conscious members of the middle class who aimed to achieve better
conditions for the working classes. They tried to convert the people to socialism however this failed
as they were persecuted by the state and quickly decimated.
Land and Liberty relied on terrorism and murder. They evolved into the People's Will group which
assassinated Alexander II in 1881. Started around Lavroks ideals and frustration around the failure
of the Narodniks. The state then exiled, killed and imprisoned them.
Perhaps one of the biggest challenges facing Alexander III was political violence. Not only his
predecessor, Alexander II, but also other leading political figures across Russia during the 1870s had
been assassinated. People's Will was a terrorist organisation that hoped to bring political change to
Russia through revolutionary violence. They attacked leading members of local and national
government. The assassination of Alexander II was merely the culmination of a nationwide
campaign of violence.
The immediate cause of revolution was the demonstration in St Petersburg in January
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Fxico Madero Pros And Cons
The country of Mexico won its independence from Spain in 1821 and over the coming decades
would see serious political strife while leaders fought for control of the country. In 1876 General
Porfirio Diaz seized control of the country and held power for the next thirty–four years. Diaz was a
no nonsense sort of leader, who did not allow any opposition to his policies. Diaz promoted
investment into Mexico's natural resources from foreign companies and improved the wages of
many of his supporters, while at the same time ignoring the lower classes who saw their wages
shrink and their livelihood suffer.
Economic strife during the 1907 to 1909 years allowed for opposition parties to rise up to challenge
Diaz. One such leader was Francisco Madero, who campaigned across Mexico for democratic
elections in a bid to oust Diaz. Diaz responded to Madero's Presidential bid by having him and five
thousand of his supporters arrested. Madero escaped across the border in 1910 and called on the
citizens of Mexico to rise up and overthrow Diaz. Other leaders like Emiliano Zapata and Francisco
(Pancho) Villa and Venustiano Carranza martialed their forces were able to force Diaz to ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He encouraged his supporters to engage in massive but peaceful protests, that spread through the
country in 1978. The Shah and his forces responded by attacking the protesters, killing hundreds.
This caused the protests to grow until it callumated in Black Friday on September 8th 1978. The
Shah declared martial law and his forces killed thousands of protesters. Losing international support
from the United States, the Shah fled to Egypt and the Ayatollah returned back to Iran. Protest
continued with many blaming the United States for the Shahs actions and taking hostage workers at
the US Embassy in Tehran. They would be held as captives until January of

Who Is Toussaint Important In The Haitian Revolution
The Haitian Revolution was a major turning point in history for revolutions it led to the first black
republic and inspired other nations to abolish slavery. The Haitian revolution was led by Toussaint
Louverture a former slave who believed in freedom and equality. Toussaint was an important leader
in the Haitian revolution for freedom that got rid of the harsh colonial rule and supported the people
of Haiti. But, he did face opposition because of his plantation style governance inspired by pre–
revolution times. That is how he should be remembered in history because he was an influential part
in the revolution with his style of governance. But, his governance also had its flaws which angered
some Haitian citizens.
Toussaint was an important leader before and and after the abolition of slavery. He imposed a
system of independent rule but also had an egalitarian style rule from his military background that
put laws and military rule in place. This model of governance was relatively successful and helped
keep the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He helped abolish slavery by signing laws that stated that all citizens were free. He also was a great
advocate that voiced his opinion that it was important for everyone to fight for their freedom.
Toussaint wrote, " We have known how to confront danger to our liberty, and we will know how to
confront death to preserve it." This is one of his messages to his people that they will overcome the
harsh rule of the French and that they can become a free nation. He was also at times a selfless
leader who died fighting for his country in France and all he truly wanted was for the freedom and
equality for the people of his island. His major positive impact was the monumental leader he was
during the revolution and how he inspired slaves to go after their

Rhetorical Analysis of Martin Luther King's "Beyond...
Jamie Mason
Ms. Lowe
English 1102 TR, 8:25
2 February 2013
A Time to do What is Right
In Dr. Martin Luther King's speech "Beyond Vietnam–A Time to Break Silence" (1967), Dr. King
asserts that the war in Vietnam is totally immoral and has far reaching negative implications not
only for Vietnam, but for The United States and the rest of the World as well. Dr. King's purpose is
to make the church leaders he is speaking to aware that the time has come for them to speak out
loudly in opposition of the war in Vietnam. He offers many practical reasons for the opposition, as
well as spiritual and moral reasons. He then outlines the history of the war in Vietnam, showing that
he is not simply preaching about religious ideals. He also makes an ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
"Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it
were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war..."(8). War is expensive. This is a
logical fact with which no one can argue. He also says the war is further crippling the poor in the
United States by sending a disproportional number of them to the front lines to die. These arguments
work because they point out that even though the war is not happening on our soil, it is having a
devastating effect here, especially in poor areas where people cannot afford to be hindered any more
than they already are. For these practical and logical reasons, the church should join the opposition.
Then Dr. King says that the church should oppose the war simply because it is counter to the
ministry of Jesus Christ. He says, "To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is
so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I'm speaking against the war" (12).
This is an obvious and extremely effective argument, especially among a group of Christian church
leaders. Dr. King genuinely believes that the war is in direct opposition to the teachings of Christ
and therefore the church must speak out in a united voice against it.
Dr. King includes a brief, but poignant history of the war in Vietnam which is important because he
needs to prove that he knows and understands the politics of the situation. He successfully proves
that The

Bureaucratic Regimes And Political Politics
The relationship between bureaucratic authoritarian regimes and any/all their political opposition is
not one that is harmonious with respect to social order and government functioning. These two
parties often attempt to obstruct the other. The regime typically explores ways to eliminate all
opposition from political society, and political society in turn attempts to discredit the regime in the
eyes of civil society.
One common way the regime eliminates political opposition is by separating political society from
civil society. Political society alone cannot effectively challenge the regime as it does not have the
means to interrupt state functioning and increase the cost of oppression. One way they are able to
divide the two societies is propagating the people into believing that politicians are all corrupt and
do not truly have the interests of the people at heart.1 Bureaucratic authoritarian regimes commonly
rely on bonapartism in order to gain power and keep political and civil society divided. In order to
achieve this effect, the military offers the masses protection from communism in exchange for
popular support in their bid for power. Such was the case in Chile, where the bourgeoisie are so
worried about communism that they supported Pinochet's bid for power. Such was their fear (and by
extension lack of faith in the current government/ political society to keep them safe from
communism) of being dispossessed of their property in status, like what happened to the

Harambees Pros And Cons
Deputy President William Ruto has asked the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (Coard) to stop
being preoccupied with why he conducts fund raisings most of the times in different parts of the
country. Ruto faulted the opposition, noting that discussing personalities at the expense of
development will not help them assume power in 2017, 2022, or any other election year. "Cord
should stop questioning me how I spend my money. Who asks them how they spend theirs? I am
determined in ensuring development across the country and helping out the vulnerable in the
community thus the reason why I attend the harambees. Besides, I have never gone to them to ask
for money to present to Harambees. Neither have I stole someone's money to take to harambees,"

The Between Russia And The Bolshevik Regime
The opposition groups in Russia before 1914 often came across as ineffective and weak; however,
they had certain strengths to them that must be acknowledged to gain the full breadth of the
argument. The main opposition to the Tsar before 1914 was: the Kadets, the Social Revolutionaries,
and the Bolsheviks. All of these groupings have individual strengths and limitations within their
organization and leadership, their support, and their actions; but it is true that, counting all of them
separately, they were weak before 1914; also, because they were so divided in ideologies and ideas
about how to carry out the revolution, they were weak. However, adding all their actions against the
Tsarist regime, it could be argued that they were not ineffective against the Tsarist regime, despite
being individually weak and divided.
The organization and leadership of the Kadets left much to be desired. The party as a whole was a
loose structure and hierarchy, making them weak when presenting on issues facing Russia, and
making them less than a cohesive whole. This structure also made the Kadets appear less than a
united front; making them appear weak to their opponents within the Duma. Similarly, this loose
structure left gaps and weak points within the party, which made it easier for the Tsarist government
to reduce their power as a whole, due to the fact that they became divided as an entire party on how
to face the issues in Russia. Indeed, the Kadets were never clear on their

How Successful Was the Nazi Regime in Dealing with...
How successful was the Nazi regime in dealing with opposition? Explain your answer. The Nazi
regime dealt with opposition through a combination of persuasion and force. Nazi propaganda was
so effective at portraying Hitler and the Nazi ideals in a positive light that many German people
believed Hitler was a good leader and genuinely supported him. Others were too intimidated by
potential consequences if they spoke against the regime that they did nothing. However, there were
some who openly opposed Hitler and had to be dealt with. As Hitler came to power his biggest
opponents were political ones and were the first opposition group that Hitler began to deal with.
After the Enabling Law he banned all other political parties. The ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
However, this does not mean that they fully supported it either. Despite this, there were groups and
individuals who did oppose the Nazi regime. Youth movements such as the Edelweiss Pirates, The
Swing Youth and The White Rose Movement opposed the Nazi regime, rejected their values and
produced anti–Nazi propaganda in defiance. They were more prominent in the later part of the
1930s and into the war years and were dealt with very harshly by the Nazi regime; 12 of the
Edelweiss Pirates were hanged publicly whilst leading members of the White Rose Movement were
executed. Although the Nazis dealt swiftly and decisively with the opposition of youth groups, the
fact that these young people were rejecting the Nazi ideology they had grown up with suggests that
the Nazi attempt to remove opposition by encouraging the loyalty of future generations was not as
successful as it may have seemed. The regime also faced opposition from Church leaders. The
Protestant Church, and particularly Pastor Martin Niemoller, opposed Hitler's Reich Church whilst
members of the Catholic Church were against some of the Nazi's policies such as the Euthanasia
Campaign. The Pope spoke out against Hitler and his ideals. Although some leaders were dealt with
harshly – Niemoller was sent to a concentration camp and some Catholic priests were executed – the
Nazis did not appear to be so effective in dealing with the Church's opposition; most remained open
even though leaders

Semidemocracies Essay
Torey Beth Jackson
Comparative Politics
Case Study
Numerous scholars have determined an inverted U curve exists between regime type and political
violence. In each inverted U relationship, semidemocracies experience more violence than both
autocracies and democracies. Each academic explored in the following literature review, however,
interprets such findings in a different manner.
Hegre et al posit that semidemocracies are more violent than their authoritarian and democratic
counterparts because they are transitioning. They determine that during a semidemocracy's political
change, political institutions are unraveled or not formed at all. Semidemocracies may fall into a
state of civil war because of their transitional nature. Fearon and Laitin's interpretation of the U
curve refines Hegre et al's approach. Their approaches determines that because semidemocracies
cannot fully implement either total repression or actively encourage opposition, a semidemocracy is
unlikely to prevent the rise of rebel groups.
Regan and Henderson theorize that a regime will engage in more repression if its leaders sense a
great political threat. While a typical autocracy allows zero expression of opposition and a
democracy offers numerous channels for expression, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Iranian justice system is characterized by a zealous application of the death penalty, and from
June 2013 to June 2014, nearly 900 people were executed. Activists and minorities are often targets
of arbitrary charges that result in the death penalty. According to Human Rights Watch, Iran leads
the world in executing criminal offenders under the age of 18. Journalists and bloggers are often
thrown into jail for "propagating against the regime," and in general, the Iranian government and
security forces show little tolerance for anything other than the state's Shia–based

Key Traits Of Totalitarianism In Ww2
The key traits of totalitarianism were responsible for the atrocities of the WW2 era as shown
through Hitler's complete control of information, evidenced by the police terror inflicted upon the
citizens, and demonstrated through the persecution of many under Stalin's control. The key traits of
totalitarianism were responsible for the atrocities of the WW2 era as shown through Hitler's
complete control of information on the German people, leading to the anti–Semitic beliefs and
discrimination against Jews. The key trait, control of information, is the indoctrination, or teaching,
of a state's beliefs or ideology through the manipulation of education and media, along with the use
of propaganda and censorship. This ultimately leads to the general ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Police terror is seen when violence and terror are used to force complete obedience and to crush any
opposition to the government, usually involving brutal force or even murder. The only goal of using
police terror is to protect the interests of the government, not the citizen's. This would strengthen a
leader's power due to the complete annihilation of opposition, leading to a boost in support for the
leader, as those who would be opposed would not dare speak out for fear stemming from the police.
Specifically, Hitler had established the Sturmabteilung, or SA, which was the Nazi party's own
personal police force. This police force was led by Ernst Rohm, and was used to defend themselves
during meetings, as well as to scare and terrorize the meetings of other political parties in order to
disperse them, so that there were no meetings of those opposed to the Nazi party (Growing Fascism
in Germany Lecture Notes, February 15, 2017). However, the SA contained at one point a few
million members, with some who were against Hitler's rule. Thus, Hitler decided to establish the
Schutzstaffel, or SS. Led by Heinrich Himmler, the SS was a black uniformed group used for
intimidation or terror. The SS was much smaller than the SA, as it was an elite bodyguard unit. The
SS used instruments of repression and murder to carry out their goal, whatever it may be as assigned
by Hitler (Growing Fascism in Germany Lecture Notes, February 15, 2017). Their specific goal was
carried out on June 30, 1934, when Hitler used the SS to purify the SA. Called the Night of Long
Knives, the purification was for the goal of getting rid of any dissenters or members who could
compete with Hitler. In fact, Hitler ordered the death of the leader of the SA, Ernst Rohm, along
with other allies. In total, 85 people

Film Analysis Of The Movie Conspiracy
SS General Reinhard Heydrich was in charge of the "Reich security" and appointed to lead the
infamous Wannsee Conference. This conference featured many established leaders in the Nazi Party,
SS, and German government and gets its name from the location of the meeting, a wealthy German
suburb. The purpose of this conference was to inform the slightly lower ranking German leaders of
the "Final Solution" to the 'Jewish question.' The movie Conspiracy focuses on the Wannsee
Conference and shows the influence on many of the aforementioned leaders. Kenneth Branagh, the
actor that portrays Heydrich, is able to successfully imitate his commanding presence throughout the
film with his use of body language and tone. From the opening scene of the ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The dictation of all of the members remains vague throughout the meeting, leaving much of the
decisions up to interpretation. This is caused by the use of words such as "cleanse" and "evacuation"
instead of directly stating the goals of killing anyone that has been identified as a Jew. One of the
main deceptions used is "solving the Jewish question" and it has implications of being an easy
question to solve. The goal was to have total "'physical eradication" and "cleanse the entire
continent." This deception is then followed to the methods used to kill. The 'T–4 program' was
established as a plan to sterilize any individual with a mental disability. This leads to the
conversation of which method of sterilization should be used and is most effective. As the meeting
proceeds, the joke is made; "who would want them?" and is responded to with a chorus of laughter.
This meeting was accompanied by many lawyers or well–educated men leading to the statement that
"it [a law degree] has made me distrustful of language," giving reason to the limited specifics
mentioned. Throughout the meeting the German leaders are not specific in their plan. This allows
for them to justify what is being done by claiming it was not their intention for a certain act to
happen. Even though the film ends with a decision to continue with the Jewish extermination, it took
convincing and force for all of these men to agree. Regardless of each individual's opinion, the plan
of extermination would

How Did Stalin Deal With Opposition
'Stalin was more successful in dealing with opposition than any other ruler of Russia in the period
from 1855 – 1964' How war do you agree?
Stalin was one of the most effective Russian leaders of the 20th century with the use of propaganda,
fear and repression, he managed to create a cult of personality around USSR which reinforced his
dominance and superiority as a communist leader. The use of repression supported his sovereignty
and during his reign he dealt with opposition which came in different forms. During his time as
General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Stalin
managed to supress any opposition threatening his power successfully and effectively.
Firstly the use of repression was a major ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
First of all, he believed that the country had to be united – with him as leader – if it was to be strong.
Secondly, Stalin calculated that the Soviet Union only had 10 years to catch up with the Western
world in terms of industrial growth before Germany invaded, which was highly plausible. The
Soviet heavy industry was weak and in the decline, obviously lacking the capacity to produce
enough metal and heavy machinery for the imminent war. The Terror also allowed Stalin to easily
get rid of any threatening opposition to his reign and therefore would protect himself from any
potential assassinations, something most other leaders didn't

Islam 's Anti Western Appeal
Daria Farman–Farmaian
5/1/16
Islam's Anti–Western Appeal and its Role in Establishing an Iranian Republic
"Like a series of mirrors facing each other, the revolution depended for its success on a series of
perceptions of perceptions." With this image, Michael Axworthy, a contemporary historian, aptly
argues that the Iranian revolution of 1978–79 was possible because people believed that their
grievances against the Shah were widespread, thereby creating a gradual sense of unified opposition.
Mohammad Reza Shah, the second Pahlavi monarch who ruled Iran from 1941–1979, lived a lavish
and alienating lifestyle, trying to emulate western society. With growing discontent towards the
Shah and his westernizing reforms, Iranians turned to the Shia Ulema, the Iranian clergy, and other
groups for guidance. Demanding a return to traditional culture, which took the form of religious
fundamentalism and a separation from the materialism of the west, the Iranian masses rebelled
against the Shah's regime in 1978–79. Because of the Shah's failure to embrace the economic and
social reforms proposed by the opposition, the Iranian masses overthrew the Shah and united around
the charismatic Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to establish an Islamic Republic.
With discontent growing towards the Shah and his westernizing reforms throughout the mid–1900s,
religion became the voice of the opposition led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. As a result of the Shah's
social and economic reforms, however, the Ulema

The Role Of Light Rail In The City Of Milwaukee
Milwaukee has had a long history dealing with light rail. From the 1890's when streetcars were the
main way of transportations, to the trackless trolleys and highways built in the 1950's and 1960's.
The city of Milwaukee went through many ways of trying to get people around the city and the
county. By looking back, we can tell that a couple of major obstacles prevented Milwaukee from
reinstalling light rail in the 1990's. One of those main obstacles was the opposition from certain
leaders in the community and state. Once light rail the light rail proposal came out to the
community, opposition immediately followed. Business leaders like George Watts, who heavily
promoted the idea that light rail was not the right route to go for transportation.

The Purges Of Joseph Stalin
The purges
Joseph Stalin was the Soviet leader of Russia for over 25 years. Stalin was very paranoid and
executed anyone he deemed to be a threat. In 1934, Kirov, the leader of the Communist Party and
also a workplace colleague so to speak, was murdered, probably on Stalin's orders this is widely
acknowledged as the even that started the 'Purges'. Stalin used Kirov's death as an example to order
massive purges in which anybody suspected of being disloyal was murdered, sent to prison camps
known as 'Gulags' or exiled to Siberia. This example Stalin used at the start of the purges
demonstrates the length Stalin was willing to go to achieve his goals and the level of his paranoia.
The purges quashed all opposition to any of Stalin's choices allowing him to enforce whatever he
chose in the Soviet Union; this allowed the process of Russification in Stalin's view to start in which
all territories ruled by the Soviet Union had to follow Soviet law including all religion to be banned.
In the short term, the purges were a mass slaughter and millions of people were killed, over 30% of
the whole population had been arrested or executed. Stalin had created a totalitarian dictatorship in
which his voice commanded the whole of the USSR and he had no opposition. Fear was Stalin's
weapon on his people. On the other hand, in the short term the Purges contributed to the USSR's
poor performance during Hitler's operation Barbosa due to lack of experienced commanding officers
and general

The Abolitionist Movement : The Leaders, The Approaches...
Htet Yi Linn Professor Raymand Buyco History 117AApril 20, 2015 The Abolitionist Movement:
The Leaders, the Approaches and the Oppositions 8) What were the goals and methods of the
abolitionist movement? Who were the leaders? Why were they unpopular? The goal of the
abolitionist movement was to achieve immediate emancipation for all slaves in the United States
and to end the discrimination of African Americans in the United States (Foner, Give Me Liberty
445). Of the many leaders of the abolitionist movement, some of the prominent leaders were David
Walker, William Lloyd Garrison, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Frederick Douglass and John Brown.
Different abolitionists used different methods to achieve their mutual goal of achieving
emancipation of all slaves. During a time when slavery was thriving, their idea was regarded by
many as completely absurd; but it was this absurd idea that freed the people of America. During the
1820s, there were over 1.5 million slaves in the United States and it continued to grow to 2 million
in the 1830s (Foner, Give Me Liberty 398). Slave trade was also thriving and many of the presidents
were slave holders (Cotsirilos). Even though some people agreed with the abolitionists that slavery
is immoral, they did not view African–Americans as equal. The majority of the population viewed
African–Americans as inferior to them and believed the latter do not deserve the same rights as
whites (Foner, Give Me Liberty 406). During the period where the majority

Why did the Nazis Never Face the Threat of Serious...
In Germany at the start of the Nazis regime they had a lot of political opposition who were mainly
socialists, but the Nazis never faced serious threats of rebellion in Nazi Germany and the Nazis
reign. There are many different factors which caused this to happen; one of these being the
propaganda used by the Nazis which was extensive and covered all of Germany; this propaganda
was used successfully and made the majority of German people belief what the party was saying, as
it gave them a sense of national identity. They did this by focusing on the German youth mainly.
Another factor which helped defend the party from the threats of rebellion was the fear and terror
which the Nazis bestowed on the people, through the use the SS and the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
From the outset there was disunity within and between opposition. A case where this has happened
is disunity between the Social Democrats, who's activities did not stand any chance of succeeding
any of their aims; the reason for this being their was no solidarity between the social democrats after
the 1933 election when the Nazis came to power. Because of this the Social Democrats could not
spread the same message across the country; this is a major issue when the Social Democrats are
trying to gain support to even think of rebellion on a mass scale. The Communists had determination
to produce a successful revolution from the beginning and tried but they also had the same issues
with many of the leaders either had been killed, imprisoned or exiled. There was also hatred
between the Communists and the Social Democrats that had gone on for sometime; this also makes
it harder for their goals to succeed; if they came together and stood together, they may have had a
better chance at causing a rebellion; but this was never going to happen due to the long lasting
hatred. Although there was constant communist resistance through the whole period, for example
Rote Kapelle was an active communist resistance group trying to stage many revolutions but never
succeeded and in 1942 were caught and executed. Although the

Stalin/Alexander Iii Was More Successful at Dealing with...
Opposition is a constant theme faced by any political ruler. A common measure of success is how
effective a ruler is at dealing with the problem of opposition, in comparison to his
previous/succeeding rulers, in this instance, comparing Stalin to the Tsars Alexander II,III and
Nicholas II, and Communist Leaders Lenin and Khrushchev, over a decade of Russian history.
Under Stalin, the campaign to crush opposition began almost instantaneously. Initially, this came in
the form of political opponents such as Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamanev and the left. Beginning with
Trotsky, Stalin seized opportunity and dominated the 12th Party Conference in 1923, after Trotsky
failed to capitalise on the chance to make the principal speech, which would ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
This highlighted not only Stalin's fear of being subsided as leader of the USSR, but his ruthlessness
in the face of opposition. Then followed the 1936 Show Trials, in which there were many arrests of
party members, ex–opponents, military figures and non–party members. The first involved Zinoviev,
Kamanev and their allies, who confessed under force for falsified crimes of being responsible for
attempts to wreck Soviet industry and to kill Soviet leaders, and subsequently were shot after being
convicted. The second followed in January 1937, in which Karl Radek, a well known Trotskyite and
Pyatakov was shot, again on falsified crimes. In March 1938, Bukharin and 20 members of the old
Right Deviation were tried, and found guilty of working with Trotsky and foreign governments
against the USSR. All confessed and were shot, with Tomsky being so crippled by fear that he
committed suicide. The Show Trials were a grotesque sham by which Stalin cast immense fear into
the hearts and minds of Russia's political clout, ensuring total control over any opposition through
fear alone. Removal of any potential opposition was extended in July 1937 when Yezhov (Stalin's
head of the secret police from 1936) drew up a list of over 250,000 'Anti–Soviet elements', which
included intelligentsia such as artists, writers, musicians, priests and so forth. This became known as
the Anti–Soviet List, ad anyone unfortunate enough to be found on it was arrested,

Stalin 's The Dominant Leader Of The Soviet Union
How did Stalin come to be the dominant leader of the Soviet Union?
It is undeniable that Stalin had a profound impact on the Soviet Union following Lenin's death. His
rise to power within the Soviet Union has provided historians with a hotbed of political intrigue for
many years. He was an opportunist, coming to dominance by manipulating party politics and
influential figures in the politburo to eliminate his opposition by recognising and exploiting their
weaknesses thus becoming the dominant leader of the Soviet Union. He was severely
underestimated by other members of the Politburo about his potential within the party, leading to
missed opportunities to ally and stand against him– a mistake that Stalin never made. He gained
support from the public by exploiting the idea of 'the Cult of Lenin' in 1924 at Lenin's funeral, and
then adopting this concept for himself, thereby likening himself to Lenin; and, more importantly,
gained support from other party members by following the wishes of Lenin, for example, initially
supporting the continuation of the NEP and supporting the idea of factionalism. This essay will also
argue that he was ideologically flexible as he was able to change his ideas for the party according to
who he needed as an ally, in order to achieve dominant status in the party. He sought out which
individual was the biggest threat, and eliminated them before they could stand against him.
The events which led to Stalin's rise to power were not simple and it was

Essay about How Napoleon Maintains Control in France...
How Napoleon Maintains Control in France 1799–1814
After the long period of instability in France, Napoleon seemed to acknowledge the importance of
maintaining his power, influence and control over France and the French people. Napoleon was very
able in this regard as it is important to make the people to support you and to limit opposition,
something that Napoleon and Hitler shared in common. Napoleon maintained his power in many
different ways, rewarding people that supported him, repressing people who didn't, censoring
material that would harm his regime and producing other material to boost its popularity. He also
controlled things which were important for everyday people like religion, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The next way that Napoleon maintained his control was through Repression, to limit any opposition
to his regime. Napoleon created "Code Napoleon" to bring uniformity of the law to all of France.
This Code was illiberal, restrictive, authoritarian and brought order. Napoleon then banned trade
unions and introduced "The Livret". He also introduced harsher Criminal and Penal codes with new
courts, tribunals for political offenders, arbitrary imprisonment without trial and house arrest. All
these changes gave Napoleon perfect power to remove any opposition, as he had influence of
appointment of judges and the Supreme Court. Napoleon also used the police, which monitored
public opinion, used a network of spies and informants. Napoleon also had his own secret police so
that he had supreme power to remove anyone at all that stood against him. Napoleon also appointed
Prefects for each department which was important as it made a connection between local and central
government and Napoleon made the prefects responsible for propaganda, education and conscription
within each region, so Napoleon could make sure that he kept his support through out France. This
repression was important as Napoleon could prevent any opposition from developing which may
threaten his regime, as many normal people wont do anything if there is no organised opposition to
turn

Poland DBQ
Diego Lopez Liranzo
22 September 2014
AP European History
Form VI
Analyse the factors that contributed to the emergence of a workers' opposition movement in
Communist Poland in the period 1956–1981.
After World War II, the official communist party dominated all aspects of Polish politics, which
soon became an issue with not only the working class of the country, but also the intellectual and
educated Polish community. Between 1956 and 1981, there was an emergence of workers'
opposition against the communist party in Poland due to the blatant oppression and desperate living
conditions of many of the Polish workers and their families. Workers demanded rapid change in
policy from the party because the workers believed the government had ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
(Doc 4) The intellectual and party member support helped the workers' movement gain serious
momentum. A major factor in the emergence of the workers' opposition movement also was the
support of the Catholic Church and the Pope specifically. In September of 1976, the bishops of the
Catholic Church in Poland called for the government and party to "fully respect civil rights and
conduct a real dialogue with society" while also demanding that they stop all repression of workers
involved in the protests of June 1976. (Doc 5) The fierce and somewhat scolding tone in which the
demands are made show the Catholic Church's unwavering support for the Polish workers'
opposition. It is not surprising, however, that a group of Catholic bishops would demand better
treatment for the Polish workers because, as members of the church, they would naturally be in
favour of social justice. The value of having the Catholic Church support the movement manifests
itself in the fact that the Polish communist party begins to require all teachers to tell students that the
pope is "an enemy" and "dangerous" man who only wishes to charm the crowd. (Doc 7) This
response to the pope's support demonstrates that the party itself realised that the church could have
tremendous impact on the turnout of the opposition. By the 1980s, a coalition of independent trade
unions, known as Solidarity, was established in Gdansk. The photograph of Lech Walesa and other

Examples Of Propaganda In Animal Farm
Animal Farm vs ISIS Propaganda Some of history's greatest and most infamous leaders have gained
and held uncontrolled power for very long periods of time. It always comes into question as to how
a single person could attain such massive amounts of power while remaining unchecked by the
people being led. Through the use of propaganda, these leaders have been allowed to corrupt
themselves and their government standards while still keeping the approval of the people.
Propaganda is a powerful tool in any sort of conflict because it not only controls how the people
view each side, but how history will remember the participants of the conflict. Prime examples of
this can be seen in the novel Animal Farm and in today's conflicts involving the terrorist group
known as ISIS. Both of these situations represent how propaganda has allowed morally disobedient
individuals to remain in power without question or resistance. A powerful tactic in the world of
power struggles is slander (also known as name–calling), in which a person defiles the reputation of
another to both reduce opposition and gain the trust of the public. One great example of the effects
of using propaganda to gain power can be found in a quote from the book Animal Farm. It
emphasizes how Napoleon had used his public influence to eliminate Snowball from the contest for
power. By saying "He (Napoleon) had seemed to oppose the windmill, simply as a maneuver to get
rid of Snowball, who was a dangerous character and bad

Cultural Conflicts In Nicaragua
Introduction While China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, and immigration have dominated international
news, clashes between the government and protesters have resulted in 145 dead and thousands
injured (Agence France–Presse, 2018, para. 5) during "the bloodiest disturbance in Nicaragua since
the 1980's" (Associated Press, 2018, para. 11). A missionary evacuated from the region in May
succinctly expressed the frustrations of many over the lack of impetus of other nations to condemn
the rampant violence and human rights violations that have become common place in this conflict
(R. Caiazzo, personal communication, June 5, 2018). Analysis Addressing cultural conflicts begins
by mastering the story behind the problem (Patterson, Grenny, Maxfield, McMillan, & Switzler,
2013). Hauk and Mueller (2015) suggest three variables common to such stories; the cultural
leaders, the cultural perspectives, and the incentives that compel each group to engage or disengage
in negotiation. Understanding these components offers insights to open potential doors to negotiate
an acceptable resolution. Cultural Leaders The first step in moving cultural conflicts toward
productive negotiation is identifying leaders; influential individuals which Hauk and Mueller
describe as the source of culture. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As the primary architect of Sandinista culture, President Daniel Ortega has extended his control
within the party and the government indefinitely by eliminating presidential term limits with the
help of the supreme court and a Sandinista controlled constitutional committee (Cherry, 2014).
Another cultural leader of the Sandinista party, Rosario Murillo, vice president and wife of President
Ortega, was part of the revolution from the beginning and viewed as the "power behind the throne"
(Burbach, 2009, para. 2; Schrank, 2018, "Paralysis" section, para.

Lord Of The Black Rod
Some people have specific duties in Parliament – the Governor–General, the Speaker, the Prime
Minister, Ministers and other members with special roles, the Clerk of the House, the Serjeant–at–
Arms, and the historical office of Usher of the Black Rod. Their titles and functions are set out here.
Sovereign / Governor–General
Speaker of the House
Deputy and Assistant Speakers
Prime Minister
Ministers
Leader of the House
Leader of the Opposition
Whips
Clerk of the House
Serjeant–at–Arms
Usher of the Black Rod
Sovereign / Governor–General
The Sovereign, represented in New Zealand by the Governor–General, is an essential part of
Parliament and has a formal role. This includes assenting to bills passed in the House of
Representatives so that they become Acts of Parliament.
After a general election the Governor–General opens Parliament by delivering the speech from the
Throne. The speech from the Throne sets out the Government's intentions for the coming term of
Parliament. The Governor–General also brings a parliamentary term to an end. This is known as
'dissolution'.
The Governor–General has no part in the daily activities of the House of Representatives.
Speaker of the House
The Speaker presides over the House of Representatives. It is the Speaker's role to apply the rules of
the House (Standing Orders), and oversee procedures and the day–to–day operation of the House.
The Speaker:
represents the House to the Sovereign and the Governor–General chairs the meetings of the

Churchill's Defeat Of Great Britain At The First World War
People make history. When France had fallen to the Nazi Germany it now meant that the British
now stood alone and they were not going to give appeasement anytime soon. They selected a new
prime minster Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, he was very much against giving into the
Germans. For England Churchill was their savior in the war, when the time was difficult and the
odds were against England he gave the British their will/ urge to fight back and to not give into the
Nazi's. "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the
fields and in the streets... We shall never surrender." He was what the British needed. He was one of
the greatest speakers and used this to his advantage to persuade the British people to support him
and have ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
".... Wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give
us.... Against a monstrous tyranny." He was determined that Germany would not defeat the British.
He was a great role model for the British people, he never gave into the enemy and even if it was a
difficult decision he did what he thought was best for the nation not just him.
7.) What factors do your think a country's leader considers when deciding whether to fight or
surrender?
I think that many countries leader have five major reasons when deciding whether to fight or not.
Will their allies help them, are they economically stable for war, do the majority of the people
support it, is their military as advanced as the opposition, and finally do they see themselves
winning the war. The success of a nation at war depends on these five major reasons in my opinion
of course there are many more but these are key factors. If the nations allies are defensive

Muhammad 's Influence On Islam
In the year wchih followed the Revelation, Muhammad began his public preaching. The first
converts include his wife – Khadija, cousin – Ali, other people closely related to him, and eventually
more people from his own clan of Hashim. At first there was no sign of opposition against
Muhammad's teaching, but as it become more widespread in Mecca, people start seeing it as a threat
to the city's stability. Muhammad's message about a single, all–powerful deity negates the
legitimacy of the haram and its idols, puting the holy and neutral status of the site at risk. This
theological clash continued to put pressure on Muhammad and his followers. However, they receive
protection because of the solidity of the clan system. It had been Abu Talib, Muhammad's uncle,
who united the Hashim in support of Muhammad and protected him for his Meccan opposition.
In 619, both Khadija and Abu Thalib, two of Muhammad's most important protecters passed away
and his opposition became even more bold and determined to pressure Muhammad. It is important
to remember that the previous early success of the spread of Islam in Mecca could only be achieved
because of Muhammad's allegience and close relationship with these two important Meccan figures.
In other words, Muhammad's kinship paved the way for his teachings to be disemminated within the
Meccan society. As Meccans become more hostile towards Muhammad, he began to look outside his
native city for support. At this crucial point, Muhammad was

The Wasat Party in Egypt: Promoting a Liberal Political...
The Wasat Party has slowly become an important opposition party throughout the years that
promotes a more liberal political environment in Egypt. The article explains that before the Wasat
Party had the legal status of an official party, the foundation was being formed secretively by young
leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. The young leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood were considering
democratization to be a better option because of the positive impacts in had on other countries
around the world. Moreover, the young leaders didn't desire the repression they had to go through
because of the strict interpretation of the Shari'a, the Islamic law. The Shari'a condemned aspects
Therefore, the young leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood had to keep their intentions of their
aspiring new political party secret until it was exposed to the regime. The Wasat Party offered more
liberal interpretation of the Shari'a as well as provides different ideas of what undermined the
Islamic core values the differed from the Muslim Brotherhood. There are three important ideological
principles that characterize the Wasat Party that differ from the Muslim Brotherhood. The first
ideological principle is the interpretation of the Shari'a and its role in politics. For the Muslim
Brotherhood the Shari'a is a set of binding rules that have a major role in politics. They are fully
bound by the rules and provide various measures of repression to any violators of such rules. In
contrast, the Wasat Party

Similarities And Differences Between The Presidents And...
Leaders of authoritarian systems have an absolute rule without contestation from others and have the
power to control all factors that concern their state. This paper will explore the similarities and
differences between ruling presidents and ruling parties within the authoritarian system.
Authoritarian rulers place themselves above the law without any reprimand. There is no respect for
civil society and the population has limited political participation. These rulers often strive to
financially benefit themselves rather than their state and any opposition is removed by threats of
violence. This increases fear within the population and increases power of the ruler or rulers. All
media platforms are censored and monitored and the ruler or party

Nehemiah In The Bible
Many people have come to me struggling with opposition. I urge you to not fret and look at way
Nehemiah in the Bible handled opposition. He gives a great of example of you we should handle
everyday problems that happen to us. In order for us to begin rebuilding your confidence and ability
to handle opposition let us take a look into the life of Nehemiah. The name Nehemiah means
"Jehovah comforts" Nehemiah is a character in the Bible. He was working for King Artaxerxes, as
the cupbearer. What a cupbearer does is he tests the food before the king eats it to make sure it is not
poisonous. Nehemiah found out that Jerusalem's walls and gates had been destroyed and he wanted
to help rebuild them. He asked Artaxerxes to allow him to go to Jerusalem ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Nehemiah responded with this statement, "The God of heaven is the One who will grant us success.
We, His servants, will start building, but you have no share, right, or historic claim in Jerusalem."
With this you must ask yourself. When life has you down and you are having a tough time at work,
home, or anyplace that you may be remember "The God of heaven is the One who will grant you
success..." You can not let the words of people put you down. Also do not look to worldly things to
bring you comfort, the only person who can truly save and refresh you is the Lord, "...He will grant
you success..." little did Nehemiah know that this was just the beginning. Nehemiah 4:1–3 The
leaders began mocking the Jews who were starting on the gates and wall. Nehemiah in verse 4 and 5
said this, "Listen, our God, for we are despised. Make their insults return on their own heads and let
them be taken as plunder to a land of captivity. Do not cover their guilt or let their sin be erased
from Your sight, because they have provoked the builders." Nehemiah Gave all his problems he was
having to the Lord. As followers of Christ you, and I must remember to give all our problems to
God don't let them sit inside and grow into something bigger than they were

The National Salvation Front
The National Salvation Front (FSN), led by Ion Iliescu, comprised the new provisional government.
Iliescu gained popularity by proclaiming his role in the death of Ceauşescu and championing a new
"one party democracy" (Wolchik and Cury 318). Ceauşescu's legacy and the lack of political
competition in Romania led the citizen's of Romania to believe in the empty promises of reform
made by the FSN and Iliescu. The National Salvation Front promised to be a transitional
government and to offer free and fair elections (Wolchik and Cury 317). In May 1990, they offered
free, but unfair elections in which Iliescu won the presidency with over 85% of the vote and the
FSN won a majority of parliament with 66% of the vote (Vachudova 41). Iliescu quickly proved to
be anti– Ceauşescu, but not anti–communist. Immediately after his election in 1990, Iliescu began to
concentrate his power by appointing communists to government positions, ousting non–communists,
and taking control of the media (Vachudova 45). Anti–Iliescu demonstrations in Bucharest began in
response and Iliescu sent miners to violently oppress the demonstrations (Linz and Stepan 361).
Iliescu continued to demonstrate that he would not allow a strong opposition. A small number of
opposition groups managed to exist in Romania; however, they were small and fragmented. Iliescu
was reelected in 1992, despite his repeated manipulation of illiberal democratic processes such as
rent–seeking and partial economic reform. Under

DINA in Chile
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
HL HISTORY
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
INTERNAL ASSESSMENT To what degree were the measures taken by the DINA effective in
stopping opposition to Pinochet from 1973 to 1977? Gaby Chiongbian
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Word Count: 1,993
Number of pages: 12
Section A: Plan of Investigation In June of 1974 Augusto Pinochet and the Junta formally
established the Directorate of National Intelligence also known as the DINA (Kornbluh 157) and
was a prominent branch of Pinochet's regime until 1977. The DINA was key in consolidating
Pinochet's power in Chile by eliminating opposition. In order to determine the to what degree were
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The CIA had these files in order to keep tabs on the Chilean government. The United States had
allied them with Pinochet's government, however, they soon got reports of human rights violations
and so they began to look into the secret police of Chile. The document had the purpose of reporting
the organisational structure of the DINA and the function of each branch back to the CIA
headquarters. Being written in the midst of the DINA's peak it allows one to see the structure in
which things thrived for the secret police. Not only does it show the structure but the positions and
branches within the DINA, which can serve as an evaluation of how extensive the DINA's coverage
was in gathering intelligence and apprehending opposition. Although, having not been written by the
DINA themselves

Essential Readings For College Writers: Nature Over Nurture
Andrea Garcia
Mr.Smith
9th Grade Composition
Leadership Essay
December 4, 2017
Nature Over Nurture
What were to happen if a few students in a group were to not have a leader? What if a whole country
were to not have a leader? The students are not doomed with the result to come, but unfortunately,
the country would erupt into massive chaos. There are many different ways leaders have to lead
their people. Leaders are always liked and disliked because there is no perfect leader, but leaders
should not be generous. Leaders need to be strict in order to prevent opposition to leadership. There
have been leaders who have succeeded and leaders who have also failed in being strict to stop the
opposition, but there are also other aspects of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Leaders need to be strict to stop the opposition. What would a place be like without a leader taking
control and actually leading? To what extent would the pandemonium be without a leader?
Works Cited
Jefferson, Thomas. "Declaration of Independence." A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for
College Writers, edited by Lee A. Jacobus, Bedford/St. Martins, 2013 pp. 258–267.
Lao Tzu. Tao–te Ching. A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers, edited by Lee A.
Jacobus, Bedford/St. Martins, 2013, pp. 202–217.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Qualities of a Prince. A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College
Writers, edited by Lee A. Jacobus, Bedford/St. Martins, 2013, pp. 218–235.
Stanton, Elizabeth Cady. "Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions." A World of Ideas: Essential
Readings for College Writers, edited by Lee A. Jacobus, Bedford/St. Martins, 2013, pp. 268–277.
"Top 15 Greatest Leaders of All Time." Listovative, 1 July 2014,

Iran Human Power Essay
The subject of human rights is a topic that most countries around the world are familiar with. The
United States of America has a democratic form of government that receives its power from its
people which is a stark contrast to the Islamic theocratic form of government in Iran which has all of
its power come from a Supreme Leader, Islamic Cleric. The U.S. was founded upon a document
known as the Constitution of the U.S. and Bill of Rights, while Iran's government is wholly set forth
by extreme Islamic laws. The U.S. Constitution secures the people's natural human rights as the
Declaration of Independence declares the people to be independent of government control and able
to obtain rights that are given to every man by their Creator. This ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
there are 3 branches of government; legislative, executive, and judicial whose powers are given by
the Constitution and the people. This a democratic republic form of government whose power is
shared between the federal and state governments. The legislative branch is made up of Congress;
Bicameral, House of Representatives and Senators. Congress has the power to levy and collect
taxes, print money, provide for post offices and roads, create federal courts, declare war, initiate the
militia and make laws. Each Representative and Senator are elected by the people in their state for a
specified amount of time. The executive branch is the President who is the head of state and
government as well as Commander in Chief of the military and the chief diplomat. The President
granted power by the constitution to veto laws, sign treaties, and broker peace or war with foreign
powers. The third branch of government is the judicial branch which applies the laws and power is
given in Article III S1 of the constitution. The Judicial Branch establishes that all federal judges are
appointed by the President and confirmed by the senate. In addition, each state has their own form
of government that falls under the federal government but is separate from it. In opposition to the
U.S. form of government, The Islamic Republic of Iran (domestic and foreign) is completely
controlled by the cleric or the Supreme Leader. He is commander in chief of Armed Forces and
appoints and dismisses judiciary, state controlled media, and revolutionary guard. He appoints 6 of
12 members of council of Guardians which is the body that oversees parliament. They decide who
can run for which government office. The Supreme Leader has around 2000 clerical field operatives
sprinkled throughout government to intervene on his Behalf. The Supreme Leader and his clerics
review Islamic writings and make the country's laws strictly upon that one religious view. No other
opinion on how laws or on the

Essay on Fascism
On the 23 March 1919 after a series of Communist demonstrations, the almost forgotten Mussolini
decided to attempt to revive his Fasci movement. A meeting was held in a hall in a Milan and was
attended by some fifty malcontents. From this seemingly small and insignificant event the Fascio di
Combattimento' (Combat Group) was born. Initially, it would seem that the Fasci were destined for
failure with none of their candidates (including Mussolini) winning a single seat in the 1919
elections. How was it that a party with no clear programme, save a belief in action of some sort,
became a ruling dictatorship little more than ten years later? By the end of 1919,
Mussolini possessed hardly more than 2% of the vote in Milan, less
than ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Interestingly, they were later to make exactly the same mistake again. The fact that Mussolini's party
benefitted greatly by offering action, showed that political gains could be made from the weakness
of the government and from the unrest of the country. It was at this point in 1921 that Gioletti began
searching for allies against the Socialists. The Vatican had turned against him; This was mainly due
to the government's proposal to tax the bonds which were a main form of Church property at the
time. As a result Gioletti decided to use Fascist support against the Socialists.
Why did Gioletti decide to use the Fascist's support to combat the
Socialists, when there were many other safer ways of doing so?
Principally, he believed that he could easily dominate Mussolini and once in power again he would
discard the tougher elements' among the Fascists. He made a grave mistake in believing this. In the
winter of 1920–21, Mussolini organized his men into squadre d'azione' (squads of action) headed by
local leaders ( ras') like Balbo in Ferrara and
Grandi in Bologna. Primarily, Mussolini's clever planning was demonstrated by his success: His
initial campaign of violence against the Socialists led to 200 dead and 800 wounded in the period
between
December 1920 and May 1921. The government, in accordance with its alliance with the Fascists,
did little to prevent the violence, and instead saw it as a cheap way of

How Did Lenin Win The Bolsheviks
One of the first problems faced by the Bolshevik party was the upcoming election to the All Russian
Constituent Assembly in November. Lenin was highly opposed to this as he thought any democratic
elections were tricks played by the bourgeoisie to keep itself in power and unlike other political
parties Lenin's ideas for the Bolsheviks were different, he did not want to win mass support but to
create a party capable of seizing power , the Bolsheviks ruled by de facto not de jure. This led to the
dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, January 1918. This aided the Bolshevik consolidation of
power as this action is considered to be the onset of the Bolshevik dictatorship as all political
opposition had been removed, from this moment onwards any legal opposition was essentially
impossible. Furthermore this revealed the lack of support for the Bolsheviks in Russia as they had
lost the election by only won 24% of the vote, (175 of 707 seats) in the Constituent Assembly.
Whereas their opposition the social revolutionaries (SRs) won a majority, with 370 of 707 seats. The
SRs had a clear majority with the peasant vote. The Bolsheviks considered the winning of the urban
votes was more significant than winning the rural vote . Lenin saw how vulnerable the Bolsheviks
would be if the Constituent Assembly were to remain open. The Bolsheviks, a minority party, could
not lead Russia surrounded by opposition or alternative socialist parties such as the SRs who also
disagreed with how the

Let America Be America Again: Poem Analysis
Langston Hughes grew up in Missouri and through his hard work and dedication was able to attend
Columbia University but decided to leave abruptly after just one year (Biography.com). Hughes
produced many famous and inspiring works one in particular was "Let America Be America Again".
The Poem "Let America Be America Again" was first published in 1936 in Esquire
Magazine(Dreier, Peter). He wrote this poem to express his frustration with the inaccurate
representation of the American Dream. "Let America be America again" contradicted peoples
thoughts about the American dream with peoples actions which were in direct opposition of what
the American dream stood for. Hughes speaks for immigrants and what they believed America
would be like when ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A lot of slaves viewed America as the land of the free and when they arrived they were abruptly
greeted with a starkly different reality. They were greeted with a land that would enslave their
mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters. Native Americans were here from the beginning and were
torn apart from their land in order for the settling population to earn a higher profit. These
individuals came over from Europe in order to extend their empire and to grow their empire. The
immigrant would come to America in search of a better life. Upon arrival they would often find a
country with the very same limitations as the land they have just left. The Opposition is very
surprised that the stories they hear on their way to America don't mesh with the reality that they are
faced when they get there. Hughes communicates a very optimistic attitude regarding the future of
America. This man is showing us all the wrong America has done to their citizens but trusts that we
have the ability to change. All the tools for change are in place, it is just up to the leaders to enact
that change. He recognizes this idea may be a tough sell but in order to be the moral leader of the
world this is necessary. America has always been at the forefront of political and social change and
this must not change. Hughes' poem is very insightful and can be used during any period of time it is
a call upon those in power regardless the level to use their powers for

Essay on The Effectiveness of Stalin's Use of Personal Power
From the 1920's onwards, Stalin set the stage for gaining absolute power, through a number of
campaigns of repression against groups which opposed the Communist Party and Stalin himself.
The use of terror became a central part to Stalin's rule during the 1930's with the launching of The
Great Purges against opposition to Stalin. It can be seen that Stalin did effectively remove
opposition to the exercise of his personal power until 1941 when Germany invaded Russia. The term
'purge' in Soviet political slang was an abbreviation of the expression 'purge of the party ranks.'
However, Stalin's terror changed its meaning to almost certain arrest, imprisonment or even ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The main difference was the terror in the 1920's was usually applied to obvious opponents of the
party; whereas the terror in the 1930's was mainly against members of the party and against people
had committed no offences to be considered as opposition. Another major difference was the earlier
terror had occurred under exceptional circumstances in the civil war, when Communist rule was
under threat. The terror in the 1930's took place while Communist rule was firmly in place. It is
necessary to make a clear distinction between 'The Purges' and 'The Terror'. The purges were the
attempts to 'clean–up' the party so that unworthy party members who only joined for their own
advantage were expelled. They were also attempts to ensure the party members were loyal,
dedicated and active. Whereas 'The Terror' is the name given to the use of fear by Stalin to control
the population and to remove his opponents. There were many attempts to clean up the Communist
party in the early 19360's. In 1933 and 1934 a general purge of the party was launched where alien,
unreliable and disreputable elements were expelled from the party. At the end of 1934 nearly one
million members were expelled from the party and Ryutin was jailed. Also in this year a New
Central Purge Commission was set up. In 1935 there was a verification of party documents

Violence In William Golding's The Night Of Long Knives
Violence has and always will run rampant in human civilization, from civil war to revolution,
violence is only one step away from breaking out. But when the dust settles and the fighting has
stopped what is left behind after humanity's greatest conflicts? Popular belief is that an increase in
violence will lead to a decrease of power and control. Despite this history shows that violence can
be used to obtain power and control by removing one's opposition.
Violence has always been a staple of politics. The "strongest is ruler" policy has existed since man
came to be. History is littered with many groups and individuals that amass military might so they
can attempt to overthrow the government for power and control. But the most infamous example of
a political group using violence to grant themselves power and control by far is The Night of Long
Knives; the night that insured Hitler's Nazi rule over Germany. "Night of the Long Knives, [the]
purge of Nazi leaders by Adolf Hitler. Fearing that the paramilitary SA had become too powerful,
Hitler ordered his elite SS guards to murder the organization's ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Author William Golding tells a tale similar to the examples stated above depicts a power struggle
between to boys of control of the island. One of the candidates for control of the island Jack is
already leader of a fraction of savage boys obsessed with hunting "'They hate you, Ralph. They're
going to do you' 'They are going to hunt you tomorrow. ' (Golding, Lord of the Flies, Pg 188). In the
excerpt Ralph, Jack's rival for control of the island, is being told that Jack will hunt him and kill
him. This is an excellent move from Jack with most of Ralph's backings dead, Jack only need to
move on the king and violently secure his control over the island. By eliminating his rival Jack will
have no opposition and become de facto leader of the

Authoritarianism
Left and Right: Two Sides of the Same Coin Throughout history, different forms of government
have been used to control and lead the masses. One of the most powerful of these forms is
Authoritarianism which often aims to consolidate rule for one individual. This is shown through the
leaders Francisco Franco and Mao Zedong, who represent both sides of the political compass, and
they both gained authority using extremely similar methods. By using these two leaders it is possible
to see how whether left or right wing, Authoritarian leaders rise and control power in similar ways.
Authoritarianism is not bound to a single ideology or group, thus is can be used by both left and
right wing politicians. An example of the later is Francisco Franco ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Mao founded the Chinese Communist Party and would later establish the People's Republic of
China, ruling China from 1945 to 1976 (The Asia Society, 1984). Mao had be an avid revolutionist,
beginning at young age at around 16 (Schram, S. R. 1967), which would be crucial later in his life. A
pivotal point before the Chinese Civil War was the setting up of a revolutionary base in 1931 by
Mao. This base was forced out of Kiangsi in 1934 and Mao's followers left with him, thus beginning
the Long March which ended in 1935. After the Long March, Mao had enough military power to
overcome the Kuomintang, or Chinese Nationalists Party, and gain control of China during the
Chinese Civil War (C N Trueman, 2015). During this civil war China received support from Soviet
Russia in the form of arms and military guidance. As Yang Kuisong, a Chinese historian from 1945,
stated "Soviet leader Joseph Stalin commanded Marshal Rodion Malinovskyto give Mao Zedong
most Imperial Japanese Army weapons that were captured." Clearly by having the support of a
foreign force it aided in the overthrowing of the Kuomintang. After the civil war concluded, Mao
began to purge the land of all Kuomintang influence. According to Stephen Rosskamm Shalom, of
the Arizona State University's Centre for Asian

King Argues Church Must Oppose Vietnam War for Moral Reasons

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Amanda Brady

More from Amanda Brady (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

King Argues Church Must Oppose Vietnam War for Moral Reasons