Book Review The Southern Press - 1515 Words

In a letter to â€Å"The Southern Press,† dated July 20, 1850, G.K. Lewis shared his knowledge and frustrations regarding the many invasions by the Indians. What could be worse than knocking someone down when they are merely trying to pick up the pieces after being defeated? These vicious attacks by the Indians did not only take place in the United States, they took place in Mexico as well. Unknown to most readers, Indians are not as innocent as one is accustomed to believing. In actuality, some Indians were persistent as they inflicted numerous depredations less than 20 miles from Fort Brown, one of the largest military posts in Texas. During this time, it was just a blatant disregard for law and order. The manner in which these vicious†¦show more content†¦In continuing on the same path of Indian attacks, fast-forward to the Mexican-American War. As a result of Mexico’s defeat by the United States, Mexican troops were unable to enforce counterattacks o n the Indians once the Indians retreated back across the U.S. Mexican Border. The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) was the first U.S. armed conflict fought on foreign soil. It positioned a politically divided and militarily unprepared Mexico against the expansionist-minded administration of U.S. President James K. Polk, who believed the United States had a â€Å"manifest destiny† to spread across the continent to the Pacific Ocean. A border skirmish along the Rio Grande started off the fighting and was followed by a series of U.S. victories. When the dust cleared, Mexico had lost about one-third of its territory, including nearly all of present-day California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico. In exchange for surrendering and his release to the United States, the Mexican General Santa Anna agreed to have the boundary line set at the Rio Grande between Texas and Mexico. Of course, it did not pan out as expected. The plan presented was for the boundary to run northward. This would include New Mexico as well as some land in west Texas. Instead, th e Mexican government drew the border at the Nueces River.

Ratification of Constitution Essay - 869 Words

The Constitution has been operative since 1789 after the ratification of nine states (American Vision and Values, Page 52). Today many question the relevancy of a document 222 years old to our society. The Founders created a governmental framework, defining three branches and giving powers to the government and others to the states. It also guarantees the rights of the people. It took two and one-half years for the 13 colonies to ratify the Constitution. This ratification period was one of great debate and produced a series of essays complied into The Federalist. Authored by John Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay during the ratification debate in New York, they tried to get public support for the Constitution. Thus began the first†¦show more content†¦To further strengthen the rights of the people, The Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791. With only the first ten amendments, it is no accident that two amendments, 9 and 10, specifically define the Consti tutions purpose to protect rights, given to the government from the people; and the powers of the government are â€Å"only those delegated to it by the Constitution on behalf of the people† (Spalding, Page 145). Madison in Federalist No. 10 (Page 131) also supports the view of the Framers to have â€Å"great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures†. Madison expounds further in Federalist No. 39 (Page 135) about the constitutional limits of government to â€Å"certain enumerated objects only,† and the states being delegated the remaining â€Å"objects†. Federalism was created in the Constitution and while it seems a difficult concept U.S. Attorney General, Edwin Meese’s definition is very simply put â€Å"institution design was to divide sovereignty between two different levels of political entities, the nation and the states†. (American Vision and Values, Page 62). Moore goes further in support of originalism with examples of Jefferson, Madison, Crockett, Pierce and Cleveland vetoing or rebutting congressional billsShow MoreRelatedThe Debate And Ratification Of The Constitution883 Words   |  4 PagesThe Debate and Ratification of the Constitution The Constitution of the United States of America was ratified in 1789. It begins with, â€Å"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.† The constitution was to serve basicRead MoreThe United States And The Ratification Of The Constitution2191 Words   |  9 PagesAnti-federalists- were a group of people opposed to the ratification of the constitution. They were less organized than the Federalists. They were united in their fear that the Constitution might lead down a path of government corruption and tyranny. They believed in restricting government power. Benefits of federalism- Federalism allows people to maintain loyalty to their states; due to increasing the states ability to meet the citizen’s needs. It makes running this huge country easier and allowsRead MoreThe Constitution Convention And The Ratification Debate Essay1196 Words   |  5 Pagesof Pluralism in the Constitution Convention and the ratification debate The constitutional conventions importance is indisputable, it is one of the biggest turning points in history and it is also an event that continues to affect politics to this day. It can’t be ignored, the constitutional convention has such a big historical significance and such a direct impact on America. People have tried to examine the workings behind the constitutional convention and the ratification debate. Many peopleRead MoreThe Ratification Of The U.S. Constitution. . . Richard1892 Words   |  8 Pages The Ratification of the U.S. Constitution Richard Fernandez HIST 107 J. DeMarco February 28, 2017 (Insert a Page Break here to maintain a separation between your title page and page one) What we re going to focus on was The Articles of Confederation that are in place in the government during the Post American Revolution into the ratification of United States Constitution. A republic was essentially a government in which citizens roll thru elected representative. The people weRead MoreThe Ratification Of The Us National Constitution3020 Words   |  13 Pagestopics: The ratification of the constitution in 1787 limits the democratic freedoms that American citizens had gained right after the Revolutionary War; the New Deal Coalition and policies formed by the President Franklin Roosevelt (FDR) that prevents the country from becoming a socialist stave and saves the democratic and capitalist system; and the G.I Bill compensated the war veterans leading to the emergence of the American middle class. Limitation on Democracy: The ratification of the US nationalRead MoreEssay about U.S. Constitution Ratification Debates789 Words   |  4 PagesU.S. Constitution Ratification Debates On September 28, 1787, after three days of bitter debate, the Confederation Congress sent the Constitution to the states with neither an endorsement nor a condemnation. This action, a compromise engineered by Federalist members, disposed of the argument that the convention had exceeded its mandate; in the tacit opinion of Congress, the Constitution was validly before the people. The state legislatures decisions to hold ratifying conventionsRead MoreWhy the ratification of the constitution was a good thing1595 Words   |  5 Pagesï » ¿ Why the ratification of the constitution was a good thing The Constitution of the United States is one of the first written constitutions and one of the ‘oldest’ to have been made on the national level and applicable today. It was developed and adopted by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in May and September, 1787. The Constitution of 1787 followed the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. The U.S. Declaration of IndependenceRead MoreThe Debate Over Ratification Of The United States Constitution940 Words   |  4 PagesAmerican history has been the arguments made by the Federalists and the Antifederalists over the ideas and powers stated within the United States Constitution. A large number of authors who write about the debates between these two political groups present the ideas of the Federalist and Antifederalist as separate, opposing ideologies about how the U.S. Constitution should either stay the same for the sake of the country or be amended to grant border rights to the public and states. To begin a paper aboutRead MoreAnti Federalists Vs The Ratification Of The U.s. Constitution1074 Words   |  5 PagesOn the other hand, Anti-Federalists were against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Unlike the Federalists, many of the Anti-Federalists were not included in the deliberations on the new constitution; they were not selected as delegates to the consti tutional convention. Anti-Federalists were in favor of a confederacy; a system where the central government exercises no control over subunit governments (i.e. states) and acts for the subunits. Therefore, their name, Anti-Federalists, is notRead MoreWhy Did The Federalist Papers Influence The Ratification Of The Constitution?2354 Words   |  10 PagesSection A: Identification and Evaluation of Sources This investigation will explore the question: To what extent did The Federalist Papers influence the ratification of the Constitution? The publications, arguments, and effects of this document will be the focus of the investigation to allow for an analysis of where and in what ways The Federalist was influential during the constitutional conventions from 1787 to 1789. The first source that will be evaluated in depth is Ron Chernow’s book â€Å"Alexander

Critically evaluate Samuel Huntingtons claims in The Clash of Civilizations free essay sample

The abrupt end of the Cold War meant that the bipolar model of thinking which had dominated the sphere of World Politics for decades became obsolete. This new phase led to a renewal in thinking in the study of International Relations dubbed â€Å"the hundred schools of thought† which led to a wide spectrum of visions about the uncertain future of world affairs. One of the more prominent visions was the late Professor Samuel Huntingtons â€Å"Clash of Civilizations? † published in a 1993 Foreign Affairs article, where he predicted a growing pattern of conflict based on differences in cultural, religious and historical identity of entities he labelled civilizations instead of the ideological differences of the Cold War Era. Huntingtons thesis was a Realist response to Fukuyamas 1992 book, The End of History and the Last Man. Fukuyama argued that the post-1991 world was left with no viable ideological alternative to liberal democracy and the free market economy predicting a new era of global consensus on democracy, justice, human rights and cooperation. The nation will continue to be a central pole of identification, even if more and more nations come to share common economic and political forms of organization. i Huntingtons premise was that The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain as the most powerful actors in world affairs but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. ii The controversial nature of Huntington’s thesis ensured the stern critique by some of his fellow academics for reasons including oversimplification, neglecting contradicting factors and inaccurate predictions. The tragedy of 9/11 and the events that followed revived the confidence in his thesis by his supporters who saw this as the conformation of Huntington’s predictions notably the inconsolable clash between Islam and the West. Huntington begins by describing the historical evolution of the nature of conflicts in the Western World; from the competition between monarchs and emperors for territorial and mercantile expansion leading to the emergence of nation states beginning with the French Revolution, to the rise of ideological conflict after the Bolshevik Revolutioniii. His Eurocentric bias is clear early as he quotes and perpetuates an idea put forward before by William Lind that these were primarily ‘Western Civil Wars’. Labelling World War II, the deadliest military conflict in history which involved the majority of the world’s nations, as such greatly diminishes the involvement and sacrifices made by people across the world. Notably the Soviet Union which was mainly composed of nations Huntington would regard as part of a Slavic-Orthodox civilization sustained the highest amount of casualties totalling at around twenty-seven millioniv. Later in the paragraph, Huntington writes ‘peoples and governments of non-Western civilizations no longer remain the objects of history as targets of Western colonialism but join the West as movers of history’ as if to suggest that events occurring in non-western parts of the world somehow do not constitute as history if they don’t involve or have a felt effect upon Western society. Although the leadership of the West in fields such as science, technology and engineering for the larger part in recent centuries is indisputable; Jewish philosophy, Hindu mathematics, Muslim astronomy and engineering contributed significantly to the foundations of what we know today and this shouldnt be undermined. The sharing and borrowing of ideas between the different corners of the world through the millennias thats still going on today suggests a long-term cooperation instead of a clash of civilizations in our common pursuit of knowledge. According to Huntington a civilization is the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identityv. He divides the worlds population into seven civilizations as well as hinting at the possibility of a Caribbean and an African civilization; Africa being indeed a continent known for its vast diversity of cultures and traditionsvi. He defines a civilization by what he calls objective elements such as language, history and primarily religion as well as by the subjective self-identification of people. Huntington argues the onset of globalization has led to increased levels of interaction between peoples of different civilizations, which in turn intensifies civilization consciousness and brings to the forefront their cultural differences which unlike ideological and political differences are fundamental and much less mutable and hence less easily compromised. It’s clear that people instinctively identify themselves closely to others who share common traditions, customs and history; I hold the belief however that Huntington downplays the penetration of globalization and focuses on one aspect of its possible consequences. It’s not the differences that drive cultural conflict between peoples; it’s the lack of understanding which in turn creates prejudices and fears. The increased interactions between peoples have led to a wider acceptance of and fascination with other cultures, helping us understand why foreign societies live the way they do. Huntington argues: ‘†¦Russians cannot become Estonians and Azeri’s cannot become Armenian’vii. An Estonian living in Russia will absorb aspects of Russian culture depending on one’s willingness, length of stay and the extent to which one feels alienated or accepted by Russian society. Thus the objective elements invoked are not convincingly definitive in determining one’s identity; an Englishman may choose to convert to Islam while a Chinese citizen in Shanghai may choose to learn French as a pastime. Globalization in itself has penetrated the long-standing limitations in global trade of the past; politicians ever increasingly have to consider the global implications of domestic policy. More than ever national states around the world are dependent upon each other; the United States Demands Chinese goods while China needs the US to buy its goods. Huntington ascribes ideas such as constitutionalism, human rights, the rule of law, free markets and democracy as Western; unable to gain a foothold in other civilizations. He writes: ‘Modern democratic government originated in the West. When it has developed in non-western societies it has usually been the product of the western colonialism or imposition’viii. suggesting that somehow peoples of other civilizations may not be able to sustain or see the benefits of a form of democratic governance. The people of India would point out that democratic government was formed in their country despite, not because of the Westix. Today more than two-thirds of the world’s governments operate in some form of democracy, which reaffirms the idea that democracy is a universal value, contradicting Huntington’s view of its general Western exclusivity. If asked, most Middle-Easterners would prefer the idea of a democratic to authoritarian governancex; the limitation of democratic development in the region however is a product of the unstable and incompatible political landscape rather than the irreconcilability of the culture. Defining the religious aspects of the Western Civilization, Huntington justifies the grouping of Protestant and Catholic Christians into a single entity by emphasizing shared experiences in European history such as the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution which in turn separates them from the Orthodox Christians beyond Central Europexi. Although it is evident that the closer proximity of those events has influenced Protestants and Catholics more than their Orthodox counterparts, the closer resemblance of Catholic and Orthodox practices and beliefs as opposed to Protestants is however neglected. Huntington consistently appeals to religion as the primary source of cultural identity, rightly so, to a Christian the creeds of their religion have a profound influence on their world view and thus how they would identify themselves. When speaking of the Islamic civilization however, Huntington doesn’t seem to make the effort to differentiate between the major denominations of Shia, Sunni and Sufism which have so strongly influenced the historical and especially current political landscape of the Middle-East. In a passionate attempt to warn his fellow Americans of the potential threats that their country may face in the post-Cold War environment, Huntington essentially perpetuated ideas that were dangerous and self-fulfilling. The existence of a Confucian-Islamic connection that may threaten the West described by Huntingtonxii is yet to be empirically verified, as the Chinese and US economies remain inter-linked and Barrack Obama moves towards a policy of dialogue in the Middle-East. Given the history of US foreign policy, legislators would have found Huntington’s paradigm easy to understand and convenient in terms of implementation. A worldview of distrust towards foreign powers that demands the maintaining of military superiority in the name of security panders to the powerful military industrial complex in the US. In order to maintain peace, global stability and have any hopes of dealing with transnational issues such as global warming, policy makers should regard all nations as members of the world community and work closer with international organizations such as the UN and WTO in establishing universal laws. The alienation and coercion of other governments will indeed create an atmosphere of antagonism and hostility.