Japan and the Cold War

1.The Dodge plan and the impact of the emergence of the Korean war greatly contributed to Japan’s recovery and emergence as a world economic power after even after being defeated in World War II. The Korean war created a boom that led to increase in production that helped to speed up Japan’s economic growth. Increase in production was made possible through the different forms of technology imported into the country to boost production (Franks, 2018). Since Japan was greatly affected by the war, resulting to import technology ensured that little time was wasted trying to develop different forms of technology. Importing ensured that the technology acquired was of good quality and that production could commence early in advance, giving Japan the boost, it needed to recover from the consequences of the war.

Other that advanced technology, recovery after the war was greatly as a result of the country’s ability to implement the skills and knowledge gained from engaging with Western countries. The information gained from experiences with other countries acted as a basis of reference on what recovery processes were ideal following a crisis (Franks, 2018). Japan’s ability to implement utilise the information greatly contributed to the accelerated growth.

2. The berlin wall was seen by many as a representation of the philosophical, political and physical differences that existed between the east and the west. Building the Berlin wall was significant to the onset of the cold war because it attacked other nations indirectly without starting World War III (Sarrote, 2014). The wall was formed under the notion that a stable government would be formed leading to the signing of a new peace treaty which would result in the wall becoming unnecessary.

When relationships between the Soviet Union and the West started to deteriorate, it became clear that the wall was causing political problems for all parties involved, resulting to the emergence of the cold war. The soviets opted to block access to Berlin and prevent those from the west from coming into the region (Sarrote, 2014). Since Berlin relied on shipments to resupply its goods, medicine, coal and raw materials needed for fuel and heating, the wall strained relationships between Berlin and the west and this contributed to the emergence of the Cold War.

3. The collapse of the Berlin wall was significant to the end of the Cold War because it facilitated the falling of communism in East and Central Europe. After the collapse, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was dissolved and restrictions such as policies barring movement of diplomats and other official personnel were lifted (Sarrote, 2014). The collapse also greatly contributed to the reunification of Germany where East Germany was dissolved and further facilitated the reunification of the German state in the region along the democratic lines of West German Basic Law.

            The collapse also led to the scraping of the Warsaw pact and this contributed to the abolition of the institutional basis for the cold war. In a psychological scale, the fall had a positive outcome as it helped get rid of a symbol that was used to divide people into different groups (Franks, 2018). The collapse however meant that the Soviets and Westerners could no longer see each other as enemies of individuals competing for similar resources. Negotiations were no longer held with the intent to gain an added advantage but rather to help all regions involved to recover and this greatly contributed to the end of the Cold War.

References

Franks A, (2018) “Gale researcher guide for: Japanese economic recovery after World War          II” Gale, Cengage Learning

Sarotte E, (2014) “The collapse: The accidental opening of the Berlin wall” Perseus Books

World War I and the Middle East

How would you reconcile the ethnic differences in determining state boundaries? Consider cultural, religious, geographical, and historic dimensions.

 The Middle East States face conflict and stability as a result of the concept of self-determination. The States have territorial aspirations and differ in terms of their state of being in that some are interested in independence, some want to acquire the tribal kingdom, others want to create colonial powers, among other reasons[1]. The States differ in their national boundaries in that each state has a unique ethnic, religious, and cultural beliefs. Some States do not have a sense of national identity and therefore they want to create their own identity and attain sovereignty[2]. The States need a peaceful resolution to solve the ethnic differences and recognize the right of the other. Therefore, in reconciliation with the ethnic differences, I would use the negotiation method.

  First, the role of the negotiation method in solving the ethnic differences is to help the States understand that each State has an independent power[3]. It is important to note that State power is based on having the right to control the economy, social, and cultural status. In considering cultural, religious, geographical, and historic factors, it is important to note that the claims by each State are just. The role of negotiation in peaceful negation is to allow the States to acknowledge that all States have political, religious, and social rights[4]. Thus, all States should exercise tolerance. Each State has the right to define itself in social, cultural, and religious terms. I would also the method of integrative negation to ensure that the States value each other and develop a long-term relationship. States should settle the differences by acknowledging that each State deserves sovereignty, integrity, and independence[5].  Each State has the right to live in a secure State free from threats. The States should build peace and recognize that each State has a right to self-determination. 

 Should ethnicity have been a consideration in the formation of the new states of Iraq and Palestine? Why or why not?

 Ethnicity should have been a consideration in the formation of States. First, it is important to note that where there is not ethnicity consideration, dominant ethnic groups will have control over the minority ethnic groups[6]. The dominant group excludes the other ethnic groups in terms of political, social, and economic benefits. Thus, ethnicity should have been a consideration to give the States of Iraq and Palestine the right to autonomy and freedom[7]. Also, ethnicity is important in allowing Iraq and Palestine States enjoy sovereignty and maintain domestic peace.

References

Fontana, G. Creating nations, establishing states: Ethno-religious heterogeneity and the

British creation of Iraq in 1919–23. Middle Eastern Studies, 46(1), 1-16. 2010

McTague Jr, J. J. Anglo-French Negotiations over the Boundaries of Palestine, 1919-

1920. Journal of Palestine Studies, 11(2), 100-112.1982

[1]

Fontana, G. Creating nations, establishing states: Ethno-religious heterogeneity and the

British creation of Iraq in 1919–23. Middle Eastern Studies, 46(1), 1-16. 2010, pg 1

[2] Ibid, 5

[3] Ibid, 9

[4] Ibid, 11

[5] Ibid, 12

[6] McTague Jr, J. J. Anglo-French Negotiations over the Boundaries of Palestine, 1919-

1920. Journal of Palestine Studies, 11(2), 100-112.1982, pg, 110

[7] Ibid, 111

How colonization affected Native Americans

Introduction

            Colonization is a process by which a central system of power dominates the surrounding land and its components. Colonization was linked to the spread of tens of millions from Western European states all over the world. Colonization raptured many ecosystems, bringing in new organisms while eliminating others. The Europeans brought many diseases with them, which decimated Native American populations. Colonists and Native Americans alike looked to new plants as possible medicinal resources. Some people think that the colonization was a great event that happened to the Americans and Europeans.

            Colonization of the North American was planned by Sir Walter Raleigh (1554-1618), at Roanoke in 1585, the colony only lasted a few years (Jennifer, 2018) .John White settled more than one hundred men and women before returning to England for more supplies. White found all the settlers gone and the word“CROATOAN”written on a tree .That was the only clue to their fate thou it is still unclear whether this was a signal that the surviving settlers had gone to live with Native American.

            European colonization of North America had a devastating effect on the native population (Jennifer, 2018).Within a short period of time their way of life was changed forever. The changes were caused by a number of factors, including loss of land, disease, enforced laws which violated their culture and much more. They believed that the land was a gift from their ancestors and it was supposed to be shared among all living things

            When the Europeans arrived they brought with them diseases unknown to the natives. The natives, having no immunity died from diseases that the Europeans thought of as common place (Kathy, 1997). They also brought guns, alcohol and horses. The effect of these was to change the way of life for the Native Americans. Horses and guns changed their way of hunting for food. Since the cultural groups had been based on their method of subsistence, changing this changed the groupings. Some major groups moved. Once they started to move fights over territory broke out. Groups who had had plenty of food, now didn't have enough.

            Missions were introduced, and Natives were aggressively encouraged to convert to Christianity (Jennifer, 2018). Most of the groups had had some form of ancestral worship, and this enforced change in religion altered their culture identity. On top of all of these factors was the Europeans need for land and food. Native groups, because they were nomadic, didn't see land as belonging to one person. The idea that someone could come in, claim a piece of land and ban them from it caused many problems. Wars broke out over the fact that they could no longer hunt or forage for food in places they had always done so.

            Some of the effects that colonization had were unintentional. No one thought much about immunity to diseases, or that they would kill off the entire bison population (Melvin, 2003).These effects were a side effect of the Europeans greed and attitude that they could take anything they saw. Later however, things changed, and a determined effort was made to completely suppress the Native culture. This active suppression took many forms. Certain tribes were freely supplied with guns, so that they could wipe out their neighbors. Old problems between tribes were brought back into the open, causing wars. The army and many settlers treated the Natives as nothing more than pests to be got rid of. Laws were introduced that banned certain ceremonies, forced the children into the European education system, and tied whole groups to land that was useless and could not sustain them. The intention was to deny them of their cultural identity, which has the same effect as wiping them out.

            Native Americans were deeply affected by colonization. It was extremely unfair of the Europeans to destroy Native American way of life (Anonymous, 2011). If the Native Americans had the weapons, like guns and disease, that the Europeans did, then maybe they could have fought for what was theirs. Europeans came to America and changed the Native Americans lives forever. This contact between the Native Americans and Europeans was called the Columbian Exchange. While both Native Americans and Europeans received advantages and disadvantages from the Columbian Exchange, Native Americans definitely suffered more while the Europeans were benefited.

            Initially the introduction of Europeans and guns affected the eastern sub-arctic region the most (Kathy, 1997). Europeans hunted for furs, using guns, and decimated the local wildlife. Often they just skinned the animals and left the meat to rot. This caused a shortage of food and fur for the natives in the area. The introduction of guns also caused some groups to become more powerful and more aggressive. The Cree, one of the largest groups in the area, moved south into the Great Plains using guns to hunt bison. The change in their way of life caused them to lose much of their cultural heritage. Although the rest of the area was untouched in the beginning, western influence has gradually destroyed the native culture.

            In conclusion as a young and growing population the Native Americans seems to face effects such as poverty, racism and trauma (Jennifer, 2018). It is important to recognize the resilience and tenacity that have allowed Native people to survive as distinct cultural and political groups in spite of centuries of colonization .Helping professionals can play an important role in assisting Native clients to access needed services  and nature their resilience .professionals can also bring a strong grounding  in social justice to combat many of the struggles that affect indigenous people .By doing this its helps the Native Americans to improve their ways of living and improving their standards of living for them and their generations to come.

References

Jennifer, E. (2018). Gale Researcher Guide for: Native Americans and Europeans. Gale. Cengage Learning.

Sammis, K. (1997). The Era of Colonization & Settlement. Portland, ME: Walch.

Page, M. E. (2002). Colonialism: An international social, cultural, and political                                       encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO.

Origins of Ice Tea in the US

Introduction

Iced tea is one of the most appreciated beverages in the US, and has been in existence in the country for more than a century. This beverage has remained popular even though a number of non-alcoholic beverages are flooding the market. While it seems difficult to understand why Americans prefer iced tea which is not preferable during winter, there seems to be a hidden reason as to why they seem to appreciate this beverage. Starting from the preparation of iced tea to the point it is served, it becomes clear that Americans are not ready to part ways with this drink any time soon.  Americans particularly in the South have a close relationship with the tea, hence making iced tea one of the most popular beverages in the country. For that reason, in a bid to understand why Americans love this tea, this paper will discuss the origins of ice tea in the US and how it became so popular in the South.

Origins of Ice Tea

The preparation of iced tea began as a result of the invention refrigerators, which allowed for the manufacture of pure ice. Pure ice is a significant ingredient in the preparation of iced tea, owing to the fact that the tea must contain ice cubes. In the US, South Carolina was the only state to produce tea plants in as early as the 17^th century. This was after a French botanist whose name was Andre Michaux took a number of plants to South Carolina in a bid to gratify the tastes of rich Charleston planters. The origin of iced tea dates back to the colonial period when iced tea was drunk in form of alcohol-drenched punches. Even though the exact year when iced tea was made in the US is not known, it is believed that iced tea drinking practices commenced in 20^th century. This was after the non-alcoholic version of iced tea was disseminated St. Louis in the year 1904 (Danovich, 2015). Nonetheless, Richard Blechynden is however recognized as the inventor of iced tea, and this was after he added ice cubes to his tea, to make it cold at the World’s Fair in St. Louis.

The hot summer weather did not favor the consumption of hot tea, hence most people preferred iced beverages such as juice as well as alcoholic drinks. Tea punches would later on be prohibited in the country, a factor which heavily favored non-alcoholic iced teas. This brought about the preparation of non-alcoholic iced tea in restaurants, as substitutes for the prohibited tea punches. Likewise, after home refrigerators dominated the market, most people purchased them since it made it easier for them to easily make ice which help in making iced tea (Teas etc, 2019). Iced tea would then be made at home, thus it was not necessary for people to visit restaurants to have iced tea. In summer, most people preferred iced tea which was better owing to the fact that it helped keep the body cold. The procedure of making the sweet tea was not complicated because it only required one to fill glasses with ice, then add two teaspoonful’s of crushed sugar in each of the glasses and finally pour the tea on top of the ice and the sugar. Owing to the fact that the process of making tea was easier, the only ingredient which was hard to find was ice, and this problem was solved after most people began purchasing refrigerators.

Development of Iced Tea in the South

Iced tea in the South became popular because to the prohibition of the sale of alcoholic drinks in the country. The prohibition of alcoholic drinks meant only one thing, a better alternative non-alcoholic drink to quench the thirst. Most people in the region would then opt for iced tea because it was cheaper and easier to make. In addition, iced tea was a better alternative for the reason that it helped in reducing the summer heat. Initially, iced tea had been considered a drink for the rich, since not so many people could afford to go the restaurant and purchase the tea. In addition, because of the scarcity of ice, the tea became expensive until 1930s when refrigerators hit the market (Danovich, 2015). Likewise, as an instant tea, most people in the South preferred the beverage since it did not consume a lot of time, and it was also considered as a healthy and relaxing drink. This type of tea quickly spread in different parts of the South, making it a culture for the people of the South to drink iced tea whenever they met with friends or had a gathering.

Even though people in the South were allowed to drink beer during the prohibition, beer was only preferred after work. Henceforth, the only cold beverage for a working men was iced tea as opposed to beer. This became a habit for workmen in the South, since they would from time to time drink iced tea while working. This was consequently the main reason why the drink became very popular in the region as people would continually drink it even while working. Due to the popularity of sweet tea in the South, it became clear that the people of the South were attached to the drink, hence it was adopted as the official hospitality beverage of the State in Carolina, in the year 1995 (Teas etc, 2019). Georgia also joined the wave, after it presented a House Bill which required all restaurants in the states to serve sweet tea. Lastly, the chilling factor of iced tea made it popular in the region, hence in the South, tea is supposed to be stored in the refrigerator all the time. The legalization of the tea in the region consequently helped in further popularizing iced tea across the Southern states (Krider et al, 2008).

Conclusion

Iced tea just as discussed in this paper, is very popular in the Southern states due to its chilling factor. Nonetheless, it is also the official hospitality beverage in South Carolina, which means this drink can be served anywhere at any time in the region. The origin of the beverage of the beverage was somehow complicated, in the sense that iced tea had not been initially invented, but it became popular as a result of the prohibition of alcohol and alcoholic drinks in the US. On the other hand, the success of the tea is currently being witnessed in different parts of the US even though it is highly preferred in the South.

Reference

Krider, R.E., Li, T., Liu, Y. et al. (2008). Demand and distribution relationships in the ready-to-drink iced tea market: A graphical approach. Market Lett 19, 1–12 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-007-9022-1

Danovich, T. (2015). As American As Iced Tea: A Brief, Sometimes Boozy History: The Salt. Retrieved from: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/06/09/412984583/as-american-as-iced-tea-a-brief-sometimes-boozy-history

Teas etc, (2019). America’s Love Affair with Iced Tea: Teas Etc. Retrieved from: https://www.teasetc.com/education/america-s-love-affair-with-iced-tea

The Great Depression

The Great Depression was a period of severe economic hardships which began in the late 1920s all the way to the 1930s. It is considered to be the longest and most severe economic turmoil in todays history. The effects were felt globally marked by massive loss of income as well as deflation of most major currencies. ( Bernanke 2000).They are different factors that led to depression but it is mostly linked to the First World War which had left the world in a global financial crisis.

 The U.S. stock market in the 1920s, was undergoing a prolific expansion and as stock prices rose investing in the stock market became a way of making easy money. Masses of people rushed to dispose any income they had to buy stock, some even selling their houses and properties in order to invest in the stock market ( Berton 2001).However, by 1929 prices of shares began to decline and as a result millions of people started to panic and rushed to liquidate their holdings thus worsening the decline. Phycological effects were also some of the major effects of the depression as many people committed suicide as they could not come to terms with the effects of the stock marked crush.

The gold standard was also one of the major causes that led to the depression. It was used as the basis for national currencies and their exchange rates. It had temporally been suspended to curb the effects of World war 1. The United States, European nations, and Japan had however tried to establish it (Berton 2001).  The continuous use of the gold standard by these countries only made the problem worse.

Decreased international lending and tariffs is also considered to be among the major causes of the depression.  In the late 1920s, Countries that relied on U.S. banks for loans began to seek other alternative partly because of high U.S. interest rates. The drop-off resulting from this also led to more economic hardships. American agricultural interests were also greatly affected as a result of overproduction and increased competition from European and other agricultural producers.

President Hoover was unprepared for the scope of the depression crisis and his limited response did little to help the millions of Americans in need. He took several steps to keep up with his philosophy of limited government, an ideology that many had shared with him until the upheavals of the Great Depression ( Bernanke 2000).The effects were so severe making it clear that a more direct government response was required.

President Hoover called for a spirit of volunteerism among America’s businesses, asking them to keep workers employed and encouraged the citizens to make due with the little they had.  He also tried to create programs aimed at putting people back to work and helping fund local and state charities with aid. The programs, however were small in scale and highly specific as to who could benefit thus only touching a small percentage of those in need. As the situation worsened, the public grew frustrated with President Hoover and he left the office with one of the lowest approval ratings of any U.S president in history.

References

Bernanke, B. (2000). Essays on the Great Depression. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University           Press.

Berton, P. (2001). The Great Depression 1929-1939. Toronto: Anchor Canada.

Article analysis

Rosa Luxemberg

One year after the October revolution in Russia, a sailor started a mutiny in Germany which led to the onset of a revolutionary upsurge where Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht emerged as key leaders. Rosa Luxemburg was born on March 5th, 1871, and grew to be a major player in the Russian revolution (Kremerer 1). Her arrest in 1915 did little to discourage her determination as she continued to spread her influence through letters (Kremerer 1). In one of her letters, she wrote on the importance of equality, stating that freedom for only those in government and their supporters was not freedom at all, regardless of their numbers. She further believed that freedom was anyone who thought differently and her actions sought to ensure that all individuals, including those that did not support the government, were free. 

           Luxembourg's death in 1919 did little to stop the spread of her ideologies and only ended up making her a martyr (Kremerer 3). After being interrogated and tortured at Eden Hotel, Luxemburg was beaten to death with a riffle and her body was disposed of into the Landwehr Canal. While this was intended to end her influence, she became a martyr to those in the communist cause and even had a bigger influence in death. 

           Her strong influence was mainly due to how passionate she was about equality and her strong position against capitalism. As a representative of the left-wing socialist, she fought to bring an end to the dictatorial and anti-democratic tendencies that existed within the Bolsheviki (Obrien 5). She sought to bring an end to the corruption of power and deprivation of rights by creating a new world that followed political strategies and economic laws that sought to bring about equality above all else. 

Rosa Parks

           Rosa Parks is one of the major figures in the Civil Rights Movement and her bravery and influence continues to inspire people across the world. She not only called on people to be brave in the fight oppression but also led by example when she refused to give up her seat. Born on February 4th, 1913, her experience in Tuskegee, Alabama exposed her to all the challenges that result from oppression based on race (Feuerherd 1). She lacked access to basic education and her mother had to step in as a teacher before joining the school at Pine Level which was only a single room. She was, however, able to finish school and even attain a degree with the assistance of her husband, Raymond Parks. 

           Rosa Parks is mostly remembered for the incident in December 1955 when she was taking a bus home from work. During this time, laws and policies favored whites and it was expected that people of color give up their seats for the whites as they were considered more superior. When the bus driver asked Rosa Parks and two people of color to give up their seats, she refused and went on to state that she had grown tired of giving in to the oppression from the whites (Feuerherd 1). She was later arrested and taken to court. During this time, E.D Nixon, who was the leader of the NAACP held a boycott and called for all members of the African Ameican Community to refuse to ride the bus in support of Rosa Parks (Feuerherd 1). The success of the boycott proved to the NAACP that boycotts could have a significant impact and decided to start an even longer boycott to bring about positive and permanent change. 

           On the trial day, there were over 500 local reporters who showed up in court who not only covered the proceedings but also supported Rosa Parks and her decision to make a stand (Schudson, 1). The exposure, however, failed to dissway the court, and Parks was found guilty because refusing to give up a seat from a white person was a violation of the local ordinance that governed the community. This led to the boycott being extended to 381 days after her trial and buses ran empty as a result (Feuerherd 1). Attempts made to end the boycott such as burning down Martin Luther King Jr.’s house and African American churches only saw more people commit to the boycott. It was not until the city lifted enforcement on the segregation in buses on December 20th, 1956 that the boycott ended (Schudson 1). A decision as simple as refusing to give up a seat brought to an end to one aspect of segregation in a community dominated by whites. 

Susan B. Anthony

Susan B. Anthony was born on February 15th, 1820 in Adams Massachusetts to a family of eight children (Quanquin 3). Despite being brought up in a community that denied women access to education, her father was a firm believer in equal rights regardless of gender and enrolled her in a private school in Philadelphia. Her work as an activist for women's rights begun in 1851 after she met Elizabeth Cady Stanton (Styer 7). The two worked together to try and reform state laws that discriminated against women in New York. Together, Susan and Stanton organized state campaigns and gave speeches that advocated for legal reforms. 

           Susan fought to end the culture that saw women grow up to become dependent on men and she tried to teach women how to rely on themselves instead of depending on men. She believed that the dependence of men is what gave them power and while her fight for equality was like any other by various advocates for equality, she faced great challenges due to what the term ‘equal’ meant in that era (Quanquin ). For equality to be achieved, it required whites and those in the middle and upper social status to give up some of their power and control to people who were regarded as unfit or inferior. It meant that women and African Americans would now have the right to weigh in on decisions on matters relating to society and this made it even more difficult for the idea of quality to be implemented. 

           Although Susan started as an abolitionist, her commitment to bringing about equality led to her becoming one of the most renowned and influential suffragists in history. Her commitment to the cause saw her travel to different parts of the United States using wagons and stagecoaches giving speeches. She devoted her life to giving women the right to vote and also promoting equality. Other than giving speeches, she also wrote newspapers and even cast a ballot even when it was illegal for women to vote. 

Qiu Jin

Qiu Jin is considered as one of the greatest revolutionary women in China and a hero to some. After being bound and forced into marriage, she later left her husband and moved to japan to study. After returning to China, Jin became an activist and joined various secret societies that wanted to overthrow the Qing dynasty. She also engaged with women on different occasions and urged them to take control and resist oppression. In 1907, Jin was executed when her plan to engage in an armed revolt against the Qing dynasty was exposed (Moeller 2). Her death, however, did little to end the revolution she had already stated. 

           After Jin was killed, two of her friends sought to offer her a proper burial. Although the burial took place months after Jin was beheaded, hundreds of people came for the memorial service and was considered by the government as a form of public protest (Moeller 2). The two friends responsible for the memorial, Wu Zhiying, and Xu Zihua, were placed in the government’s wanted list and forced to live in hiding. Four years after her death, the republican revolution gained popularity and Qui Jin was recognized as a martyr in China’s fight for revolution. 

           In China today, Qiu Jin’s story is used as a form of educational text for students, and her image is used in various films and on-stage performances. She is regarded as a transitional figure that helped bring to an end the plight caused by the Qing dynasty (Ying 1). Her death also symbolizes the end of a time where Chinese women were oppressed to the beginning of a new era where the new modern Chinese woman had more rights and freedoms.

Work cited

Feuerherd, Peter. “Rosa Parks and the power of oneness” JSTOR Daily, 2016, retrieevd   from, https://daily.jstor.org/the-legend-of-rosa-parks-illustrates-the-power-of-a-   single-action/

Hu, Ying. "Writing Qiu Jin's Life: Wu Zhiying and Her Family Learning." Late Imperial China, vol. 25 no. 2, 2004, p. 119-160. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/late.2005.0005.

Kemmerer, Alexandra. “Editing Rosa: Luxemburg, the Revolution, and the Politics of             Infantilization” European Journal of International Law, Volume 27, Issue 3,          August 2016, Pages 853–864,         https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/27/3/853/2197260

Moeller, Karilyn. “Chinese women unbound: An analysis of women’s emanci[pation in    china” The University of Arkansas Undergraduate Research Journal, 2017,       retrieevd from,             https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1208&context=inquiry

O’Brien, Robert. “Revisiting Rosa Luxemburg’s Internationalism.” Journal of       International Political Theory, Mar. 2019, doi:10.1177/1755088219833416

Quanquin, Hélène. “Susan B. Anthony and the Struggle for Equal Rights”, Journal of       American History, Volume 100, Issue 3, December 2013, Pages 844–   845, https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jat503

Schudson, Michael. “Telling Stories about Rosa Parks.” Contexts, vol. 11, no. 3, Aug.      2012, pp. 22–27, doi:10.1177/1536504212456177.

Steyer, Meridith. “Susan B. Anthony’s extemporaneous speaking for women suffrage”     Taylor & Francis, 2017, retrieved from, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07491409.2017.1368762?scroll=top            &needAccess=true&journalCode=uwsc20

Women in the Civil War

Introduction

The civil war was a fight between the northern United States and the southern United States. The war started as a result of controversies about the enslavement of the black people. Before the civil war, the true women according to history were supposed to be devoted to taking care of their families, creating a comfortable and clean home for their husbands and children. The men, on the other hand, were to provide for the family. During the civil war, many women moved their attention from the domestic sphere to what was happening in the outside world. Very many women both from the south and the north volunteered and signed up to work as nurses, spies, and disguised soldiers.

This is the first time in the history of America that a woman had played an important role in the civil war. The women came up with ladies to help societies that could provide the soldiers with all that they required. These needs included food, clothes which they sewed, knitted socks and gloves, and money among other things. They organized campaigns, performances, and all other kinds of ways that would help them to raise money to be able to get medical supplies and other necessary stuff. During the war, women got new duties and responsibilities other than what they were historically known for and this changed the perspectives of many people. Many publications have been made about the different women and their duties, their braveness, and their will to help in the civil war and are viewed as having been useful and patriotic.

Mary Bell was a woman soldier who joined the confederate army disguised as a man. Being a farm girl, she was used to hard work, riding horses, hunting and that meant that being a soldier would not have been a problem for her. When she felt she was ready to maintain the disguise, she presented herself for recruitment (Eggleston 2015). She enrolled her name as Tomy parker and because of her riding capabilities, she was accepted and given a post. This happened after her uncle left Virginia and moved north to join the union army. This angered her and thought of her uncle as a traitor. This prompted her to join the southern soldiers and do her part to try and make up for her uncle being a traitor.

 Bell worked in the army for two years without being detected. She was considered to be a brave fighting soldier and was promoted to be a corporal. For her to be able to continue keeping her sex a secret, she decided to reveal her secret to a young captain. The reason for this revelation is for the captain to help her when it came to medical checkups and other responsibilities of the army that might have exposed her. Her accomplishments as a soldier made the captain overlook her gender and keep it a secret (Eggleston 2015). The captain was later captured in battle and Mary decided to confide in another young lieutenant who reported her to the general. She tried to plead with the general reminding him of the good fighting record she had but it was to no avail. She was put to prison for two weeks with no charges made and after the three weeks, she was allowed to return home in her full uniform. Bell’s story was unique because she had to cut her hair to look like the rest of the soldiers, wear thick woolen shirts to cover her breasts and curves, and then practiced to talk in a low tone. She did all this to be able to join the army.

Sarah Edmonds who was the daughter of a farmer was a great rider and an expert in using the squirrel rifle. She decided to run away from home at the age of sixteen and even drop the last letters of her surname since she despised her father and anything she did to please him did not mean anything to him. Dropping the letters from her surname to her meant she wanted an entirely new life for herself. She was in search of a job and discovered that all the jobs that she wanted to have were given to men. It is then that she decided to become a man to secure a job. She cut her hair and changed to a male attire to get a salesman job that had been advertised. She then changed her name to Frank Thompson and got a job as a bible salesman (Garrison 1999). Much later there was a slot in the regiment where Frank signed to offer three months of service. Because she was small and active she was put in the list as a nurse with a private position and this was a period when all nurses were male.

She worked as a hospital attendant for several months and nursed the wounded soldiers. Although there is no official record to prove it, it is said that she served as a union spy and invaded the confederate army several times. Frank contracted malaria and that meant that he had to be hospitalized. This meant that she would have her body examined and this would have exposed her and so she decided to desert. She could not return to the regiment after she recovered because she had been listed as a deserter (Garrison 1999). She decided to resume her female attire and her name Sarah Edmonds and continued to serve her new country but now as a female nurse. The most unique part of Sarah is working as a spy and disguising herself as other people while she was also disguising herself as a man.

Elizabeth Van Lew was an outspoken woman who openly conveyed her views on slavery (Eggleston 2015). After the death of her father, she freed all the slaves that were in their home. She loved her country and when she heard of the battle, she thought of a way in which she could help to reunite the country. After the first land battle if the war, the Confederate government set five prisons in Richmond that the captured Union soldiers would be housed. Elizabeth offered to help the prisoners by giving them food, clothes, and medicine. She also gave them books and provided them with information about the war. She was allowed to enter the prisons to take care of them and when there she realized that these men could provide her with valuable information that could be of help to the federal troops. She also gathered information from the government officials and officers that visited her home. To get the information to the Union army, she used former slaves and the people who supported the union. For security, she came up with a code that would keep any person who got the couriers from accessing the message. After her death, a copy of the code was found on the back of her watch.

She worked as a spy for generals, commanders in the armies, and commander of the Union forces (Eggleston 2015). The messengers wore boots that had hollow soles that contained the coded messages, maps, plans, and letters. Elizabeth pretended to be foolish and crazy and no one could think that she was capable of the complex activities that she was doing and she was never discovered. Elizabeth’s story was unique because of her sympathy towards the slaves and the prisoners to the point of freeing them.

Conclusion

The women in the civil war were fearless and wanted to act in the best of their country. Some left their homes and joined the army and participate in the battles. They left their families behind to just go and fight for their country. For the love of their countries, they even disguised themselves as men to be allowed in the army. They fought against the men and help to win battles and even managed to get promotions and big titles. Because of the intensity of the fights, some of the women decided to share their secrets about their gender to the leaders above them to be able to stay in the army. This was to help them in case they were wounded and needed a physical checkup which would have revealed their gender causing them to be put in prison. This went bad for some of the women who decided to share their secrets to some of the leaders because it led to imprisonment and in the long run they were sent home.

Being disguised as a man was not easy for a nurse that worked in the army and fell sick. This called for a medical checkup and her true gender would have been revealed. She opted to leave by herself and never to return. Working as a spy for some women was out of sympathy for slaves and prisoners. They gave information to generals, commanders in the armies and commanders in the unions.  Being a spy needed one to be smart and put preventive measures because the information being delivered could have fallen to the wrong hands. Women in the civil war showed their prowess, courage, sympathy, and patriotism towards their countries.

References

Eggleston, L. G. (2009). Women in the Civil War: Extraordinary Stories of Soldiers, Spies,

Nurses, Doctors, Crusaders, and Others. Jefferson NC: McFarland & Company, Inc.,

Publishers

Garrison, W. (1999). Amazing Women of the Civil War: Fascinating True Stories of Women Who

Made a Difference. Nashville: Thomas Nelson

Ancient Mystery

Introduction

According to Ancient Near East (1), the death of Tutankhamun is an ancient mystery of a young boy called Tutankhaten who became royalty in Egypt at only eight years old. Because he was extremely young to be a leader, his officials and advisers used the little king to bring back old traditions and the big cult of the forbidden god Amun. The young king ruled for a decade and died at the age of eighteen under unknown circumstances.

In the Ancient Near East (1), a scientist named Brier experimented Tutankhamun’s mummy by studying the x-rays and put out the idea of a possible assassination. An expert in the investigation who helped Brier proposed that because of the solidity to the base in the optical bone it might have been subdural hematoma. This could have been a result of a violent blow to the head that could have led to a coma or even caused death. More evidence to having a blow in the head were the loose bone pieces Harer a physician came up with another theory that involved a hippo crushing the chest of Tutankhamun using its powerful jaws. Because the sternum and frontal ribs of Tut were missing according to the x-ray. The hippo is a very dangerous animal and could crush a person to kill them with its strong jaws.

           The theory of possible assassination is the best one to explain the ancient mystery because of the radiograph that showed the king’s skull Ancient Near East (1). The images showed a bulge at the back of the head and some loose bone pieces. Being a young king Tut could have had some enemies and others who may have wanted to take the throne. This may have driven them in murdering the young king to be able to sit on the throne.

Conclusion

Ancient history and culture enable us to know and understand mostly where cultures and traditions originated from. It helps us know the problems that existed in ancient times and if they still exist today. Tutankhamun's death is considered a mystery because no one has a clear explanation of how it happened and the reason as to why it did. The reason why it holds so much fascination is that very many people have looked into his death. They have all come up with many theories of what might have caused his death and still, there is no agreement or conclusion.

Sources

1. Ancient Near East- Just the Facts (2014): The death of Tutankhamun: accident, disease,

or murder? Retrieved from https://ancientneareast.org/2014/01/01/the-death-of-

tutankhamun-accident-disease-or-murder/

The long-term and short-term causes of the American Revolution.       

Overview

During the Seven Years’ War, the two forces wanted to control North America. In other words, France and Britain (both European rivals) wanted the same land.  However, the war ended in 1763, and the British took control of the 13 British colonies until 1776 when the 13 colonies declared themselves independent. Note that the colonists thought that Britain would promote economic growth and cooperation. In contrast, Britain came up with new trade regulations, political differences, and other imperial policies. There was a disagreement on many issues between the American colonists and the British government, and this resulted in rebellion. The colonists had two decisions; either to be loyal British partitions or to build a new nation and become independent. Many events pushed the colonists to fight for freedom and the paper identifies both long-terms and short-term causes.

 Long-term causes

 Proclamation of 1763

 Following the British victory, Britain drew a boundary line that was known as the Proclamation line. The boundary divided the colonists and American Indians in that the latter was supposed to dwell in the land to the east and the former the land to the west (Fredriksen, 582).  Great Britain also wanted the colonists do have their own lives and to prevent them from trading with Great Britain. The colonist was angry about this Act and they felt being restricted from purchasing lands from the forbidden territories, and also to trade with the Native Americans (Fredriksen, 582).  As a result, both rich and poor colonists begun resenting British and believed that they had invested heavily in the western land.

 Unfair law

 The British government had more control over the rights of colonists. The colonists felt that their rights were being threatened and they feared that they would lose their English right and remain under the British Empire (Forest, 10). Note that the British government imposed levy taxes and pass laws and ensured that the colonists did not have a voice in the local matters. The colonists demonstrated their dissatisfaction with the British and declared "no taxation without representation" (Forest, 10). This means that they could not pay the taxes since they had no power or there was no one to protect their rights and interest in the British government.

Sugar Act of 1774

 The Sugar Act was also a long term cause in that at the end of war, there was a huge cost that was incurred in America as a result of the deployment of ten thousand men on the territory (Morgan, Edmund & Helen, 3). To pay the bills, George Grenville imposed a regulation known as the Sugar Act which imposed import duties and smuggling regulations.  Following the enactment, the colonists started to protest against the Sugar Act and also against the Stamp Act which would be introduced later.

 Tea Act of 1773

 The British government designed a bill known as the Tea Act. The colonists were told to pay high taxes on the tea but they considered this ass unfair taxes (Volo, 182). The colonists met at Old South Meeting House to defend their rights against the high taxes simply because they had no representation in the British Parliament. The colonists did the worse by preventing the ships from the East India Company to land in Philadelphia and New York (Volo, 182). In Boston, a group of men attacked three ships and destroyed the tea. Later on, the British government punished the colonies by introducing Intolerable Acts.

 Short-term causes

 The Boston Massacre

  Colonists protested against the tax laws that had been imposed by the British government.  For this reason, in 1768, the Royal Governor requested 2 British troops to move to Boston to maintain order, enforce the law, and ensure that the colonists pay tax (Kjelle, 5). In contrast, the colonists believed that the troops were unnecessary and for this reason, the 'Sons of Liberty’ attacked the soldiers.  Miserably, other soldiers killed five colonists. This is a short-term event that motivated the colonists to continue with their rebellion.

 Intolerable Acts/ Coercive Acts

 Intolerable Acts were short-term causes of the American Revolution in that they occurred as a result of colonists' resistance towards the Boston Tea Party (Fremont-Barnes, 130). The British government created the Intolerable Act as a way to punish the colonists. The following are some of the Intolerable Acts;

• The Boston Port Act- the port was closed and led to serious economic distress.
• The administration of Justice Act- the royal authority mandated that officials charged with murder would be tried in England (Fremont-Barnes, 130). In other words, the British officials who committed an offense while enforcing tax laws could not be tried in local colony court.
• The Quartering Act- the Act mandated the provincial Americans to build private houses for British troops.
• Massachusetts government Act- the towns were restricted from holding annual meetings. The assembly was restricted from electing the colony's upper house annually. The British government believed that the colonies had self-government and did not respect the English colony (Fremont-Barnes, 130). They had the power to administer their local affairs by holding meetings. The Parliament mandated that the colonists should not hold meetings without the royal governor's consent.

Work cited

Fredriksen, John C. Revolutionary War Almanac. New York, NY: Facts On File, 2006. Internet

resource.

Forest, Christopher. The Rebellious Colonists and the Causes of the American Revolution. North

Mankato, MN: Capstone Press, 2013. Print.

Morgan, Edmund S, and Helen M. Morgan. The Stamp Act Crisis: Prologue to Revolution.

United States: The University of North Carolina Press, 2012. Print.

Volo, James. Boston Tea Party: The Foundations of Revolution. Westport: ABC-CLIO, 2012.

Internet resource.

Kjelle, Marylou M. The Boston Massacre. Minneapolis, MN: Core Library, 2013. Print.

Fremont-Barnes, Gregory. Encyclopedia of the Age of Political Revolutions and New Ideologies,

1760-1815. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2007. Print.

Why did Russia go to war in 1914? ′

August 1^st 1914, marked the beginning of World War I in Russia when Germany declared war on it.  The world war I impacted many nations and shaped the world in a number of ways.  The Russian Empire entered the war as a powerful and vast state but at the end of the war the great Russian empire crumbled. Tsar died during this period and a new faction that would change the course of the Russian history was in power.  For over three hundred years the Romanov family remained in power in Russia and built one of the world’s greatest empires. In the beginning of the 20^th century Tsar Nicholas II was in power and a midst the many economic problems and social unrest, Tsar formed secret alliances with France and promised to go to war if either France or Russia was attacked by the industrialized Germany and Austria-Hungary. It is in 1941 that all hell broke loose. The world war I did not only bring a sudden end to the old-world order but also provided a defining image of the horrors of war while giving rise to the many disputed borders and country conflicts that are still very much dominant in today’s world [1]. The great war did not only impact Russia but claimed the lives of 17 million people world-wide, traumatised a generation, overturned and brought an end to empires changing the political order forever. The causes of this great war in countries such as Russia have been debated a century on but time has led to some clarity.

In 1913 Tsar Nicholas II ruled over a huge dynasty and enjoyed the freedom of being the sole leader.  The empire stretched from central Europe to the Pacific Ocean and to the borders of Afghanistan.  By 1914 Russia Was not prepared for war considering that nine years ago Russia had been defeated by Japan.   The revolts that happened in the country has shaken the empire and was politically unstable.  In 1914 Europe was divided into two rival alliance systems[2]. The unification of countries in the continent dramatically altered the balance of power in Europe. Looking back to the period between 1873 and 1887 Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary had allied together with the league of the three emperors and in the Reinsurance Treaty but with time these two collapsed as a result of the competing interests of Austria-Hungary and Russia in the Balkans[3]. France took advantage of this to ally itself with Russia.

A Serbia nationalist group referred to as the Black Hand executed the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand who was the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne This murder gave rise to international diplomatic problems that were commonly referred to as the July Crisis[4].  All the secret alliances that were formed between nations begun to take effect as empires disagreed on this murder.  In retribution Austria demanded the impossible from Serbia and subsequently declared war. Russia aligned itself with Serbia and mobilized its army at the border and in return Germany declared war on Russia out of support for Austria and France declared war on Germany because of its alliance to Russia.  Just like that the secret alliances fell into place and Europe was at war. According to Gary Sheffield a war historian war came to Europe not by accident but by design.  According to him war begun for reasons such as; the decision makers in Vienna and Berlin choose to pursue a course that they had high hopes that it would bring about significant political advantages but war was going to be one of the consequences of this course and because the government in the involved states rose to  the challenge of war. Throughout the crisis in Russia Britain could not interfere in the war and had no obligation to fight alongside Russia.[5]. Europe at large was dragged into war while countries were forced to stand and fall with each other.

            Austria-Hungary was prepared to risk war with Serbia since it had the guaranteed support of Germany.  It was the believe of many nations in the 19th and 20th century that having a strong army that was a symbol of military strength was important and part of the symbols of being a great power[6]. Russia had a great army and it was a sign of great power and they had every expectation to win the war. Germany had one war plan which was to defeat France before defeating the allies of France. The Generals of France feared Russia’s power and were ready to strike before Russia had the upper had in the war.  On July 30^th Russia ordered its forces to prepare for war. This was a precaution that the country put in place in case war broke out.  On July 31^st Germany issued out an ultimatum to Russia with demands that it demobilises its army, the ultimatum expired without any reply forcing Germany to declare war on Russia. Germany has also sent out an ultimatum to France demanding its neutrality in the event of war between Russia and Germany[7]. However, as a result of the alliance between France and Russia, France knew it had to stand or fall with Russia.

Germany did not strike Russia at first and moved against France sending its main armies through Belgium to strike Paris. The Belgium invasion forced Britain to come to Belgium’s aid[8]. Soon Turkey came to support Germany and Italy joined the Allied side.  The Russian mobilization made Germany feel threatened by Russia and upon refusal of the ultimatum issued Germany gathered its armies and declared war on Russia on August 1st 1914 [9]. Russia took offense against both Germany and Austria-Hungary. Over the century historians have agreed that the poor quality of Russia’s leadership might have contributed to the occurrence of war in the country.  Tsar Nicholas II was responsible for making all the final decisions on the major issues affecting the nation. The leader was given conflicting advice and typically made all the wrong decisions and dragged the country into war. Tsar had set up a weak and flawed organizational structure that was inadequate and could not sustain the high pressure and demands of war.

David Stevenson, a British historian points out that among the many mistakes that brought Russia to war was that the civilians and generals were not in contact with each other thus the government was not aware of its fatal weakness and thus continued to remain out of touch with the public opinion of civilians. Russia’s decision to go to war can be referred to as a tragedy of miscalculations. Russia was resting on the assumption that it was possible to prevent a domestic breakdown while still at war and each of the involved countries hopped for success. Sergey Sazanov who was the Russian foreign minister was a powerful person but he felt insecure to advance his position and the critical stage of the July crisis he displayed inconsistency and failed to grasp the international realities of the matter [10]. Tsar fired Sazonov in July 1916. This was met with ridicule form the French ambassador although he constantly promised that France would go to war alongside Russia. Serious planning on how to handle a future war was impossible given the complex priorities that are given to royalty.   At one critical and crucial time in 1915 the grand Duke Nicholas failed terribly forcing the Tsar to take control of the entire army despite his many military incompetence[11]. The lack of proper and well-advised leadership is one of the reasons that led to war in Russia.

As mentioned earlier Russia heavily relied on the French alliance and was hopeful of emerging successful in the war, this also counts as a reason why Russia went to war.  Russia was sure that a two-front war against Germany was winnable.  The French ambassador Maurice Paleologue hated Germany and had France ally with Russia to fight Germany in full agreement with President minister Raymond Poincare who was a close trustee [12].   The support of France towards Russia was an accelerating factor that pushed Russia to the blink of war since the country was sure to win the war.

The fight in Russia could have been as a result of a family feud between the rulers of Britain, Germany and Russia who were cousins; the rulers were George V, Kaiser, Wilhelm and Tsar Nicholas II. According to a BBC documentary Royal Cousins and War these three politically disagreed and had strained relationships.  Unlike, many family feuds the disagreement between these three cousins exacted a geopolitical price. As the relationship between these three cousins deteriorated so did the political relationship between these countries[13].  Queen Victoria had attempted to broker peace between the three cousins but with her death the conflict between these three continued.  The battle of wits between these countries accelerated and was disastrous for all the monarchs, including Russia.  By the end of 1918 Tsar’s children were murdered by revolutionaries.

Conclusion

On August 1st 1914, Germany declared war on Russia marking the beginning of the first world war. The war was responsible for shaping the political course of many nations in Europe and among these nations Russia. By 1913 Tsar Nicholas II ruled over a huge dynasty that was not prepared for war considering the defeat the empire had suffered at the hands of Japan. The murder of the Archduke Franz who was the heir to the Austria-Hungary by a Serbia nationalist group is regarded as the main cause of the great war. Afterwards Austria-Hungary issued a list of ultimatums to Serbia. However, Serbia could not meet these demands. Serbia was an ally of Russia and Russia promised its support to the country. Germany an ally of Austria-Hungary rose to support its ally. France an ally of Russia and an enemy of Germany rose in return to support Russia.  It is also believed that the war was caused by the long-standing family feud between the three rulers of Britain, Germany and Russia who were first cousins. The war was not only taking place in Russia but in Europe at large. At the end of the war Tsars children were murdered and the Russian empires was among the three empires that fell before the end of the war.

Bibliography

Anievas, Alexander. "1914 in world historical perspective: The ‘uneven’and ‘combined’origins   of World War I." European Journal of International Relations 19, no. 4 (2013): 721-746.

 Clark, Christopher M. 2013. The sleepwalkers: how Europe went to war in 1914.

Engelstein, Laura. 2018. Russia in flames war, revolution, civil war, 1914-1921.

Imperial War Museums, How the World Went to War In 1914. Retrieved from:             https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/how-the-world-went-to-war-in-1914

 International Encyclopedia, War Aims and War Aims Discussions (Russian Empire), Retrieved from https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-         online.net/article/war_aims_and_war_aims_discussions_russian_empire

  Lieven, D. C. B. 2016. The end of tsarist Russia: the march to World War I and revolution.

 Martel, Gordon. 2014. The month that changed the world: July 1914.             http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.32334.

 McMeekin, Sean. 2011. The Russian origins of the First World War.             http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.32472.

 MIA: Encyclopedia of Marxism, WWI – Russia, Retrieved from:             https://www.marxists.org/glossary/events/w/ww1/russia.htm

 Sanborn, Joshua A. "Unsettling the empire: violent migrations and social disaster in Russia         during World War I." The Journal of Modern History 77, no. 2 (2005): 290-324.

 Seton-Watson, Hugh. 1990. The Russian empire, 1801-1917. Oxford [England]: Clarendon         Press.

  Stone, David R. 2015. The Russian Army in the Great War: the Eastern Front, 1914-1918.

Wohlforth, William C. "The perception of power: Russia in the pre-1914 balance." World            Politics 39, no. 3 (1987): 353-381.

[1] Imperial War Museums, How the World Went to War In 1914), np

[2] Wohlforth, The perception of power, 353-381.

[3] McMeekin, The Russian origins of the First World War, 10

[4] Martel, the month that changed the world, 49

[5]   Engelstein, Russia in flames war, 36

[6] MIA: Encyclopedia of Marxism, WWI – Russia, Retrieved from, n.p

[7] Lieven. The end of tsarist Russia, 66

[8] Stone, The Russian Army in the Great War, 47

[9] Sanborn "Unsettling the empire, 290-324.

[10] International Encyclopedia, War Aims and War Aims Discussions, n.p

[11]Clark, The sleepwalkers, 87

[12] Anievas, in world historical perspective, 721-746.

[13]Hugh, The Russian empire, 1801-1917, 102

The City of Pompeii

Decades, prior to the Mount Vesuvius’s eruption which buried the city of Pompeii, the everyday life in the city was characterized by parties as well as struggles. According to Jarus (2019), during the period of Ancient Rome before the tragedy struck, the city of Pompeii was a wealthy and major resort destination. Originally Oscan people settled in the city around the seventh century BC. As a port city, it is in a strategic location for trade and agriculture. The rich nature of the volcanic soil in the area as a subsequent of previous eruptions of the Vesuvius promoted farming for olive trees and grapes. Samnites seized the city and later fell under the reign of Romans, becoming a formal Roman colony in 80 BC.

The city was popular as a leading vacation destination, particularly for Romans. It was a flourishing resort location based on its location, which provided a rare view to the beautiful scenery of the mountains with elaborate villas and elegant houses that were along the paved streets of the city (Mason, 2013). Most of the rich Romans owned summer homes in the city, and they would live there during the warm summer period. One part of the city was comprised of a forum where all the businesses in the city were carried out. Also, this side of the city accommodated temples, and this allowed the business to thrive due to the increased flow of customers from the temple (Jarus, 2019). The city people loved entertainment, and there was a huge stadium that would accommodate more than twenty thousand people for wrestling games. Several theaters also existed for religious celebrations, plays, and musical shows.

The City of Pompeii experienced frequent earthquakes, and in 62 AD, a huge earthquake had destroyed most buildings across the city (Jarus, 2019). The people were still rebuilding the city, and they were aware that the area was volatile to natural disasters. However, the 79 AD disaster was unforeseen, seen the previous eruption was rather minimal in intensity (Mason, 2013). The city was barely prepared for guarding its people against natural disasters even after past tragedies.

On the 24th of August, 79AD, Mount Vesuvius erupted. It is estimated that about 1.5 million tons of ash and rocks erupted from the volcano after every second (Mason, 2013). The mist of ash rose to more than 20 miles about the mountain. Some people tried and managed to escape while most were unable, leading to the death of approximately 16,000 people (Jarus, 2019). The city was completely buried and destroyed, and people ultimately forgot about its existence. It was later discovered in the 18th century when archaeologists were starting uncovering it. Most of the city was conserved under the ashes, and things such as houses, paintings, and buildings were still intact. Thus, much of what is known about the life of Romans originates from Pompeii.

References

Jarus, O. (2019). Inscription Reveals Final Years of Life in Pompeii Before the City Was Buried in Ash. Retrieved from: https://www.livescience.com/ancient-pompeii-inscription-life-before-tragedy.html

Mason, F. (2013). Pompeii: A history of the city and the eruption of Mount Vesuvius. Lexington, Kentucky: BookCaps Study Guides.

 The intent for a peaceful relationship that the Canadian indigenous people were seeking with the newcomers/settlers

Introduction

            Historically, the act of mutual discovery ended up sparkling a critical period of indigenous- newcomer relationships or relations. Before the arrival of the newcomers into the aboriginal land, the indigenous people stayed in limited regions. Although they used to have widespread contacts with nearby and neighboring communities, the truth is that they used to have little information about other people from distant worlds (Benton, 2010). Their world perfectly filtered across indigenous territories, staying in peace with their communities, telling stories to youths about their cultural values, and so on. Unfortunately, when newcomers/settlers made their first contact with the aboriginal communities, they fed them with information about their motherland. Furthermore, they introduced them with unique war approaches, new tools, better spiritual explanations, as well as diverse promises to economic prosperity. As a result of that, the responses of the indigenous people about the arrival of the newcomers ended up setting up a stage for decades of subsequent relations (Frideres, 2011). The essence of this essay will entail illustrating what made the Canadian indigenous people to desire to establish a peaceful relationship with the newcomers.

Do you believe the intent is still there?

            Yes. I believe indigenous people were seeking a peaceful relationship with the newcomers because they were willing to accept what they had brought to them and in return teach them their ways of life. This is because such an approach was to act as a key element for enhancing the critical aspects of their relationship (Garrett, 1996). As more and more newcomers continued to visit their land, aboriginal people made them feel welcomed because of their loyalty. Conversely, it was evident that indigenous people were not initially helpless uncivilized communities because they were not ideally recoiling in the face of development. The reason for that is because the interaction of the indigenous people and newcomers was to impact their cultural domains in a positive way because that was their initial intention (Frideres, 2011). Consequently, newcomers started displaying negative attitudes and views to the Canadian indigenous people. All those traits were to greatly impact the agency of the indigenous people in a negative way.

            During their first encounter, the newcomers were extremely frightened with what they found there. For example, they noted that the Canadian indigenous communities had skills to construct excellent houses that could blend well with their culture. This is because initially, they had taught that their motherland was far better in terms of social organization, culture, innovation, and so on. Likewise, the absence of rigidity amongst the indigenous societies who used to lived in temporal structures, having no religious or cultural form also confused or astonished the outsiders. Considering the existence of extensive land jungle, especially rich aquatic environments, open plains, and so on, made it hard for the newcomers to understand or characterize the political and socio-economic lifestyles of the indigenous people (Brayboy, 2005). Regardless of such differences, I believe the indigenous people wanted to establish a peaceful relationship with the newcomers that will enable them to conserve their cultural heritage.

            During the outbreak of hostilities between indigenous people and newcomers, misunderstanding was the key element for such an encounter. For instance, since newcomers did not have a clear understanding of the ceremonies, languages, reasons for smoking sacred pipes, and curiosities of the indigenous people, they were forced to respond violently. Nevertheless, the relationship that was established between the newcomers and the indigenous communities by that time was ultimately impacted by both external and internal forces. Although these associations have extensively changed and continue to evolve with time, the indigenous people had the notion that their exchanges were ultimately characterized were for the betterment of their societies (Wallace, 1994). As time continued to evolve, I believe that the intent of the Canadians indigenous people was to ensure that they have not encountered any difficulties in regarding them as part of their community members while staying in the aboriginal country. Therefore, I believe the reason for establishing a peaceful relationship with the newcomers was to offer them an opportunity to understand the manner in which their historical legacies had managed to shape their identities.

                        Historically, the life of the indigenous people was based on storytelling as a means of discussing their love of nature, harmony, and love amongst each other. Therefore, I believe the indigenous were seeking a peaceful relationship with the newcomers because the initial objective of the colonizers was clear that they were to continue maintaining indigenous communities as allies. The same situation was later aggravated by increasing demand for more land by the newcomers (Benton, 2010). The proclamation that was established ended up setting out protector or fiduciary relationships in which the crown could act as a trustee for exterminating aboriginal policies. Despite that, it became hard to retrieve the properties seized by the colonialist. The terms of their leaders, however, indicated that indigenous people should not be disturbed or molested.

            Furthermore, I believe the reason that meant indigenous to seek a peaceful relationship with the newcomers is because they introduced them to trade. During this time, it was clear that the indigenous did not have a clear understanding of the significance of international trade.  But as expenses increased and return dwindled, the colonizers had no option but to come up with other means to increase their interactions with the indigenous communities. In return, the plan that appeared to work entailed civilizing the indigenous communities so as to reshape Indian-Canadian administrations. Protecting indigenous produced significant changes to the ruling regime thus distorting the culture of the indigenous people (Frideres, 2011). Despite that, assimilation could have been used as one of the justifications of instilling a peaceful relationship with the newcomers.

            Additionally, during the first encounter with the newcomers, what I believe equally made them to seek a peaceful relationship with the newcomers is because they were extremely impressed with their technological advancement in combat and navigation. Ideally, since indigenous people were not aware of the motives of the newcomers, they were easily puzzled and deceived by various aspects of the social world and the materials of the outsiders (Garrett, 1996). Moreover, since the indigenous did not have a clear understanding on how to use them, there was the need to educate them. Later, they realized that their weapons were not much threatening as they taught after the first encounter with them. The reason for that is because the imperatives of specialized communities are what mattered most to the indigenous (Francis, 2011).

            Nevertheless, the arrival of the newcomers and their colonizers made their country to be established on acts of dispossession and resettlement. Ideally, it is logical to say that the removal of the original Canadian inhabitants as well as their histories is perceived to be the unrelenting settler myth that regards aboriginal societies as stumbling blocks to them. In connection with that, it is evident that the main objective of the Indian Department was to make sure that the various indigenous communities have been perceived as being allies and not subjects of colonization (Garrett, 1996). In return, I believe the Canadian government could have not allowed Britain to have the opportunity of gaining full control of their land to the extent of destabilizing aboriginals’ ways of life. Therefore, I believe what made the indigenous to seek a peaceful relationship with the settlers was the need of acting benevolently and peacefully when handling their differences.

            In connection with that, indigenous people wanted a peaceful relationship with the settlers because the civilization approach used and the treaties signed did not augur well with them. Ideally, the civilization approach that was used was intended to transform indigenous communities into self-sufficient farmers who could have the potential of integrating into newcomers' society. In order to keep up economic prosperity, there was the need to educate indigenous people about new firm mechanization, how to dress, act, and live like Euro-Canadians. Furthermore, the two-row wampum belt treaty that was signed sifted from the model of peace to those aimed at land cession (Benton, 2010). The reason for that is because such a treaty had the potential of clearing the path for newcomer settlement. This implies that the initial encounter between the Canadian indigenous people and the newcomers was something that is taught to have been clocked in great shock and uncertainty for both of them of the socio-cultural frontier.

            Visible indicators and what needs to be done to revive the situation

            Historically, aboriginals and newcomers were seeking new creative means of linking with each other. Despite that, the arrival of newcomers disrupted their way of life. For instance, First Nations leadership is a process that used to be hereditary, that is passing it from one generation to another. Unfortunately, they still receive opposition from governmental leaders (John, 2009). In order to maintain a good relationship, I believe the bad leaders of the aboriginal communities should be allowed to take the responsibility to manage their social amenities for the sake of their upcoming generations. Furthermore, since a number of the aboriginal languages are regarded as being dangerous by critics, it means that there is the likelihood of them becoming extinct. As a result of that, I believe aboriginal communities should be given the opportunity to teach their youths about their historical heritage so as to maintain the social values of their languages.          

            Accordingly, colonial leaders had managed to warn the colonial leaders about the need of sticking or adhering to the laws as well as the moral guidelines which defined their societies. The reason for that is because they felt that there was to be the likelihood for them to be 'Indianized'(Miller, 2009). This is because the relationship that was established between the aboriginals and the Canadian indigenous is something that was ultimately shaped by strong competition amongst European nations for power and wealth. For instance, as the European continued to take control of the Americans, thousands of indigenous people lost their lives as a result of slavery, and so on (Garrett, 1996). Despite that, I believe that the increasing recognition of aboriginal rights in Canadian law is what will foster the recognition of their contribution to Canadian society. This is also coupled with the need to coming up with better-governing systems that can provide them with the opportunity to express their concerns to the concerned authorities.

            It is logical to say that ignorance was produced as well as maintained via dominating narratives about the nation that reinforced colonial dispositions. Such dispositions are still intrinsically anti-democratic because they can in return reproduce symbolic and structural forms of hostilities or violence that undermine the possibilities of establishing a peaceful nation (Frideres, 2011). What I believe is the fact that coming up with better governing rules and regulations will have the potential to the surface the historical hidden conflicts through understanding the Canadian-Aboriginal relations. Accordingly, that will assist in creating productive sites that disrupt ignorance regarding historical differences of the aboriginals and Canadian indigenous societies. The same approach will give each community the ability to end the prejudice that existed hence instill a peaceful relationship amongst themselves.

            Seemingly, I believe the new policies that are being implemented, especially education policies, should be aimed at incorporating fundamental elements and aspects of cultures, languages, and traditions of the Canadian indigenous people. The reason for that is because I believe these approaches have the potential of strengthening new socio-economic systems of the modern aboriginals. This is also based on the suffering they went through in the hands of newcomers. Moreover, what this implies is the fact that the Canadian government should continue addressing the traditional legacy of those who suffered during that time to the modern generation. I believe this will enable the Canadian indigenous people to conserve their culture, values, and norms as well as instill a peaceful relationship with the settlers.

            To be in the position of reclaiming their traditions, customs, and beliefs various celebrations and festivals are being held to regions that are open to not only aboriginal people but also to non-aboriginal communities. On these occasions, the youths are taught the importance of keeping their language alive as well as taught the skills they will use to maintain their culture. They also take time to follow the footsteps of their elders so as to watch and learn. This is what enables them to keep on protecting their ancestral way of life regardless of the modern conveniences they get exposed to (Miller, 2004). Additionally, in order to redefine and reclaim their identity, they free themselves from critics or stereotypes who view them uncivilized. I believe the reason for that is because they are now educated to become creative individuals seeking better means of constructing contemporary identities that will blend well with conventional spiritual beliefs, cultural practices, and traditional languages

Conclusion

            The aboriginals’ traditional ways of life is an expression of their unique or exceptional relationship with their land. Up to date, although the cultures of the indigenous of Canada or the aboriginals continue to be diverse, their societies continue to be rooted in their traditional core values and ceremonies. It is clear that prejudice and struggles for social recognition is still something that Canadian indigenous people are straggling with. To some extent, indigenous Canadians are no permitted the right to narrate their histories to upcoming generations. One of the contributing factors is that still newcomers do get exposed to negative information about the aboriginal people from critics. As a result of that, understanding the relationship that currently exists between the Canadian Government and the aboriginals can ultimately offer a clear picture of the dynamics of their socio-cultural relationships. The reason for that is because the struggle for self-governance or self-determination can be said to be something that was initially based on their historical experience.

                                                             References

Benton-Banai, E. (2010). The Mishomis book: The voice of the Ojibway. Minneapolis, MN : University of Minnesota Press

Brayboy, B.M.L. (2005). Towards a Tribal Critical race theory. The Urban Review, 37 (5). Retrieved from: http://nau.edu/uploadedFiles/Academic/COE/Dine_Project/_Forms/Toward%20a%20Tribal%20Critical%20Race%20Theory%20in%20Education.pdf

Francis, D. (2011). The imaginary Indian: The image of the Indian in Canadian culture. Vancouver: Arsenal Pulp Press.

Frideres, J. S. (2011). First Nations in the twenty-first century. Don Mills, Ont: OUP Canada.

Garrett, M.T. (1996). Reflection by the Riverside: The traditional education. Journal of Humanistic Education & Development. (35(1), 12-17

John, S.L. (2009). Makúk: A New History of Aboriginal-White Relations. UBC Press

Miller, J. R. (2004). Reflections on native-newcomer relations: Selected essays. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Miller, J. R. (2009). Compact, contract, covenant: Aboriginal treaty-making in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Wallace, P. A. W. (1994). White roots of peace: (Iroqrafts-Iroquis Reprints. Santa Fe, N.M: Clear Light Publishers. Retrieved from: http://www.nelson.com/albertasocialstudies/productinfo/gr6_9/documents/abss6ch4draft.pdf