The period between the end of the Civil War and the Great Depression had many notable achievements such as western expansion and the Reconstruction Era. However it was also a time period in which many minority groups were fairly disappointed in the American government. The Reconstruction Amendments had many holes not making it effective enough, and with more expansion to the West came more extreme racism towards Native Americans. It is clear that there were attempts to change America for all the people’s freedom, but there are still many flaws those changes possess. Because of that, I find myself in the middle of the debate about who benefited most from this time period.
If we keep going on reading, we will find many inhuman scenes exemplified in the novel. We found killing, violence, intolerance and sufferings in life.Candide’s misfortune made him passed through many natural disasters. Candide passed by a stream of earthquakes, kidnappings, piracy and deaths. Candide saw the dystopian features were implicated in several situations throughout his adventures such as violation directed to women and tendency to racism. Candide’s misfortune starts when the bulgur army had attacked the castle.
These event caused large amounts of discrimination that was depicted in the media because, many feared the unknown dangers they believed they would cause. Moreover, such ideas were usually from someone whom the general public trusted, a person of high power. For instance, the person could be of government authority that could easily manipulate the minds of others. Consequently, this posed a problem to humanity as manipulation could cause people to be conditioned into believing to metaphorically stay within a box, and that anything outside of the box was seen as a threat or something unfamiliar. This idea became prominent during World War II and again after 9/11 due to terrorism, discrimination, propaganda and violence.
Overall, I perceived the article to be terrifying convincing, yet, upon further review I discovered to issues and lack of empathy from Friedman 's point of view. All and all I believe friedman did an extraordinary job explaining the changes that took, but did a subpar job offering positivity and solutions. The old international system, which was abandoned in the late 1980s, was The Cold War System. This system was characterized by division and had two main superpower nations, the United States and the Soviet Union. Under this system, countries and companies were threatened and given opportunities based on who they were divided against.
Fake news (propaganda) can be very dangerous. An example of propaganda is when the US dropped leaflets over Iraq and told people that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the suffering. Also, take the Holocaust for an example people were blind sighted by lies and propaganda from Hitler which caused 7.6 million lives. We can change these events from repeating by not voting for corrupt people. If nobody believed in Hitler 's lies we could have been a stronger community and a stronger nation overall.
I believe John Gardner wrote Grendel, not to make us sympathize for Grendel, but to help us understand why Grendel has this dark, pessimistic view of the world. John Gardner did an amazing job narrating a back story from the monstrous point of view of Grendel. There are many people who disagree and say John Gardner wrote Grendel to make the monster of Grendel seem more monstrous, and barbaric, but I feel these people are not fully digesting the text. There is plenty of evidence that shows Grendel was written so we could better understand the mind of Grendel. John Gardner’s Grendel, is all in the monster Grendel’s point of view.
In Book XIV of Homer’s Iliad we can witness one interesting scene of seduction. The main protagonists are Hera and Zeus. It is well described how Gods sometimes tend to behave and think in deceived ways just like humans. But we also see that they are not humanlike in everything because there is a presence of some unrealistic elements on this passage. The Iliad is all about war and battlefields so it was kind of relieving to put scene with different theme.
In his novel, Gulliver’s Travels, Jonathan Swift frequently satirizes the flaws of human nature by exaggerating them in the cultures of his fictitious nations. Each country described by Swift shows an over-exemplified behavior that’s used to criticize our own. Although Swift is commonly labeled as a misanthrope due to his censure shown throughout the entirety of his novel, there is evidence that he has more hope for humanity than he’s given credit for. The Lilliputians, Brobdingnagians, Laputans, and Houyhnhnms are evidence of Swift’s misanthropy, while Pedro de Mendez shows how not all people fit into his stereotyping. Gulliver’s first expedition leaves him shipwrecked on the Island of Lilliput, where the other inhabitants are only six inches
But as has also been noted, such a cultural consensus can potentially, and damagingly, prohibit serious enquiry. And this dilemma defines how the literature of terror has struggled over the years to come to terms with the representation of 9\11. Thus, for Baudrillard, 9\11is an event that is the result of globalist or rather perhaps, the globalization of American economic, cultural military power. Given the ubiquity of this power and its complete dominance over the world, Baudrillard does not deny that terrorists were but he also accuses the globalized economy of being similarly immoral, he write including the Gulf War or the war in Afghanistan are the unavoidable eruptions endemic within any hegemonic domination. But Baudrillard goes on to argue that 9/11 defies not just morality, but any form of interpretation.
However, since the context of the speech deals with such a controversial time in history, I think its best viewed as a relic of the Weimar Republic. This relic is a symbol of the crisis faced during the Weimar experimentation of democracy, and what many will view as a battle of good vs. evil. What makes this document so sentimental and powerful, is the destruction that follows. Obviously Otto Wells couldn’t not have knows everything that was to follow this speech, but, since we have the luxury it makes this speech all the more powerful; arguably more powerful today, then at the time. In the end, a short analysis of Wells speech provides the reader with a unique perspective of the tumultuous times leading up to Hitler dictatorship.