President Andrew Jackson was a very popular president and did a lot of things during his presidency. But in my opinion, I think he was not democratic because he wanted everything done his way or no way, like during the Indian Removal act in Document 10. He wanted the Indians land so he had his soldiers move them \west into the Indian territory. One way that President Andrew Jackson was democratic was his Bank Veto Message to Congress in Document 4. From what I read and what he said, I thought it sounded like he didn’t want to shut down the United States Bank.
Abhraham Lincoln is the president whom impacted America the most and was the strongest. The first president of our country was George Washington, and although he was an impeccable leader, not the best when set side to Abraham Lincoln. Few individuals might say Washington was the best because he had originated the Citizen President. "He showed his tremendous leadership skills on the field of battle," (Weston 4), and also served in the French and Indian war, however he still does not compare to Lincoln. One of the major problems in America during the time Abraham Lincoln was president, was the civil war.
Battle of the Brits “Great men are not born great, they grow great”-Mario Puzo. Henry the V was a man of strength that accomplished what he saw fit,often by using brute force. Winston Churchill however was a man of integrity and intelligence that helped better the world. Winston Churchill is a better leader than Henry the V because of his personality, morality, and concern for the people. Henry the V was a cruel, brave, and cunning general that helped shaped Briton’s impact on the world .
5.Jack is also a good leader but he is so power hungry it makes me feel like he’s a dictator and yes he also couldn’t be one either, but he makes me think he just wants to be more powerful than Ralph.6. Ralph is going for the most obvious goal which is, get off the island or get rescued either one will work in his eyes but he almost ends up kilt by jack in the uttermost end Ralph loses his group or followers to jack as well so Jack has become a savage killer but here’s my vision on the difference between these leaders... First off Ralph in Lord of Flies is a good leader because he seems more sane and more intelligent than Jack, Jack just wants to be the most powerful Man/person on the island and just really just wants to be number one and that his opinion, is what everyone wants to hear he’s kinda ignorant self centered just all the bossy traits as a dictator. Now ralph is better, for one reason he has his goal set this is a repeat from the intro but it’s true he wants to get off the island and in my eyes i would follow him because why
Both projected remarkable leadership traits and military strategic thinking. Besides their charismatic leaderships, which made the battle a highly rated confrontation in the study of international history, the aftermath implications of the battle, was significant. The victory of Peter I created a getaway to the
The federalists gave him the opportunity to come back to the country, to take power, and to defend Mexico. Since Santa Anna was not really committed to either side of politics, his alliance with the federalists was just so he would be allowed to return to power. It was possible for Santa Anna to change his political views from one group to the other as long as the group could guarantee that he would be in power because that is all that he wanted. Santa Anna repealed the Mexican Constitution, which eventually led to the beginning of the Texas Revolution. Santa Anna 's reasoning for the repeal was that American settlers in Texas were not paying taxes or tariffs, the Texans were claiming they were not recipients of any of the services provided by the Mexican Government.
Confederate president Jefferson Davis’s previous career as secretary of war qualified him for running the Confederacy, but some of his characteristics hindered his leadership ability. He was extremely smart but interacted awkwardly with people. He often associated compromise with weakness and differing opinions as personal attacks. In contrast to Davis, Abraham Lincoln won the support of his people by “persevering the importance of the Union”. He also created support in his speeches where he used pathos to create an emotional connection to his people by referring to “the family man”.
Evidence to show this is how he jumped to defence the Army in the Zabern affair without knowing anything about what they had done. This could show how the Army had control over the Kaiser and could get away with anything but does not carry that much weight in general as he could have just been defending the army’s prestige. On the other hand there is some evidence to show that the Kaiser was powerful enough, such as how he replaced anyone who went against his will, the Chancellors an example of this. Other evidence of this is how he had an attitude that leads him into wanting complete power over the country. Overall, it would seem that the Kaiser did not have an entrenched autocracy because of how people acted when they were not around him and because of how his power was not always absolute.
Beowulf wins the fight but in Thor’s situation the price he pays for his arrogance is a great one. Thor and Beowulf both have their demons that they have to face internally and physically in the outside world. Thor has to learn how to become a great king for his people and Beowulf is struggling with the Anglo Saxon standards of living and having to stay in line in terms of the rules and things he wants to be known as a great warrior that has done many things for his people so keeping that good image up is a
I. Machiavelli In his famous work the Prince Niccolo Machiavelli exposes what it takes to be a good prince and how only this good price and keep control over his state. There are many different qualities that make a man a good ruler but there are some that are more essential than others. In this work Machiavelli stresses the importance of being a warrior prince, a wise prince, and knowing how to navigate the duality of virtù and vices. Without these attributes there was no way that a prince could hold together their state and their people. This is a work that still influences us today and is still relevant in today’s complex society.