This was not only because anyone could be seen as a communist, but anyone could report others and get them taken away. The drawback from snitching was it affiliated you with a communist and got you arrested as well. The population caught on quickly and “Anti-Nazi political and union workers either fled germany or faced long-term confinement in a concentration camp”(Political Prisoners). Often those not lucky or resourceful enough to escape imprisonment, would conform with the Nazis in order to save themselves. Since anyone to stand against the government would be taken away, it shows that political prisoners were the first in Nazi camps.
Convict communists were ordered to confess their crime and name others to avoid the retribution. The new decision led to a cyclone of accusations because people realized the possibility of their condemnation regardless they were guilty or innocent. Many helped that system by untrue confessions to save their lives. Miller, among others, refused to surrender to questioning. People who were revealed communists suffered greatly (Bly 2-5).
Research shows that “the NKVD had its eyes on the rich peasants, academics, artists, and scientists. The purge was also directed against national minorities” (Budanovic 7). This explains who was targeted by Stalin’s agents - anyone who could have the knowledge of how to, or the idea, take control of the country from him. By targeting Russia’s critical thinkers, he was eliminating ‘threats’ to his power, and removing dangerous people with dangerous minds from the public eye. Placing the blame on foreigners, by taking the minories residing in Russia, turned the loyal Stalinists against other nationalities, keeping the facts of the arrests relatively contained.
In Lameman’s terms, it was a method to expose supposed communists who infiltrated the United States. McCarthy was notorious for making false allegations and accusations to attract attention to his policy, brainwashing Americans into believing their country was being intruded by communists. A large majority of McCarthy’s accusations were backed up by little or next to no evidence, “HUAC’s circuslike investigations and unproved accusations left a trail of shattered reputations and broken lives”. This was seen especially in the case of Air Force Reserve Milo Radulovich, who was discharged from the force due to supposedly having family who were Communist sympathizers. When trialled, a sealed envelope was present with supposed evidence but was never opened.
A People’s History of Ancient Rome and political scientist, Michael Parenti, stated that Caesar’s assassination “marked a turning point in the history of Rome. It set in motion a civil war and put an end to whatever democracy there had been” (Parenti 2). Caesar’s assassination harmed Rome and did not help their political situation at all. It confused and infuriated the working class because they had lost their beloved king to greedy senators without a real explanation. In Meller and McGee’s book they state that instead of supporting the conspiracy, the “assassination did help Caesar’s reputation” (Meller and McGee 78).
Pathos is a means to convince an audience emotionally. When he claimed “while the wall is the most obvious and vivid demonstration of the failures of the Communist system… it is… an offense not only against history but an offense against humanity, separating families, dividing husbands and wives and brothers and sisters, and dividing a people who wish to be joined together” (Kennedy, “Ich bin ein Berliner”), he compellingly convinced the citizens of the West Berliner of how corruption and cruelty communism conquered East Germany by mentioning the separation of families and loved ones. President Kennedy have successfully invoked the sympathy from the West Berliner and made them feel what he wants them to feel as a consequence of communist corruption. This emotional appeal not only inspired the suffering and angered citizens to grow stronger against the European communist countries, but also enhanced the speech to be considered as one of the most compelling speeches of all
Aaron however, has a dark attitude every time he speaks. Even though Cassius does plot against Caesar, he does it for political reasons only, while Aaron obviously hates the world and tells Luscious that he enjoyed doing all the evil things he has done and would do it ten thousand more times. They don’t exactly show the same attitude because these characters are not part of the same play. Titus Andronicus is a revenge tragedy and Julius Caesar is a political play, therefore Cassius is a politician who does anything in his power to protect Rome and its citizens. This is also why Aaron does evil things to Rome; he had a dark tone every time he spoke because he needs to get revenge.
However, to Dante, Pope Boniface VIII was one of the most corrupt and fraudulent because he led a false perception of wanting to make peace. This false perception undermines the church and all of its followers, causing him to eventually join Pope Nicholas III in his misery, following the theme of how the abuse of power, particularly in the church and politics, is despicable towards
We shall hex the Pentateuch and slip you in neatly between Numbers and Deuteronomy!” (101) These words, directed at Brady from Drummond, are rather unnecessary and cruel on Drummond’s part. In addition, Henry Drummond appears to be a very intimidating and malicious evolutionist. He is immediately portrayed as the bad guy in the story; the person defending Cates only in order to wreck the townspeople’s faith in the Bible. According to Brady, “He wants to destroy everyone’s belief in the Bible, and in our God!” (98) Yet, at the end of the
Away with you, you miserable wretch! And don't you come near me ever again" (Voltaire, 8). After this occurs, Candide is helped by an Anabaptist named James. The kindness of this man shows Voltaire's disapproval of religious prejudice, considering at this time Anabaptists were extremely unpopular and often persecuted. Throughout the novel, popular religions are criticized and shown to be highly immoral continuously through characters such as the Inquisitor, Don Issacar, and Pope Urban X. Voltaire imprints these ideas in the minds of the oppressed by having lower class characters as well-liked characters in order to relate with the reader and by making Dr.
Sam Robert’s article, “A Decade of Fear” explains how McCarthyism turned Americans against each other after World War 2. In the first place he lied about communists being in the U.S. senate. As stated in Sam Robert’s article, “News of McCarthy’s accusations against the state dept. of president Harry Truman sent shock waves across the nation.” McCarty’s statements made him look like a gallant anticommunist and gave him power. As a matter of fact, he was considered more of a witch hunter.
Goldwater was an unfavorable candidate from the start, he was seen to be too much of an extremist and was not popular against the well liked Lyndon B. Johnson. The slogan he came up with for the campaign was widely ridiculed for making it seem like being for Goldwater was something to be ashamed of. The Democrats also made fun of the slogan, coming up with their own “In your guts you know he’s nuts” motto. Overall, the Goldwater campaign was a devastating defeat for the Republicans after Johnson won an astonishing 10:1 in electoral college votes
According to Commager, among those who are really disloyal are “Those who for selfish and private purposes stir up national antagonisms” (Foner 240), i.e. those politicians and public figures who cause national panic and an animosity towards a certain group. At this point in history, those at the wrong end of the stick were communists, for the anticommunist crusade was in full swing during the Cold War. Ironically, in 1950 three years after “Who is Loyal to America?” was published, Senator Joseph McCarthy delivered his infamous speech claiming that the United States State Department was infested with communists, sparking an age of McCarthyism and bringing about the most ruthless times of the anticommunism crusade. Those who did not conform
The Trials of 1692 were a perfect way for Miller to express his thoughts about the hunt for communists in the U.S. as Americans let fear control them causing fellow neighbors to suspect each other and ignore one another 's civil rights and as stated by History.com “ the Red Scare – is often cited as an example of how unfounded fears can compromise civil liberties”(History.com “Red Scare”) . The attitude of the 50 's also helped to play a vital part in how Miller came to choose to write about the trials as Americans branded communists were as stated by History.com “hounded by law enforcement, alienated from friends and family and fired from their jobs.”(History.com “Red Scare”), Miller lived in a world that was teetering on the edge of fear. His writings about the Salem Witch Trials expressed Martinez 2 just how fear of the unknown can influence and cause people to commit atrocities which can lead to the persecution of innocents. However, it may have been the fear developed inside of those who
Federal judges, especially Judge Irving Kaufman, were generally harsh when ruling against Communists, viewing their crimes as “aggression against free men everywhere” and “worse than murder.” The mixed attitudes towards the threat of communism stretched all the way up to the highest court in the land. In the case of Dennis et al. v. United States, the head of the court at the time, Chief Justice Fred Vinson maintained that in the case of the dangers of communism, it would be extremely foolish for anyone not to “convict unless they found that petitioners intended to overthrow the Government ‘as speedily as circumstances would permit.’” The Chief Justice severely narrowed the interpretation of the Clear and Present Danger Test to point of almost nonexistence in regards to Communists, stating that no attempt to overthrow the government did not mean “that there [wasn’t] a group that was ready to make the attempt.” He expresses the need for the Government to preemptively act against any possible communist attack that could occur. In the same case however, Justice Hugo Black took a very different approach to interpreting the law surrounding the case. Justice Black in his written dissent outlined the crimes that were and were not being committed, and plainly explained that the charges were unconstitutional under the rights given to all American presidents in the First