Consensus history is a nationalistic and homogenized narrative composed by white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, New Englander elites that aimed to minimize some of the errors of our nation’s past (p.20). Books composed in this manner frequently exaggerated, omitted, or falsified information to make the history of America look less shameful and more valiant than it really was. Some of those omitted were women, Native Americans, and African Americans because they did not fit this positive narrative. Two of the major authors of consensus history were George Bancroft and Francis Parkman. Bancroft published a ten-volume series, History of the United States, which was read by a few generations of people (p.20).
In both of these readings the government is the blame for Germany’s severe loss. In Hindenburg’s Testimony, I personally don’t believe he actually gives any realistic reasoning for his opinion. He talks about how the government was manipulative in the way in which they made military decisions, however, he doesn’t actually give any evidence of this. He only really argues that the government restricted their ability to become stricter and more disciplined. One part of the reading that actually made me laugh was reading the lines that said “(Commotion and shouting)”.
Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” published in the year 1866, made an impact on the views of many Americans and has carried out in the present day. Civil disobedience is the act of demonstrating non-violent protests. “All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable” (Thoreau). One of the main messages that Thoreau portrays from his essay, is that the citizens of a government have the right to act if they believe that the government is not governing properly. As Thoreau believes “That government is bets which governs not at all” (Thoreau).
Pathos Henry Logically, logic should be the most powerful type of persuasion, but this is not often the case. On March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry stood to speak in front of a divided Virginia House of Burgesses. What he said used all forms of persuasion, yet only one is truly responsible for his success. In Patrick Henry’s “Speech to the Virginia Convention,” pathos is by far the most persuasive technique as his strong words and heavy, hard tone form a strong hate for Britain while making an unignorable call to action. Henry uses loaded words and angry arguments to plant a deep dislike for Great Britain in his audience.
Roosevelt’s short opening sentence is also relatively vague, as he avoids mentioning specific details about the attack. This ambiguity leaves a lot of room for imagination, and many will automatically assume the worst case scenario, which strengthens the chaos that Roosevelt implies with his diction. Roosevelt continues to use this direct tone throughout the speech when he says, “It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago.” This portion is structured similarly to a data analysis, as he presents a fact and forms a conclusion by analyzing the data. The exception is, Roosevelt neglects to mention his analysis. He agains clips his sentences by leaving out specific information, and there is no time given to question him.
From its first publication in 1939, John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath has become a classic in American history and literature. Yet Steinbeck’s use of intercalary chapters has always faced criticism. Because they depict stories separate from the main plot, many readers think that they detract from the story of the Joad family. Steinbeck defends his choice, arguing that they only add to the story. He also argues that the intercalary chapters provide insight into the society for which the narrative chapters do not allow.
Bill Clinton I Am Profoundly Sorry speech Partner Analyzing Essay An apology said right can bring forgiveness, said wrong can bring more remorse. Though it was effective, Bill Clinton's apology did not bring complete forgiveness. Bill Clinton’s remarkable “Profoundly Sorry” speech, which lead to the impeachment of the president, is effective because it uses repetition, ethos, and pathos. This speech was given in the Rose Garden of the White House on Friday, December 11, 1998. Bill Clinton wrote this speech due to having an affair with Monica Lewinsky.
The Nuremberg Code has no legitimate power behind it, and it would be wrong even to acknowledge it as the system on which every future code have been based. Considering that it was set up by lawful luminaries presences of that time, it has all the earmarks of being a poor ad lib finished the 1931 Guidelines on human experimentation. It has gotten significantly more consideration than it at any point merited, presumably in light of the fact that it was made in a pivotal period and that it was created by Americans. Likewise, Ethics is a regularly advancing subject, and rehashed modification of moral codes is confirmation of enhancing human ethics and qualities (Ghooi, 2011). The Belmont Report abridges moral standards and rules for human subjects.
Some people believed and considered that Winston Churchill was a stutter while he spoke his speeches. According to Nan Bernstein Ratner, Ed.D, and VIivan Sisskin, M.A., of the Department of Hearing and Speech Science at the University of Maryland “that Churchill was not seen to stutter in some records is in fact a classic and frustrating feature of stuttering.” This accusation could not ignore the fact of the effect of his speech “Their Finest Hour,” on his citizen, where, according to Dr. John Mather, a Washington Physical, who said clearly Churchill’s stutter “is a lie.” Winston Churchill succeeded by attracting people’s attention, where no one else could. First of all, people were waiting for hearing his speeches on the BBC radio, which was his secret weapon to deliver his messages not just to the British people, but to everyone who can receive the broadcast of the BBC overseas. With this in mind, Winston Churchill said that “if we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United Stated, including all that we have known and care for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister.” Secondly, gathering people around him gave him the support and the absolute power to take decisions to defend on Great Britain then the British Empire.
Snivelization Herman Melville descibe the United States as a “snivelization”. The word “snivel” means to speak or act in a whinning, sniffling, tearful, and weakly manner. What he means by “snivelization” is that we as citizens complain too much and whine too much. I agree with this statement, saying that we Americans are a Snivelization. Not many people have sued someone in a their lifetime.
The art of deception William D. Lutz is an American linguist who specialized in the use of plain language and the avoidance of doublespeak. In the article ‘Empty Eggs: The Doublespeak of Weasel Words’, the author describes, how these days, are flooded ads in magazines, in newspapers,on the forums or websites in internet ,on TV or on billboards. Lots of these advertising claims for the products sound concrete, specific, and objective. However, William Lutz, in this topic points out that these attractive claims are weasel words, that is, these words meanings nothing but increased profits. Many advertisers use weasel words, which sound concrete, specific, and objective, such as “help”, “virtually”, “new”, “improved”, “acts”, “works”, “like”,
Although, the Founding Fathers can be viewed as hypocrites and racists from today’s point of view, their views were very common and acceptable in their days. We look at the Founding Fathers today and find some of the things they believed in as very nonsensical and radical, just like how they found the state of Europe two and a half centuries before them very disagreeable. Indeed, not all of the Founding Fathers were the same, they all had varied views, some were quite radical, others more liberal. A very good example of the Founding Fathers that we can discuss in this matter is Benjamin Franklin. Franklin’s views changed radically as he grew older.
The 35th president of the United States intrigues me the most because of his influence on the people of America, specifically voters. John F. Kennedy most certainly did not get everything right, but he influenced the voters in a way Americans had never seen. Kennedy was excellent at delivering speeches and giving Americans a familiar face to trust. He was personable and seemed honest, and that was good enough for the people of America. Not to mention, he was a total babe.
Historian John C. Miller mentions how the content of the essays “went over the heads of the common people”; even other federalist thought they were not the best way to convince the citizens, and complained that Publius was “too recondite for the masses” and a writer with a more “common touch” would have been better. This lack of understanding made it easier for the anti-federalist to advocate for their cause, something which was illustrated with the fact that The Federalist was “vastly outsold” by pamphlets that contained anti-federalist
17 voters out of twenty told me that the media was more fair to Hillary Clinton. Majority of voters were disgusted by the media, but more importantly recognized that the media was unfair to Trump. This widespread view of the media is compared to bad weather by William G. Shade, Ballard C. Campbell, and Craig R. Coenen”THE ROLE OF THE PRESS AND MEDIA IN AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS ”The news media are more like the weather—an atmosphere that obstructs, restrains, or destroys without purpose, motive, intention, or plan—a power to be sure, but a random one that nothing can really control (least of all itself). What makes this election so amazing is that even know the media may of be unfair to trump in a “Hugeeee” way, it didn 't stop voters from picking him and his strong views on issues as their next president. It could be said that even know the voters were constantly hit with bad weather, it didn 't let them rain on their parade.