Post-Liberalism Past to Present

1) Explain some of the ways in which Post-War America (after World War II) is different from the U.S. in previous eras?

• Post-War World II era is different since Americans had to take an interest for foreign affairs unlike previous eras.  Being involved in multiple conflicts outside their own government doing, but none-the-less fighting for another’s cause (freedom, independence, etc.) led Americans to become less self-involved and aware of what’s going on outside their sphere. 
• Ideas of “New Americans” presented by Kennedy took hold in the minds of Americans, militant and economic superiority.

2) Explain how modern American political leaders interpret and apply American history in their political speeches. How effective is this is for justifying their policies?

Great American Presidents of the past have left marks of their tenor that resonates to this date:  George Washington is known for the Declaration of Independence, Abraham Lincoln fought against slavery; leading to the emancipation proclamation, Woodrow Wilson ushered in the progressive era which resulted in laws and offices set up for social and economic change for citizens, Franklin D. Roosevelt who led the United States during the Depression, War, and institutionalized the New Deal.  Many presidential candidates have learned to embody/align themselves to previous presidents to present similarities between them, showing that like these great leaders, they too can do much for government and the citizens of the U.S.  Depending on the current political conflict will denote which past presidential icon will be employed.  This ploy works well with American’s who is looking a resolution to whatever problem their facing, and so elect the candidate that can convincingly portray that feeling of security.

 

Quote Interpretation

John F, Kennedy

“And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – but what you can do for your country.”

I picked this famous quote because I have heard it since I’ve been born.  It has been utilized in past presidential candidates speeches and commercials over time.  This quote is a challenge to Americans to push to the limits of what they can contribute to their country.  It’s not only what America can provide to citizens, but the contribution citizens must make in return to make it great.

The Progressive Era

1) Why is the size of the nation important when defining the "meaning of democracy." What are the consequences of the growing size of the country and how would you judge the arguments of the progressives who emphasize the growing role of the government?

Woodrow Wilson realized that the country of the United States in whole is needed for the well-being of government.  Meaning, the greater number of constituents in the U.S. meant more balance, balance that also will be realized through a bridge from privatization and government.  During Wilson’s term in office, he institutionalized many additions, revisions to the amendment and government office (The Federal Reserve).  All changes that occurred were for the monetary betterment of government and overall social change in growth for all citizens.   The argument’s of progressive’s is a valid one of its time, where their thoughts and actions were in response to circumvent big bosses (monopolies), corruption and stimulate social change.

 

2) What are the advantages and disadvantages of having technically trained government officials administering the government? How would you judge the effectiveness of this kind of administration in today's politics?

Advantages of having a technically trained official administer government would be that they would know that particular department and would be able to ascertain flaws knowledgably in a short space of time as opposed to someone who is not so educated to recognize a flaw.  Having a specially trained individual would help the government and in turn the constituents that would benefit from them.  A disadvantage would be the same as the advantage.  Having a specially trained individual who knows a system inside and out, recognize flaws and move to correct these flaws can lead to corruption.  Without a point check system, an individual can run-a-muck.  Since the span of time since the progressive era, a point check system have been in place to circumvent corruption, but there’s always loop holes and therefore room for improvement.

 

3) Choose one of the rights mentioned by Roosevelt in his Economic Bill of Rights. Explain if this right has been granted since then, and if not, should it be a right of people?

The Economic Bill of Rights by Roosevelt was to establish security among citizens, detailing basic economic stabilities that everyone should be entitled to.  One right is the right to a good education.  This right was established since children of the age were utilized in sweat shops barely older than toddlers to do adult work.  These actions were against the progressive ideologies that children should enjoy being children, immersing themselves in progressive behavior to uplift them socially and economically for the betterment of self, and in turn society.

I speak from the standpoint of an individual who is benefitting Roosevelt’s Bill of Rights, specifically the right to a good education.  Without this right I probably would not be in school today, as this right resulted in additional benefits (tuition financial aid: Tap/PELL) in order to realize the educational goal that progressive’s originally established.  So I do believe that education should be a right to all people, not only to benefit society and the economy, but to satisfy one self.

Quote Interpretation

“Some of these people really forget how sick they were.  But I know how sick they were.  I have their fever charts.  I know how the knees of all of our rugged individualists were trembling four years ago and how their hearts fluttered.  They came to Washington in great numbers.  Washington did not look like a dangerous bureaucracy to them then.  Oh no!  It looked like an emergency hospital.  All of the distinguished patients wanted two things – a quick hypodermic to end the pain and a course of treatment to cure the disease.  They wanted them in a hurry; we gave them both.  And now most of the patients seem to be doing very nicely.  Some of them are even well enough to throw their crutches at the doctor.”

I chose this quote because it reminds me that everything is repetitive.  Big business in the past reaching a downturn point that they have to ask the government for help is a predicament that the United States just went through – again.  Roosevelt accurately assessed business predicament and sentiment by stating he knows their business is doing badly, he sees this in “their fever charts” (IRS reports, Reserve Reports, etc.)  He knows their in turmoil, and they turn to government to resolve their private business discrepancies (wanting a lead, like a parent would lead a wayward child) without interference in their so-called “private” business (which of course is an oxymoron).  And once receiving their scolding and then receiving a correction, then it’s perfectly fine to snob the hand that fed you (government).

The American Revolution

The American Revolution

1)      How did religious and scientific ideas get mixed together in the American Enlightenment period? What were the major consequences of this?

The ideas of science and religion were hard to separate, though Enlighters attempted to separate them on the premise of private and public domain, they both held the same idea of equality and natural law, though with different meaning.

 
2) What are the major differences in the liberal view of government (Adams, Paine) and the more religious view (Winthrop)? Which is more dominant is contemporary politics? 

Adam believed in a liberal government based on natural needs, based on just, true, equal and impartial liberty (natural liberty).   Paine also holds with these believes but goes further asserting that governmental heads can be corruptible and so there is a need for more equal rights, whereas, Winthrop believed in the coupling of restrictive government and religious influence.  God would direct governmental heads in the correct reward/punishment of all, thus is not corruptible since it’s mandated by God.

Quote Interpretation

“Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil, in its worst state an intolerable one…” (Paine, pg. 50)

Paine is referring to government in general, stating government is always evil, though a necessary one.

The Puritans



The Puritans

1)      What is the difference between natural liberty and civil liberty? Why does Winthrop believe civil liberty is better?

Natural liberty is the freedom to do whatever one pleases without concern towards anyone but themselves.  There is no maximum limit on their conscious form; man can perform good or evil without recourse.  John Winthrop stated this form of liberty, “…makes men grow more evil and in time to be worse than brute beasts.”, whereas, civil liberty is concerned with the well being of the community and those within it to attain its highest potential.

2) How effective is Williams' argument for the separation of church and state? Does the separation of the two sever the bond that sustains the community as Winthrop believed? If so what could be a substitute for religion?

Roger Williams’ reflection on the separation of church and state has had a effective result in American History as it’s not practiced in today’s government.  John Winthrop upheld that people incorporate God in every aspect of their life, that there can be no separation between church and state.  He ascertained that one complimented another, the church rewards, the state punishes and vice versa both working hand in hand to provide the optimal state.  The separation of both, according to Williams would still maintain an optimal state without the church influence, providing for a free religious society to this day have been utilized in the United States.  What could substitute for religion (church) to work with state is the law.  Irrevocably, without laws to maintain government, state will fall.

3) What aspects of the Christian religion make it democratic?

An aspect of the Christian religion that makes it democratic is the belief in the rights for individuals.  Christian followers look up to God, an unseen individual who extols what is “right” or “wrong” and delivers punishment and rewards, the same can be said for a democratic state.

Interpretation

      “…Magistrates sin grievously against the work of God and blood of souls by such proceedings.”

      I interpret this quote as when state and religion is utilized together the way it is interpreted by government officials is not what God’s word intended it to be.  To be used to employ harsh punishment based on religious narrowing.

 

Work Cited

Williams, Roger  The Bloody Tenet of Persecution for Caused of Conscience (1644)

W.E.B. DuBois

W.E.B Dubois

Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others

“His doctrine has tended to make the whites, North and South, shift the burden of the Negro problem to the Negro’s shoulders and stand aside as critical and rather pessimistic spectators; when in fact the burden belongs to the nation, and the hands of none of us are clean if we bend not our energies to righting these great wrongs.”

 

I chose this passage, because it states a claim that I believe is valid today.  Dubois relates the compliance of Washington give Whites an “out” of responsibility for the inequality and Negro problems without considering them as people, humans.  Rather of another species without empathy or apathy towards to the Negro plight.  He further asserts that it takes everyone (referenced by the words, “nation” and “us”) to work together, not just blacks, but all ethnicities.      

Works Cited

                                                                              
Dubois, W.E.B., Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others              

Questions

1) Evaluate the argument between Booker T. Washington and DuBois. Has the approach of Washington actually been adopted in practice?

            The ways and means of fighting for equality has many faces and attitudes, depending on the situation a person chooses which one to employ.  Does a person display a militant attitude at all times in the face or adversity? Relaying an attitude of non-cooperation, or do you become persuasive in order to obtain your primary goal and be called by others you establish to help as “compliant” or a “door mat” to the other side?

            In today’s society, the overall attitude that has been adopted is a non-confrontational, non-violent manner that allows Blacks to obtain their goals through persuasive argument – solidified by the words of the law.  While DuBois militant points of approach do have merit, the rights granted to Blacks in the U.S. have primarily been through Washington’s practice of subterfuge.  I believe DuBois philosophy is still in use to a point, but overall success for, what is considered a minority class has been debative arguments.

Darwinism

Questions

1)      How does Carnegie adapt the theory of social Darwinism into his own writings on the accumulation of wealth?

     Carnegie integrates social Darwinism in his writing, but stating those who are able (independently) to acquire wealth is more proficient than those lesser beings who need help (also called the survival of the fittest), but it is up to the fittest to help the weak.

2)      How would you evaluate social Darwinism in regards to Lloyd's writings on socialism?

     Lloyd was against social Darwinism in respect that those who were poor needed help the most instead of forgetting about them.  Given opportunity they will succeed.

Interpretation

Carnegie

Wealth (1889)

     “Thus is the problem of Rich and Poor to be solved.  The laws of accumulation will be left free; the laws of distribution free.  Individualism will continue, but the millionaire will be but a trustee for the poor; intrusted for a season with a great part of the increased wealth of the community far better than it could or would have done for itself”.

     I chose this passage as a reflection of the way Carnegie thought.  He believed that the wealthy had an obligation to the poor by way of being thy brother’s keeper.  He believed that the poor, or less ambitious, were unable to do for themselves so it is up to the more fortunate to help the community excel.

Presidential Power

1)        What were the major factors that led to the increase of presidential power during and after the Civil War?

 

     President Abraham Lincoln was a major factor that helped increase presidential power.  When the Legislative Branch of government (Congress) deadlocked on the issue of slavery, it gave the president opportunity to take charge, thus make controlling decisions.  Lincoln also implemented various Acts and governmental agencies which are still in effect today, such as, Pacific Railway Act of 1862; Land Grant Act of 1862; Founded Department of Agriculture of 1862 (USDA).  All of these increased the presidential power base outside of any other branch within government.

Gettysburg Address

Quote Interpretation

Gettysburg Address (1863)

“Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that "all men are created equal."

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it, as a final resting place for those who died here, that the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow, this ground -- The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have hallowed it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here; while it can never forget what they did here.

It is rather for us, the living, we here be dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that, from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here, gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have died in vain; that the nation, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people by the people for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” (Lincoln, pg. 276)

The Gettysburg Address was a short famous speech given by Abraham Lincoln on November 19, 1863 to commerate the Soldiers National Cemetery.  He delivered his speech under a honey lotus tree, a stout tree with deep roots, far reaching to the sky and affiliated with love.  This symbolically could represent his believe for the continuance of this nation: stout, deep roots, limitless, and honed out of love. 

Honey Locust Tree, Soldiers National Cemetery

Lincoln speech was given during the American Revolution to commerate a section of land to soldier’s who lost their lives during the war, but his speech also turned out as a dedication to soldier’s who continue to fight for equality during the war.  His motivational speech was short and powerful and delivered for the moral of a warring nation. 

Lincoln started his speech by reminding citizens 87 years ago they won their freedom from England and now they have embarked on the same quest within their nation for all.  The notion that a country founded on these principles can endure, survive in their quest for freedom and equality, is implied and answered in this powerful message.  The meaning of those who lost their lives for liberty and the continuance of the fight carried on so the lives lost will not be in vain.  This country that they fought for is for them, the people, and the preservation of their nation.

Work Cited:

Gettysburg Daily, http://www.gettysburgdaily.com/?p=3890

Civil Disobedience

1)       What does Thoreau mean by a moral sense? How is it developed?

     Thoreau stated that people have a moral sense, the basic knowledge to distinguish right from wrong, just from the unjust as capable individual free thinkers.  To implement this process it has to be continually practiced for effectiveness, not to do so leads to the diminishment of personal thought and the following of others (government) without thought.

 2)       What is the cause of the conflict between the abolition and women's movement?

     The cause of conflict originated where they struggled against each other to classify who faced more unjust treatment.
 

3)       How would you judge the importance of civil disobedience today?

     Civil disobedience is a very important factor in today’s society as it was in previous civil cases in the past (e.i. Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks).  To bring notice to unjust treatment through non-violent means is an appropriate action as to not give cause to the government to shed a negative light on a situation or give them cause to retaliate unfairly.  A recent example of a non-violent demonstration can be seen with Trevon Martin, a black youth killed in Florida, and follow citizens protested for the arrest of his killer. 

Interpretations

Henry David Thoreau

“…see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys, and all, marching in admirable order…against their will, ay, against their common sense and consciences…Now what are they? Men at all? Or small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power?  Visit the Navy-Yard and behold a marine, such a man  as an American government can make, or such as it can make a man with its black arts – a mere shadow and reminiscence of humanity, a man laid out alive and standing, and already, as one may say, buried, under arms with funeral accomplishments, though it may be…” (Thoreau, pg. 223)

I chose this statement since its sentiment is still conveyed today where the men and women of the military are considered nameless tools utilized to carryout directives of the government without any thought of their own.  The psychological conditioning required to have a soldier obey without question leaves the individual with a moral scar since the directive carried out might go against their personal natural moral inclination, so leaving this person a shell of their former self.

Frederick Douglass

“I do not ask the esteem and friendship of any minister or any man, no matter how high his standing, nor do I wish to shake any man’s hand who stands indifferent to the wrongs of any brethren.  Some have boasted that when Fred. Douglass has been at their houses, he has been treated kindly, but as soon as he got into their pulpits he began to abuse them-that as soon as the advantage is given to him, he takes it to stab those who befriend him.-Friends, I wish to stab no man, but if you stand on the side of the slaveholder, and cry out “the Union as it is,” “the Constitution as it is,” “the Church as it is,” you may expect that the heart that throbs beneath this bosom, will give utterance against you.  I am bound to speak, and whenever there is an opportunity to do so, I will speak against slavery.” (Douglass, pg. 238)

I like this quote since Frederick Douglass is stating even in the face of opposition he will always (and frequently) speak about what he believes in.  No amount of friend sentiments or classification of power will change what he believes in: the abolition of slavery, and so if a being is hurt behind his comments/believes, it is not his intention to inflict pain, but is his intention to bring to light the injustice of the many for just response.

Hamilton and Jefferson

Quotation Interpretation

“In countries where there is great private wealth, much may be effected by the voluntary contributions of patriotic individuals but in a community situated like that of the United States the public purse must supply the deficiency of private resource.  In what can it be so useful, as in prompting and improving the efforts of industry?” (pg 149)

 This quote effectively supports Hamilton’s feeling towards government responsibility towards the United States constituents by state influence, and monetary efforts of industry.  The responsibility of monetary betterment in the United States rely not only on private individuals, but on the government itself.

Question #1
Assuming that the "command" in Hamilton's writing is to establish the National Bank or support that establishment, what are the "reports" he uses to support this command?

·         Report on Credit
·         Opinion on the Constitutionality of the Bank
·         Report on Manufactures

Question #2
Explain Jefferson's argument that individuals possess a moral sense?

Jefferson stated people over time will lose their morals if not kept in check by the government.  They can easily “forget” what is moralistically important if they ignore their innate sense of right and wrong.

Mid-term Question Proposal

1.  It has been stated that the majority of the Constitution of the United States is ineffective or useless in this modern society.  Can you think of a case currently in the news that the Constitution can be applied.  List all Constitutional amendments applicable.

2.  Name some modern day Anti-Federalist and note their current ideas. 

3.  Intepret the relevance of Article 4 of the Constitution and the effect on subsectional laws that occurred from it.

Anti-Federalist Paper No. 9: A Consolidated Government is a Tyranny

Question #1

“We the Aristocratic party of the United States, lamenting the many inconveniences to which the late confederation subjected the well-born, the better kind of people, bringing them down to the level of the rabble-and holding in utter detestation that frontispiece to every bill of rights, “that all men are born equal” -beg leave (for the purpose of drawing a line between such as we think were ordained to govern, and such as were made to bear the weight of government without having any share in its administration) to submit to our Friends in the first class for their inspection, the following defense of our monarchical, aristocratical democracy... As a majority of all societies consist of men who (though totally incapable of thinking or acting in governmental matters) are more readily led than driven, we have thought meet to indulge them in something like a democracy in the new constitution,”

This introductory portion of the Anti-Federalist document created by Montezuma and appearing in the Independent Gazetteer on October 17, 1787 displayed righteous self-esteem of the Anti-Federalist movement that proclaimed their rights as superior to others due to their station in life.  It is there contention that not all men are born equally as the Bill of Rights proclaim, but they are above such comparison to those who are, what they consider, inferior.  This proclamation states their natural born validality to a higher station in life than the next man.  Since other lesser born individuals, who in truth are unable to be rational men and are inferior, a party were created for them in order to occupy there time and lend basis to feelings of contribution, these people will be known as the Democratic Party (Federalist).  Montezuma proclaimed in this sentence that the Democratic Party was unable to think for themselves or the nation at large without the leadership of the Republican Party (Anti-Federalist).

I chose this work because it summarizes the discrimination that Anti-Federalist had towards Federalist and the pompous attitude reflected.

Question #2

Federal Government Power

It was the argument of Montezuma under Anti-Federalist writings number ten that too much power given to the federal government will result in a majority shift in power in their favor.  He stated, “Now, can a question arise in the colonial courts, which the ingenuity or sophistry of an able lawyer may not bring within one or other of the above cases? Certainly not. Then our court will have original or appellate jurisdiction in all cases-and if so, how fallen are state judicatures-and must not every provincial law yield to our supreme flat? Our constitution answers yes. . . . And finally we shall entrench ourselves so as to laugh at the cabals of the commonalty.”  He believed along with other Anti-Federalist that power should be retained at the Legislative level (federal).  The tyranny involved is the direct opposition of other factions towards there ideology, and any other opposed thought is wrong and in need of correction.  It would seem as the Anti-Federalist thought of people outside of their particular class as cattle to be led, fattened and considered as fodder for the strong to utilize as they see fit. 



The Federalist No. 10 by Publius (James Madison) Quote Interpretation

“There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects… The inference to which we are brought is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects…. If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.”

I chose this passage because it shows the conscience thought of divide and conquer…for the greater good.  Since the causes of factions can not be removed as Madison claims, because to do so would destroy liberty, liberty in itself should be encouraged with all the thoughts and objections welcomed from all.  Because as long as there are large bodies of different thoughts, no one democratic thought shall prevail, thereby letting the unified republic thought govern for the good of all.

The United States Constitution Article 4

The United States Constitution

Article 4

Section 1:  Full Faith and Credit Clause:

This section of the Constitution amends the similar Article 4 clause of the Articles of Confederation in regards to state-to-state acknowledgement of judicial superior claim and rights: “public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state.”  Whereas in the Articles of Confederation the interpretation was differently applied, it states, “full faith and credit shall be given in each of these states to the records, acts and judicial proceedings of the counts and magistrates of every other state.”  It was further explained in 1786 by a Pennsylvania court that this clause did not allow executions of one state to reflect in another.  The Constitution amended and superseded this clause to encompass this execution.

Section 2: Equality among States, Extradition

This section state other States can not discriminate against residents of other states.  Also, this section establishes extradition of fleeing criminals back to the principle state where such crime took place to answer for such transgressions.  This clause also had another objective which was to extradite run away slaves back to their masters, whereas it states, “No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.”  Though the United States while drafting the Constitution objective was to the establishment of better government, as reflected today, it was motivated to the prevalence of the businessman.  An escaped slave was considered a loss of income and labor, so with the reinforcement of The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 (which made it possible to recover slaves, overruled state sanctuary laws, made it a federal crime to assist an escaped slave and allowed slave-catchers power without border jurisdiction).  This act was followed by the amended Fugitive Slave Act of 1850; both acts were done away with when the thirteenth amendment was established abolishing slavery.

Section 3: Creation of State

In order to maintain a unified government without separate entities, this section states no State(s) can create another State within their borders or jurisdiction without expressive consent of Legislatures of State or Congress.  Previous to the creation of the United States of America there were 13 colonial divisions which mostly lined the East coast spreading westward into unknown territory.  These territories were brought together with the American Revolution which helped form the patriotism of a unified America.  In order to maintain one government this section was created so State can unify or be established outside of America.

Section 4: Guarantee Clause

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.”  What is actually a “Republican Form of Government”?  By definition it is everything in opposition to a Democratic government.  The Democratic profile was considered reprehensible to those who made law and was considered a sickness alike to a disease.  James Madison, writing under the assumed named of Publius, wrote Federalist number 10 which states the need to protect against outside factions and protect interior states.  It can be inferred by its readings that Republican form of government can be considered as a loose dictative government with the decisions and results thereof are done in the best interest of the people, even if they do not think so.  Madison also stated a government placed in the hands of the many (a delegate in charge of a large area to present the many) is better than the democracy which enables small area choice in the decision making process which clogs up the governing of State.

Quote Interpretation

     I have never managed to lose my old conviction that travel narrows the mind. At least a man must make a double effort of moral humility and imaginative energy to prevent it from narrowing his mind. Indeed there is something touching and even tragic about the thought of the thoughtless tourist, who might have stayed at home loving Laplanders, embracing Chinamen, and clasping Patagonians to his heart in Hampstead or Surbiton, but for his blind and suicidal impulse to go and see what they looked like. This is not meant for nonsense; still less is it meant for the silliest sort of nonsense, which is cynicism. The human bond that he feels at home is not an illusion. On the contrary, it is rather an inner reality. Man is inside all men. In a real sense any man may be inside any men. But to travel is to leave the inside and draw dangerously near the outside. So long as he thought of men in the abstract, like naked toiling figures in some classic frieze, merely as those who labour and love their children and die, he was thinking the fundamental truth about them. By going to look at their unfamiliar manners and customs he is inviting them to disguise themselves in fantastic masks and costumes. Many modern internationalists talk as if men of different nationalities had only to meet and mix and understand each other. In reality that is the moment of supreme danger—the moment when [Pg 2] they meet. We might shiver, as at the old euphemism by which a meeting meant a duel.

     This passage describes the idea that when a person travels outside of their sphere they leave themselves open to unknown forces that can influence self.  The undertaking of the unknown and the giddy surface acceptance/tolerance of it should be viewed with a more serious eye to see the undertone of what is actually in front of you. The concept of acceptance of all people as human beings as the same class as oneself, and the relation that everyone is brothers/sisters is not true.  The portrayal of a smile from another can really be a gauntlet of calculation for an opening of vulnerability, a beginning battle of a way to overtake and convert the opposition.   

     I chose this passage because I found the cynicism displayed highly amusing, and unfortunately (or fortunately) I find I have some of these cynical ideas imbedded in me also.

How would you evaluate Chesterton’s argument for a “friendship between nations based on differences” based on the state of politics today?

     The idea that opposites attract could be utilized as an example for this statement.  When there are two countries an appreciation of one another arises.  In relation to political affairs today, this can be seen in the import/export trade.  Where a country, such as, Jamaica may manufacture cane sugar (which is not a product the United States can produce in large volume) may in return receive an export of a commodity, monetary assistance or protection from outside forces.  This type of exchange enables one to develop an appreciation of another though their country structure is different.

How would you judge the claim often made that American democracy seeks to “convert” other nations?

     There is some validity to this claim as the thought of American idealism is passed on through patriotic sentimentality from nation to nation.  I believe American democracy is not totally a converted state, in order for a country to be susceptible to outside influences there has to be a want in place first that allows another to welcome outside ideas and statures.  Of course, there is some truth to the statement in that America is an arrogant patriotic country that seeks to spread our brand of statures to those that are considered “incorrect” in their country structure.

#1: Why does Chesterton compare the Declaration of Independence to Christianity?

     Chesterton compares the Declaration of Independence to Christianity because he states the United States is founded on creed, a summary of principles of the Christian faith.  He states it “…is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity” (pg. 7).  In other words, the Declaration of Independence is clearly based on religious beliefs, and it is arrogantly upheld in spite of this as a document that purports freedom which is an oxymoron since it ties its constituents to church beliefs.