Although, she does admit even she was shocked when listening to the speech, as she explains “the line was not believable”. From this I can conclude that source one doesn’t wholly hold Churchill responsible for the 1945 election defeat, however the reliability of the source is questionable as it is bias towards the conservative party. Source two, an extract from Lord Butler’s memoirs, clearly shows opposition to not only Churchill but also the conservative party, Lord Butler for example describes Churchill’s speech as a “negative attack on the labour party” and believed that he should have instead focused on “post-war policies”. By describing Churchill’s use of the word “Gestapo” as a “strategic blunder” shows that Butler is blaming Churchill in having played a role in the defeat of the 1945 election. Although both members of the conservative party, Butler and Churchill were political enemies, this is evident when looking at the extract: “a poor third place to the concentrated exploitation of Churchill’s personality” – this is a personal attack on Churchill’s actions.
When Keynes rejected the scale of reparations placed on Germany and resigned from his post at the Treasury, he lead the way for what many leading politicians were to understand later on. Keynes supported the approach of Lloyd George that for economic and political reasons, Europe needed a successful Germany, which would be seriously difficult to achieve whilst the excessive reparations were placed on them. Furthermore, his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919), was successful in influencing the view of Britain that a weak Germany would only make the recovery of Europe after the war, a lot more difficult. On the other hand, from taking this view, politicians were criticised for being 'too lenient' towards Germany. Even Lloyd George, who took a much tougher political approach towards the reparations, received criticism.
He also makes it seem like everything is crumbling around Paul, and destroying all hope of survival and return to normal life for anyone who had experienced the front line. This is very different from pro-war poetry, which makes war seem fun. Something Remarque does either subconsciously or very well, is to make you feel sorry for the German and Central Powers’ soldiers, and to grow a subliminal hate for the allied soldiers, no matter who’s side you came in on. The Textbook also does this well, but in reverse. The Textbook gives off a sense of dislike towards the Central Powers, and made them seem primitive and destructive for no reason.
Clemenceau resented Wilson’s generous attitude towards Germany and Lloyd George’s desire to not treat Germany too harshly. He said “if they British are so anxious to appease Germany they should look overseas and make colonial, naval or commercial concessions”. These disagreements left the big three unsatisfied and ultimately left them with a weak mere shadow of a perhaps great treaty due to their own arrogance and. It contained many faults and weaknesses. The treaty of Versailles greatly humiliated Germany forcing it to accept soul responsibility for the war.
This is a sarcastic tone because the words are harsh and bitter. The purpose is state the disagreement. 2. The writer means that he doesn't care about compulsion because the immorality and unhappiness .As you can realize by the word ''Mr.Hitler'', no one likes him but they need to do everything that he ordered. Eye for an eye punishment is also mean in the negative way.
Mao criticised Khrushchev for his policies such as de-Stalinisation and his secret speech. He was also very critical of the policy of Peaceful Coexistence as he believed it was a way of being friendly with the United States (the enemy) and also Mao saw it abandoning millions of comrades struggling to free themselves of capitalist and imperialist oppression. This, therefore, made the USSR an ‘enemy’. How could two countries work together if they had such differing beliefs about how to run their countries? This problem had a big contribution to the split as they couldn’t agree on anything, and if they did, it was because their national interests were at risk.
Throughout the text Stephen Jay Gould quotes other sources, whether it be the Bible, or another human being, however he does so in a way to illuminate the faults of the person he is quoting. He tends to put others words in quotations to add a sarcastic connotation to their words. With words such as “eugenic,” “care,” “scientific,” and “imbeciles.” Naturally when read in context of Gould’s text, one can see where this sarcasm is meant, giving less credibility to those who use these words or phrases wholeheartedly. At one point Gould tells of eugenic sterilization being practiced in Nazi Germany. A reader with even slight knowledge of the Holocaust or of Nazi Germany, would understand that sciences practiced during the Holocaust on prisoners was inhumane and as a whole un-scientific.
In this passage George Orwell makes the assertion that amongst the confusion of long literary or political critiques, the writing often becomes meaningless as a result of improper language and jargon. The use of such “meaningless” words allows them to be openly interpreted and often abused in political writing. What one might regard as Democracy, another would describe as Fascism, but neither carries a definition in this instance, but merely a positive or negative connotation. Consequently, these meaningless words often allow the reader to be deceived by the author. Orwell’s Six Rules 1) Do not use metaphors that you are use to reading in other texts.
West Germans did not like this attitude as they describe East Germans as being lazy and also think that they should be grateful instead of being against them. By this time, as Peter Pulzer said 'Unification was precisely what those who welcomed it did not wish for'. And one of the problems that affected the East was precisely the abolition of its currency to the strong west German deutschmark. This made East German industry uncompetitive comparing to Western industry. There was an unfairness in the West towards
This may come as a shock since it is easy to assume girls pay attention more, and therefore participate more in school. This is an obvious example of gender stereotyping when it comes to communication, however it happens to be wrong. Gender differences are important because some stereotypes can be misleading when it comes to communication among the different sexes. There are obvious differences when it comes to gender, but one of the biggest differences is the way the genders communicate with each other, and the opposite sex. The