Factors suggesting that enemies at Court were important might include: • an understanding of the role of Anne Boleyn and of Norfolk who had made it a matter of personal ambition to be rid of Wolsey • Wolsey had made many enemies whilst in office. Serving the King, and especially increasing his revenue had stirred a bitterness that only waited for an outlet • jealousy may have been a factor. Wolsey had dominated preferment and favour, not only as the distributor but also as the recipient. Hampton Court was the physical reminder of this • many at court opposed Wolsey’s foreign policy reversal – indeed this was key. By 1529 England was diplomatically isolated and this might be considered a consequence of Wolsey’s advances to the French • the increasingly central position of Norfolk, Suffolk and Rochford at Court was recognised even by Wolsey in the Eltham Ordinances.
Though a war over government preferences is arguably a farfetched reason to wage war, it was apparent that these ideologies had a huge influence on lifestyle. One of the two possible verdicts that derive from the question, “Who was to blame for The Cold War?” is that the
There was a lot of confusion between the Commanders at the Charge of the Light Brigade, centring of the gestures of the bearer of the written order, Captain Nolan, and the verbal explanation he gave, led to Lord Lucan sending the Light Brigade up the wrong valley against the wrong guns. In Source One, the provenance states that it is written from Captain Nolan’s obituary, which means that it will be in favour of Captain Nolan; therefore we are to presume that Source One is biased. Source One is not blaming Captain Nolan, we can tell by the terminology that is used in the Source, such as “It is alleged” and “We are aware”, showing us that the writer of the Source wants us to think different, think about faults of other Generals, not Captain Nolan. Also, the date of this extract, shown in the provenance states it was written in November 25th 1854, which is just after ‘The Charge of the Light Brigade’ was taken place, which automatically tells us that there was no evidence to blame Nolan at that time, it would have had to be assessed carefully by journalists at the time of the Charge, to come to a conclusion who was to blame for the disastrous charge. At the end of the Source, it says that Captain Nolan had “an excess of enthusiasm”, and this is cross referencing into Source Two where it says that Lord Lucan was influenced by the “eager spirit of Captain Nolan”, this is showing us that he could have been very forceful towards the attack, making sure that it goes ahead, however not realising the disastrous outcome that will unfold because of his lack of organisation.
Theme: Assess the view that throughout 1855-1964, Russian rulers opposed change. To assess this view it is important to consider a number of areas including the role of opposition, and backwardness and poor state of the country. Trotsky described war as a ‘locomotive of change’ and Russian involvement in war throughout the period meant that this was very much the case. Russian rulers were also to some degree reluctant reformers who were opposed to change as most changes throughout the period were forced upon them and were usually followed with restrictions, such as the Fundamental Laws reducing the impact of the Duma. This was probably due to their authoritarian ideology.
1.) Why does Paine begin his argument for independence with an attack on monarchy and hereditary succession? Thomas Paine attacked monarchy and hereditary succession in the beginning of his argument because he wanted to gain more support on the revolt against Britain. His approach was straightforward and got right to the point for the independence movement and the rights of all men. He wanted to show that supporting the independence movement instead of remaining loyal to the British Crown was a better idea and would result in happier lives.
This aggression towards the West meant that America had no choice at times but to counteract Stalin such as when Truman stopped the Lend-Lease aid programme to Russia in May 1945. However, this could be seen as a reaction by Truman because many in the American government had criticised his predecessor Roosevelt for being soft on Russia. This could also be seen as a sign of American aggression especially due to the appointment of Truman in the White House. Harry Truman was heavily influenced by the
Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence I think Paine had several important arguments when concerning “Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence because there was a lot of tension that was building up between Great Britain during the 1760s and 1770s. Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” was beneficial when concerning the push for the Declaration of Independence. There were several issues that led up to the colonist determining on whether or not to declare the independence from Great Britain. There were numerous taxes that were put on the colonies which they thought didn’t make any sense at all. The colonist acted numerous times to protest against the taxes.
Hobbes pessimistic view on human nature was most likely a result of how he took in his surroundings. Hobbes lived in the 17th Century, during the English Civil War; much of his theory was influenced by this war. He saw man as solely self-interested and run by fear. Man’s desires are unappeasable. Since resources are scarce, humankind is naturally competitive, inevitably creating jealousy and hatred, which eventually leads to war.
APUSH DBQ ESSAY The view of overseas expansion in the late 19th and early 20th century was mainly driven by Imperialism. With that being said, there emerged two groups with viewpoints on overseas expansion, imperialists and anti-imperialists. Although there are plenty of differences, the main one between the two was over territorial expansion. The imperialists were all for it, thinking that it would help the American market and the depressed economy from the panic of 1893. On the other hand, the anti-imperialists argued that it went against our American democracy and was harmful to the territories we were trying to acquire and our country itself.
At first glance it seems unreasonable to distinguish between just and unjust wars because we may think that all war is unjust in itself. However, there are many thinkers such as Kant, Hegel, Walzer, Heller, Pufendorf, Kelsen, among others, who have tried to legitimize or delegitimize certain armed conflicts. Some thinkers tried to defend the justice of war by believing that when legitimate defense is at stake armed conflict can be considered as fair. Others condemned war as unjust when the only purpose behind it was to conquer or attack the enemy. For both cases, there is a right that we have to take into account, the right of all individuals to preserve their own life.