"Freedom for all" has always only ever come with the footnote, "some restrictions may apply." Hughes protested on how America made of, it was still controlled by the strong and rich, while the minority suffers. The immigrants came to grasp the ‘American dream’ but They ended up in the same old evil chain and found that their dream almost died. They cannot enjoy the freedom and the opportunity that this country had even though they did the big job of building America. However, we could see that the people told in the poem did not want to give up.
Chartism is a fairly dispersed movement, its large nature and appeal coupled with many different opposing viewpoints, make it really difficult to categorize, and equally difficult to find a defined origin. Chartism in its rawest definition was the world first working class movement, which by its definition would give it a huge backing politically. But why exactly did it come about in the around 1838? One of the main reasons would have to be the failure of the so-called “Great” reform act for most people. Effectively the act benefited the middle classes, who were now given an electoral voice in parliament, while the working classes were largely ignored, causing widespread anger and resentment for the act, and all those it benefited.
This lack of democracy and in many cases, violence, towards the mentioned groups leads me to the overall conclusion that whilst Jackson may have attempted and possibly succeeded in democratising politics, at the same time he failed to democratise American society. Andrew Jackson can be seen to have democratised American politics from the moment he was first elected due to his image as the “Common man”. Having risen from poverty in the South with very limited formal education, Jackson was the first President to appeal and to represent the interests of the non-landed classes like the traditional Southern states where he grew up. Because this was so new a concept, voters were given the opportunity to make a decision: to either support Jackson’s non-autocratic views or to disagree with them. This was the first time in American history that voters were given such choice due to difference of opinion of the two candidates, leading to the development of the two-party system.
The party split into two during the 1980s, after it had expelled Martin Webster. On one side were the Political Soldier ideas of young radicals such as Nick Griffin and Patrick Harrington who were known as the Official National Front. They had little interest in contesting elections, preferring a 'revolutionary' strategy. The opposition, NF Flag Group contained the traditionalists such as Andrew Brons and Ian Anderson . The Flag Group did some ideological work of its own, and the ideas of social credit and distributism were popular, but the chief preoccupation was still race relations.
How Significant was the Vietnam War in Stimulating the Protest Culture of the 1960's? The popular protest culture that formed within the 1960's, that rebelled against the American traditional system arguably occurred because of the involvement in the Vietnam war from the federal government. Many young student and black Americans specifically, were highly against American intervention, prompting the protest culture. However, other reasons could have prompted this too, like the assassination of Kennedy, more political interest and involvement from young radicals now favouring communist and socialist ideas, and also, arguably the increase in education meaning young adults now didn't have to earn their livings as early on in their lives. Firstly, the Vietnam war was undoubtedly a very significant factor in the increased protests during the 60's.
While some showered him with praise for being so courageous and realistic, a great majority perceived him as being very unpatriotic and with the intention to cause chaos amongst the American masses Crowe, Charles: The Emergence of Progressive History, Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 27, No. 1, (Jan. - Mar., 1966), pp. 120 Despite all this, Charles Austin Beard is a pioneer historian. His contributions the the histiography of American history has left a mark that is even today
A People’s History of the United States: Reflection Chapter 5 A Kind of Revolution To summarize, this chapter serves to explain about how the common people were wooed into serving in the Revolutionary War. While the rich could control and influence (and even get out of) the drafting, the poor had no such power. However, seeing as slaves and Indians would not want to participate, the white colonists had to be persuaded. This brings to light the immense distinction between the poor and the rich, and as Zinn states, “It seemed that the majority of white colonists, who had a bit of land, or no property at all, were still better off than slaves or indentured servants or Indians, and could be wooed into the coalition of the Revolution,” (Zinn 80). He also says that 10% of the white population owned nearly half of the wealth of the country and held slaves as 1/7th of the country’s people.
Political ideology of America was to prevent communism from spreading and ultimately defeat USSR in a cold war. However this ideology impacted negatively on society , as they though it was not their war and a useless thing to do . The movement against U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War began small,among peace activists and leftist intellectuals on college campuses. But gained national prominence in 1965, after the United States began bombing North Vietnam in earnest. Anti-war marches and other protests, such as the ones organized by Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) , The Youth Campaign Against Conscription in 1962 and the “Save Our Sons” movement in 1965.
Origins One evident inconsistency with communism and consecration is the source of ideas. Karl Marx was raised with a belief that “man’s innate goodness and reason was blocked only by social, political and religious barriers, and other artificially created rules” (Miller et al. 18). From his schooling at the University of Berlin to his family life, he continually pushed for his ideas. He wanted to establish a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” which means that the working class majority would rise to power over capitalist minority.
Illegal immigrants work the hard jobs in this country as they take the jobs that they can get. Now, I am not glorifying illegal immigrants on any account, I believe that they should have immigrated to the United States through legal means, I believe they should need to apply for green cards and pay taxes. The point I am trying to make is that, the illegal immigrants do difficult work in this country that nobody would take if it was offered (the stereotyped migrant work, factory jobs, etc. ), so why do people complain (“Illegal