The League’s actions here removed a potentially dangerous base for the Persians. This act is a paradigm for the large number of cities taken by the Allies, alluded to in Aristophanes’ The Wasps. However, as a step towards Empire, the paradigm is not significant. Here, Athnes is working with the League in one of its aims, to ravage the lands of the Persian King (Thucydides). Thus, at least at its inception, Athens was willing to work within the League’s aims.
For the purpose of this paper, attention will be focused on the Antigonid, Ptolemaic, and Seleucid kingdoms and how these powerful institutions employed these particular methods to legitimise their personal monarchies. The use of propaganda to form alliances by the successor kings, as a political strategy, is most certainly visible in the century following Alexander’s death in 323 BC . It could be argued that Antigonus I, through his proclamation of Greek freedom in 315 BC , was engaging in propaganda as a means of securing legitimacy and power for his monarchy. We know from Diodorus ; Antigonus marked Cassander as an enemy of the Greeks and Macedonians and accused him of attempting to enthrone himself in Macedon. He then proclaimed freedom of the Greeks.
The involvement of Athens and Eretria in the Ionian revolt according to Ehrenberg “put Athens into the center of the unfolding story of the Persian wars”. Herodotus agrees, stating that the dispatch of the ships from Athens and Eretria was “the beginning of the evil for both Greeks and barbarians.” The conflict brought about strong feelings from Athens toward Persia that were carried into future battles. Herodotus records that “the whole episode was probably most important for the later attitudes which it engendered.” The Greeks were motivated into defending their land from the Persians after seeing the fate of the Greeks in Ionia. They knew that if they were conquered according to Ehrenberg that “the freedom of the Greek states would be lost.” Public support in Athens against Persia was gained due to the fate of Miletus. Many Athenians felt that more help should have been provided to protect the cities destruction.
Nasser standing up to Western imperialism is another factor of encouraging Arab unity such as the 1956 Suez crisis. An example is Nasser persuading British troops to leave the Suez Canal showing independence once again. Nasser, viewed as high prestige now, aimed to unite the Arab world. Although the operation was a military success it allowed Israel to occupy the Sinai. However, Nasser had forced the West into submission.
With British imperial power collapsing during World War II, the United States was ready to move in. Hull said early in the war:Leadership toward a new system of international relationships in trade and other economic affairs will devolve very largely upon the United States because of our great economic strength. We should assume this leadership, and the responsibility that goes with it, primarily for reasons of pure national self-interest.” This point got my attention because it reminded me of the “white man‟s burden” that we talked about regarding imperialism, except that in this case the idea of acting out of “pure national self-interest” is plainly stated, not hidden behind a mask of good will. “The economic aid countries would need after the war was already seen in political terms: Averell Harriman, ambassador to Russia, said in early 1944: "Economic assistance is one of the most effective weapons at our disposal to influence European political events in the direction we desire,.. ."
To what extent was Pitts repressive policies the main reason for his success in resisting the radical challenge of 1801? It is certain in my opinion Pitt’s repressive policies had a major influence on quelling the radical’s threat to his power. During his administration, William Pitt certainly proved his worth as a successful and capable Prime Minister. The manner in which he went about his duties as Prime Minister was far reaching and effective and his repressive legislation was paramount to the failure of the radicals in their challenge against his ruling of 1801. Pitt the reformer became Pitt the reactionary.
Richard III in many ways could be described as either a good or a bad king, as well as hi actions before and during his short reign as King. Before Richard III became King, the people of England wanted him to be the protector of Edward V eldest son of Edward IV, thus giving him power until Edward V could make his own decisions. This proves that Richard III was thought of by the people of Britain as trustworthy of ruling their great nation. During his reign in October of 1483 Richard crushed an attempt at rebellion against him, this is one of his strengths as it proves that he was capable of retaining his power whilst under threat. He also had the Duke of Buckingham who plotted against him captured, tried and put to death, this shows that
The Persian Empire had sent money to help the Spartans build a strong navy. The Spartans aggressive actions forced the Athenians to surrender in 404 B.C., which finally ended the Peloponnesian
Ruling the former Persian Empire turned out to be more difficult than defeating it. But Alexander was insightful about how an empire should be run and wise in his decision to retain satrapies and features of Persian government. Like previous
However, England thought the American colonies would be best suited to their crown and parliament, because ruling the North American continent was a privilege only strong countries could have. The French and Indian war: It all started when the united thirteen states decided to fight for their independence. They joined together to break the British Empire. One of the main reasons was the French and Indian war, also known as the `Seven Years War’,