How did the attitudes of the British soldiers and civilians change during the course of the war and what caused these shifts in attitude? The soldiers went into war expecting the war to be glorious and easy. How did their experiences in war shift there attitudes about the war later on. The attitudes dramatically shifted from the beginning to the very end of the war. The opinion, as discussed in class by Professor Eacott, was it was going to be a very short war and he mentioned that there was a big sense of nationalism when he mentioned that each country didn’t want to feel humiliated by each other.
“Between 1933 and 1937, the British public’s hostility to the confrontation of foreign powers left the National Government with no alternative to a policy of appeasing Hitler and Mussolini.” – How far do you agree with this judgement? Due to the aftermath of the First World War and the oncoming threat of further war, the general public opinion was to avoid war at all costs during the time between 1933 and 1937. It was in British interests to maintain peace because of similar reasons, and because of the state of the British economy. The British public were therefore not hostile to confrontation of foreign powers, but wanted to avoid the conflict, meaning there was a strong influence on the National Government to please the general public, and appeasement was a better option than to use violence. The public opinion of wanting to be peaceful was the main reason why the National Government felt as if there was no alternative to appeasing Hitler and Mussolini.
Politically, the Conservatives learned to accept the welfare state which adapted from the 1942 Beveridge report. The NHS for example was highly favoured by the public and was clear abolishment of the policy would result in an outrage, so ever since its introduction in 1945 by the Attlee government both parties have agreed to keep the welfare state running in the UK. Also among the two parties there was a consensus that industries such as coal and transport needed levels of investment that only the government could provide. Both parties accepted that some nationalised industries, such as gas and electricity produced services that ought to be available to everyone wherever they lived which meant that there needed to be planned and managed interests of the community rather than run purely for the profit of shareholders. Indeed, it was the Conservative-dominated governments of the inter-war years that had begun this process by extending government control over, and investment in, the coal industry, civil aviation, telecommunications, and transport in London.
‘Do you agree with the view that the British public’s enthusiasm for the Empire increased during the Second Boer War (1899-1902)?’ Source 4 agrees with the view that the British public’s enthusiasm for the Empire increased during the Second Boer War. It suggests that the country was overjoyed at the news of a military development, but at the end implies that it was only possible for people to form this opinion through the influence of press. Source 6 supports the content of this Source to some extent, agreeing with the view that people supported imperialistic propaganda. This Source suggests that people believed that they had to support imperialism (because of propaganda), not because they wanted to, using music halls as evidence. On the other hand, source 5 suggests that imperialism was ok, but the way the Boer war was fought was not.
Britain's national debt doubled during the course of the war and the cost of extended empire cause a dramatic increase in the cost of living. Conflicts arose between the Americans about expanding further past the Ohio Valley and Britain but England did not step in. Some English leaders thought the colonists were inferior and gave them the lowly jobs during the war; they also resented the Americans for their increasing wealth with a rapidly increasing population. Once Britain decided to "intervene more actively in American affairs" disagreement and trouble aroused; the Americans were used to their freedom and were not ready to be dictated by a ruler (97). Due to constant attacks by the Indians and the cost of keeping America under British rule, King George III
Josh Mouzer Ethics 25th January 2015 Explain a Utilitarian approach to war pacifism is immoral. Discuss. The principle of utilitarianism is what will cause the most happiness for the majority of people. When a utilitarian approaches the topic of war they will use the hedonic calculus to decide which will result in the most happiness. The general thinking is that if war will result in greater happiness than the current situation then it is fine.
With firefights, life and death situations, and the mourning of their fellow soldiers, Restrepo showed that when it comes to war, even when we win, everyone still loses. At war, winning is the main goal. Defeating the opposing side and fighting for your country is what soldiers sign up to do. However, even when the soldiers accomplish their goal, and survive the war, a part of them still dies. They will never be the same person they were before they left for war because what they see, experience and feel will change them no matter how tough they are.
Despite the undoubtable successes of the Treaty of London and Field of Cloth of Gold as clearly described in Source 4 as the “Greatest Triumph” as well as the Successes at the Battle of Spurs and Flodden, the sheer squandering of Henry XII’s Legacy and the limited wealth of England being wasted completely outweighs the successes in Foreign Policy. Overall the embarrassing and naïve Failures outweigh the Successes in English Foreign Policy in the years
CD Docs The opinion towards England changed from America admiring them and following them blindly to genuinely not caring. They were very angry with the war and not being reimbursed and the taxes. Franklin says that England will have to use weapons and military force in order to get America to start paying taxes. Their attitude says that they would rather wear ratty, old clothes until they can learn how to make their own rather than pay extra taxes on clothes made in England. Dickenson wrote everything as “a farmer” so people could see he was normal, just like them.
Although it involved many positive aspects, it was strongly rejected by America, both the government and the citizens. The Congress found it to be an attachment of war for our countries, spend more money and slowly destroy our economy, and it pulled us into European affairs. This war without country seemed at that time very dim. Coming out of a war and feeling unstoppable, maybe Wilson was only wise enough to see that war is not something to be used unless absolutely needed. To protect the right of mankind, and lives of American and allied lives.