On the other hand, source 5 suggests that imperialism was ok, but the way the Boer war was fought was not. I agree with the view that the public got swept away with the ideas of imperialism because everyone else seemed to be believing in it, but I also think that this generalisation is fairly unreliable because it shouldn’t be applied to the whole population, because there must have been some people who were against it, or saw through the press and propaganda; how they were trying desperately hard to influence people’s opinions. Firstly, Source 4 suggests that the capital of England, London, were overjoyed at the news of the relief of Mafeking, supporting the view in question that the public were enthusiastic about the Empire’s advances: “celebrated”, and words such as “fireworks” and “brass bands” give connotations of happiness and festivity. However, this Source also implies that the root of people’s merriment (imperialism) was spread and emphasised by the “new halfpenny press”. From my own knowledge, I know that there were numerous newspapers that were ‘pro-war, such as The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and The Morning Post and their
On the other hand, source 5 suggests that imperialism was ok, but the way the Boer war was fought was not. I agree with the view that the public got swept away with the ideas of imperialism because everyone else seemed to be believing in it, but I also think that this generalisation is fairly unreliable because it shouldn’t be applied to the whole population, because there must have been some people who were against it, or saw through the press and propaganda; how they were trying desperately hard to influence people’s opinions. Firstly, Source 4 suggests that the capital of England, London, were overjoyed at the news of the relief of Mafeking, supporting the view in question that the public were enthusiastic about the Empire’s advances: “celebrated”, and words such as “fireworks” and “brass bands” give connotations of happiness and festivity. However, this Source also implies that the root of people’s merriment (imperialism) was spread and emphasised by the “new halfpenny press”. From my own knowledge, I know that there were numerous newspapers that were ‘pro-war, such as The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and The Morning Post and their
Providing the Confederacy with war supplies influenced Southern power, and their assertiveness towards the Union proved beneficial to international relations. The victory of the Union encouraged the forces in Britain that demanded more democracy and public contribution into the political system. Rather than an outbreak of war, relations between America and Britain were ultimately improved when the idea of widespread famine threatened England. The American Civil War proved difficult but eventually beneficial for Britain, giving them the opportunity to check their growth and rise to power. Keeping within British tradition and diplomacy, Britain never openly partnered with the South and their involvement in the war was to protect their own people, economy, actions and
Some of the measures that the British government brought in might have over stepped the boundaries and this will also upset the colonist. The colonies have never been happy with the fact that Britain had the right to regulate trade, but they have never really been happy with the face that the British policies will increase the internal tax. Then the stamp act was brought in the colonies together agreed that Britain had no right to tax them in this area. The stamp act was tax on documents. If you wanted to print anything such as newspapers
Source 15 backs up this point; it’s message is that the media has shown the royal families true colours, albeit very bland colours. It tells us that the media revealed that the hype over the monarchy was somewhat exaggerated and they weren’t really worth peoples excitement. We can also see this in the TV show “It’s A Royal Knockout” which was a great embarrassment to the monarchy. Source 16 both agrees and disagrees with this point. It tells us that the nation was very distraught after the death of Princess Diana, who was intensely followed by the media.
DBQ 17 British imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries resulted in negative and positive effects on India and Britain itself. The British were positively affected by imperialism, while India was both positively and negatively affected by the imperialism. Indian natives had no say in government, and were pretty much ruled over, but were also positively affected, like adopting a parliamentary system of government. Britain was positively affected and gained mass amounts of natural resources and processed them, also known as mercantilism. There were many positive affects to Imperialism in India.
It can be agreed that the popularity of the rebellions and the slow reaction of the government made it possible for them to pose some challenge to the monarch and state. However, the lack of efficient leadership, causes and locations of the rebellions limited the amount of challenge posed. The protests in the sixteenth century could pose a dangerous challenge to the monarch and the state in the years 1536-69 because of their popularity. The rebellions, especially the Pilgrimage of Grace, involved a wide variety of people who shared similar grievances. Like Source W says: ‘the Pilgrimage of Grace mustered enough support to take
As with other chapters’ reactions, I find this one to be of mild interest. I enjoyed reading about the colonists’ struggles and efforts, and was especially struck by the riot shout, “‘Tyranny is Tyranny let it come from whom it may’” (Zinn 75). It’s obvious that this time in history was very rocky. Turns out, the rich not only had the most wealth and influence, but when war came up, they could get out of being drafted by paying for substitutes. This just reflects on the attitude that the rich held and holds in higher contrast the dedicated drafted soldiers versus the rich who avoided injury.
By having America pay the debt off as a whole, Hamilton thought that it would bring the people and the government together. But Hamilton wanted to use ways that were so impartial to society. Many people were inclined to adore Jefferson because of Hamilton’s malicious deed. Besides this fact, the people were truly being neglected by the power of the government. The government, just like the wealthy and rich, was so power hungry that they disregarded the people’s kind acts and defaced them as if they were animals.
The British made many poor decisions aided in the success of the American army. It could be said that America did not so much win the war, but instead, allowed Britain to lose. Popular support for the Revolution and simple American patriotism were possibly the most influential factors in the American victory and British defeat. Support cut across region, religion, and social rank. Common farmers, artisans, shopkeepers, and petty merchants were major actors during the Revolution.