Sources 10 and 11 are very much in agreement as they both support the fact that the British rule on India was based on the respect and support of the Indian people. Source 10, which is the comments made by John Rivett-Carnac who served in the Indian police before 1914, supports the statement as he stated “you couldn’t do it without Indian co-operation”. This is clearly showing he believed that India could be ruled because of this. This is reliable because this man would not have said this if it were untrue because he was British. This links to source 11 because Kenneth Mason who was part of the ICS said something very similar.
The Battles of Lexington and Concord in the spring of 1775 marked the beginning of open hostilities between the Colonies and Britain. These battles were the culmination of difficulties between England and the American colonies. The Colonists were fighting against the economic exploitation and political oppression of Parliament. The root cause of the revolution was the fact that Britain refused to believe that the colonies had outgrown, both economically and psychologically, their former status. Many, many things caused the revolution.
When Europe finally emerged out of the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, Europeans despised everything about the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages, queens and kings were decided by “divine power” which opposes the notion of rulership in Machiavelli’s The Prince. Erasmus, another key player in the Renaissance, once stated, “Men are made, not born” which totally contradicts the idea of divine power. Another new idea Machiavelli developed in The Prince that goes against Middle age thought was to use soldiers that one possesses in their state, instead of using mercenaries or auxiliary soldiers. In the Renaissance, the humility of the Middle Ages was completely thrown out, only to be replaced with people wearing extravagant clothing and consuming themselves in their image.
Government has its origins in the evil of man and is therefore a necessary evil at best.” He goes on to say that “government's sole purpose is to protect life, liberty and property, and that a government should be judged solely on the basis of the extent to which it accomplishes this goal.” Basically, Paine is stating to the common people that they have the opportunity to form their own representation of government and do it in a way that truly represents their wants and needs. He is also knocking the form of government the British have and elaborating on why they need to separate due to their own needs for America. Paine would later go into more depth of the style of government Great Britain rules with. The second and perhaps most important key point Paine was trying to explain was the Monarchy rule
General George Washington’s strategy of erosion effectively outlasted Great Britain’s will to fight a costly war on American soil. Comparatively, Great Britain wholly underestimated the colonists and did not employ a coherent strategy but rather relied on a poorly executed belief that colonial support for the war would disappear with the occupation of key American cities. Roots of the American Revolution reside in a series of laws and taxes implemented by the British government following their support of the colonies during French and Indian war. It is important to note that the French and Indian war was part of the much larger Seven Years war fought between 18th century powers Spain, Great Britain, France, and the Holy Roman Empire. While Great Britain emerged a victor of the Seven Years war, it was nearly bankrupt at its completion in 1763.
Thoreau on School Segregation Henry David Thoreau is known as one of history’s greatest critics of American government. Thoreau argues that a government should be run by the group with the most legitimate viewpoint, not the group with the most power. In 1849, he wrote Civil Disobedience in which he urges his readers to use their conscience to determine if a government is acting within its bounds or if it is committing injustice. Thoreau argues that a citizen must do what is right and not simply comply with the law’s demands. He cites the existence of unjust laws and declares that we as citizens should not be obligated to follow them.
He describes government in such a way that nearly, but not entirely, advocates anarchy. Paine calls government, “even in its best state [a] necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one;” (6). He attempts to predispose the reader’s mind to new ideas of government, namely one that involves American independence from England. Paine accomplishes this through an ideal definition and concept of government. He describes the purposes of government such as protection of property and citizens.
IMPERIALISM DEBATE PREPARATION SHEET EXAMPLE MY SPECIFIC TOPIC IS Imperialism MY POSITION IS Negative (NO) STATEMENT OF FACTS (a general overview of the topic in 3-6 sentences) The US switch to imperialist behavior that occurred in 1898 has been a topic of great historical attention. After all, the US has generally claimed to stand in opposition to the practice of taking colonies, to be an advocate of freedom, democracy, and self-government for all. Some historians believe that this imperialist period was a "Great Aberration", a mistake that the US would never repeat, and one that goes against everything the US stands for. Others think that America really continued to have a kind of "informal colonial" influence throughout the twentieth
Is Richard II about Bolingbroke’s ambition or Richard’s incompetency? At the core of William Shakespeare’s allegorical play Richard II, the disparities between the abilities of Bolingbroke’s ambitions and Richard incompetence are explored in depth. Shakespeare’s prime impetus was to investigate a warning and voice concerns to the reigning monarch Queen Elizabeth I, that there could be catastrophic consequences if the Great Chain of Being was disrupted. Shakespeare projects Richard as a conniving and calculating character who overestimates his authority to such an extent that he fails to fulfil the duties of kingship. Richard shows a dangerous capacity for poor judgment and fascination with luxury, which deviate from the expectations of royalty.
The cause of the English civil war The title ‘The cause of the English civil war’ means, what happened to make the civil war start. A civil war is when a country fights against itself with different beliefs. In 1625 King James died and Charles I came to the throne. James had strongly believed in the divine right of kings he had thought that monarchs got their power and the right to rule from God and that because of this they must be obeyed, the people of England were not very happy with this because it meant that the king could do whatever he wanted and claim that God had told him to. England for a long time had been told to hate Catholics and when James came from Scotland and became king he decided to marry Henrietta Maria, a Catholic, the people became unhappy because they did not know if their heir would be Protestant or Catholic.