Thomas Paine, Father of the American Revolution

Thomas Paine: The Father of the American Revolution When we look at the struggle for American Independence, most of us think of the war that the original patriots fought and won against the British. We look at some of the most historical figures in American history such as George Washington along with John Adams and credit them with independence of our nation. What many of us oversee is the man who inspired our weary, undermanned, unmotivated and ill equipped nation; Thomas Paine. Paine was a man who was not even born in the American Colonies.He was born in Norfolk, England and immigrated to the British colonies amidst the revolution in 1774. Amongst his stay in the American Colonies, Thomas Paine quickly realized the desperate situation the colonies were in. Using his skills as a political activist/author, he created a book called â€Å"Common Sense† which lit the fire in the hearts of many of the colonial Patriots; it gave them the inspiration they needed to wage a war that would forever change the course of history. His influence was so desirable and effective that â€Å"without the pen of Thomas, the sword of Washington would have been raised in vain† (John Adams, The Sharpened Quill).Originally titled, â€Å"The Plain Truth† he was urged to retitle it to â€Å"Common Sense† because it provided American Patriots exactly what they needed to have them open up their eyes to what was in front of them. Paine’s arguments of how it was the right time to claim independence definitely puts him up for the running as the father of the American Revolution. Being from England, Paine was more than suspected to the ways of the Monarchy. He understood the necessity of a government within a population of people.His sense of brilliancy comes from his logical view of a government. He tries his best to come up with a way that invoked the colonists into a way of thinking that would both negate the government in a bad sense, but would also shin e light upon the idea of a leading group of people. With this, he speculated the argument that â€Å"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government† (Paine, Common Sense, 4).One of the reasons Thomas was successful in being a political activist, he had obviously appealed to those who had a sour taste of a tyrannical government, and he also took it into his own hands to redefine what a government was and its role to its people. England’s constitutional monarchy gave Thomas a decent sense of what not to do in terms of leadership. During his time in America, he saw that a majority of the Patriots were already displeased with the current system and he also saw that they were susceptible to return to the old ways because of the low morale to take things into their own hands.One of the things Paine wanted to do w as sway the American people out of the idea that a king is necessary. He goes along doing this by formulating an argument that â€Å"In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion† (Paine, 9). His argument against the crown then made sense to people because they then knew that having a king would lead to all sorts of complications with history repeating itself.Thomas did not see the point in exalting one man and making him better than others. He validated his points by using the ultimate weapon in political history: religion. Using evidence of the â€Å"scriptures† he articulates a dictation using, â€Å"As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on the equal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon an d the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by kings† (Paine, 11).There are many instances that Paine brings religion to his argument, but I feel like this is where he excelled at it the most due to his hatred toward a government that is a monarchy or any type of government that exalts one man and exempts him from the rights of an individual. As far as being politically motivated, he also formulated a list from a military aspect that gave the Americans a rough number on what they would need to protect their seas and borders. He also made it clear that the American colonies were not going to win a war in numbers, but in unity.The colonies themselves were small enough to unite a single front and take on the British. No war would come without money you say? Paine suggested that to gain help from foreign powers, we would incur a ton of debt to help fund professional armies. What was his solution? The west had unclaimed land that we could use to pay off this debt. Giv ing the United States a Foreign presence, this would boom trade and inevitably open the country to expansions that they would never see before.Of course he knew that with the opening of new trade routes we would need to protect them. â€Å"No country on the globe is so happily situated, so internally capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage are her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing† (Paine, 20). Paine formulates how much money it would cost the British to focus a war with America, drawing troops from other theatres of war in the world.Showing the revengeful Americans that they would inflict a huge blow to British pride as well as create a hole in their wallets, enticed them to band together and get building. They didn’t need to rely on any foreign help to amass their own navy. He also foretold of a peace with the British because the British needed the Americans for their raw resources and valuable materials. He created an ideol ogy that â€Å"the mercantile and reasonable part in England, will be still with us; because, peace with trade, is preferable to war without it† (Paine, 23)In conclusion, Thomas Paine will always be one of the original American Hero. For being someone not of â€Å"American† descent, he came from the homeland of the British Isles and incited a revolution that brought forth one of the most powerful nations in the world. With a sense of honor and dignity, Paine did the unimaginable; started a revolution amongst people who should not have won. He gave them the â€Å"common sense† that was needed in order to be successful. â€Å"On these grounds I rest the matter.Instead of gazing at each other with suspicious or doubtful curiosity, let each of us, hold out to his neighbor the hearty hand of friendship, and unite in drawing a line, which, like an act of oblivion, shall bury in forgetfulness every former dissention. Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct; and let none other be heard among us, than those of a good citizen, an open and resolute friend, and a virtuous supporter of the RIGHTS of MANKIND and of the FREE AND INDEPENDANT STATES OF AMERICA† (Paine, Conclusion). Thomas Paine, Father of the American Revolution Thomas Paine: The Father of the American Revolution When we look at the struggle for American Independence, most of us think of the war that the original patriots fought and won against the British. We look at some of the most historical figures in American history such as George Washington along with John Adams and credit them with independence of our nation. What many of us oversee is the man who inspired our weary, undermanned, unmotivated and ill equipped nation; Thomas Paine. Paine was a man who was not even born in the American Colonies.He was born in Norfolk, England and immigrated to the British colonies amidst the revolution in 1774. Amongst his stay in the American Colonies, Thomas Paine quickly realized the desperate situation the colonies were in. Using his skills as a political activist/author, he created a book called â€Å"Common Sense† which lit the fire in the hearts of many of the colonial Patriots; it gave them the inspiration they needed to wage a war that would forever change the course of history. His influence was so desirable and effective that â€Å"without the pen of Thomas, the sword of Washington would have been raised in vain† (John Adams, The Sharpened Quill).Originally titled, â€Å"The Plain Truth† he was urged to retitle it to â€Å"Common Sense† because it provided American Patriots exactly what they needed to have them open up their eyes to what was in front of them. Paine’s arguments of how it was the right time to claim independence definitely puts him up for the running as the father of the American Revolution. Being from England, Paine was more than suspected to the ways of the Monarchy. He understood the necessity of a government within a population of people.His sense of brilliancy comes from his logical view of a government. He tries his best to come up with a way that invoked the colonists into a way of thinking that would both negate the government in a bad sense, but would also shin e light upon the idea of a leading group of people. With this, he speculated the argument that â€Å"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government† (Paine, Common Sense, 4).One of the reasons Thomas was successful in being a political activist, he had obviously appealed to those who had a sour taste of a tyrannical government, and he also took it into his own hands to redefine what a government was and its role to its people. England’s constitutional monarchy gave Thomas a decent sense of what not to do in terms of leadership. During his time in America, he saw that a majority of the Patriots were already displeased with the current system and he also saw that they were susceptible to return to the old ways because of the low morale to take things into their own hands.One of the things Paine wanted to do w as sway the American people out of the idea that a king is necessary. He goes along doing this by formulating an argument that â€Å"In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion† (Paine, 9). His argument against the crown then made sense to people because they then knew that having a king would lead to all sorts of complications with history repeating itself.Thomas did not see the point in exalting one man and making him better than others. He validated his points by using the ultimate weapon in political history: religion. Using evidence of the â€Å"scriptures† he articulates a dictation using, â€Å"As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on the equal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon an d the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by kings† (Paine, 11).There are many instances that Paine brings religion to his argument, but I feel like this is where he excelled at it the most due to his hatred toward a government that is a monarchy or any type of government that exalts one man and exempts him from the rights of an individual. As far as being politically motivated, he also formulated a list from a military aspect that gave the Americans a rough number on what they would need to protect their seas and borders. He also made it clear that the American colonies were not going to win a war in numbers, but in unity.The colonies themselves were small enough to unite a single front and take on the British. No war would come without money you say? Paine suggested that to gain help from foreign powers, we would incur a ton of debt to help fund professional armies. What was his solution? The west had unclaimed land that we could use to pay off this debt. Giv ing the United States a Foreign presence, this would boom trade and inevitably open the country to expansions that they would never see before.Of course he knew that with the opening of new trade routes we would need to protect them. â€Å"No country on the globe is so happily situated, so internally capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage are her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing† (Paine, 20). Paine formulates how much money it would cost the British to focus a war with America, drawing troops from other theatres of war in the world.Showing the revengeful Americans that they would inflict a huge blow to British pride as well as create a hole in their wallets, enticed them to band together and get building. They didn’t need to rely on any foreign help to amass their own navy. He also foretold of a peace with the British because the British needed the Americans for their raw resources and valuable materials. He created an ideol ogy that â€Å"the mercantile and reasonable part in England, will be still with us; because, peace with trade, is preferable to war without it† (Paine, 23)In conclusion, Thomas Paine will always be one of the original American Hero. For being someone not of â€Å"American† descent, he came from the homeland of the British Isles and incited a revolution that brought forth one of the most powerful nations in the world. With a sense of honor and dignity, Paine did the unimaginable; started a revolution amongst people who should not have won. He gave them the â€Å"common sense† that was needed in order to be successful. â€Å"On these grounds I rest the matter.Instead of gazing at each other with suspicious or doubtful curiosity, let each of us, hold out to his neighbor the hearty hand of friendship, and unite in drawing a line, which, like an act of oblivion, shall bury in forgetfulness every former dissention. Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct; and let none other be heard among us, than those of a good citizen, an open and resolute friend, and a virtuous supporter of the RIGHTS of MANKIND and of the FREE AND INDEPENDANT STATES OF AMERICA† (Paine, Conclusion).

Literary Analysis Plan Example of a Pl Essays

Literary Analysis Plan Example of a Pl Essays Literary Analysis Plan Example of a Pl Essay Literary Analysis Plan Example of a Pl Essay Im choosing Coral unashamed for this assignment and will analyze how the motives is essential to understanding the story. Thesis: Coral was what the people in her town referred to as polite. Since the people In the town think that Coral Is polite, for what motivated her to speak Like she did at the funeral. Mall Points: Motivation- an emotion that drives one to action. The first thing that motivated Coral: The death of Corals daughter really hurt her, and she went right back to work after she died. Coral did not take out the time to mourn, o this was something she holding Inside and dealing with herself. The second thing that motivated Coral: Jessie disclosed to Coral that she was pregnant, and Coral told her It was k. And that she would tell her mother. Coral told Mrs.. Student that Jessie was pregnant, and Mrs.. Student was upset. The third thing that motivated Coral: Mrs.. Student tootsies out of town on a so called Easter shopping trip in Kansas City, but it turned out to be a trip to take Jessie to have an abortion, so Jessie returned from the trip with ought being pregnant. The fourth and final thing that motivated Coral: Jessie died, and Coral was really upset because when Josephine died Coral looked at Jessie as her daughter because Josephine and Jessie was the same age. Coral was already holding in her emotions, and the death of Jessie was all it took for her to have an emotional outburst like she did. Place: Coral lived in a town called Mellon. This town was not large enough to be a village. Mellon had no charm about it. It was merely a nondescript collection of houses, and buildings in a region of farms. Corals family was the only African American family in Mellon. Literary Analysis Plan Example of a Pl By Williamsburg Story: Im choosing Coral Unashamed for this assignment and will analyze how the her town referred to as polite. Since the people in the town think that Coral is polite, for what motivated her to speak like she did at the funeral. Main Points: so this was something she holding inside and dealing with herself. The second thing her it was k, and that she would tell her mother. Coral told Mrs.. Student that Jessie Mrs.. Student took Jessie out of town on a so called Easter shopping trip in Kansas

art of war essays

art of war essays The Art of War by Sun Tzu is a thirteen chapter book with each chapter explaining different strategies and tactics of war. The book starts off by explaining plains you must lay down for war and also enlightens you of the preparation you must go through for war. Then toward conclusion of the book it states strategies for handling situations such as terrain and how and when to attack. In a nutshell the books main focus was to be about war but many reads associate to real life experiences. The most interesting piece about the book is found in the beginning of each chapter. Every chapter opens up with a quote by Sun Tzu himself. For example, one a my favorite Sun Tzu quotes throughout the hole book was in the sixth chapter headed, Weak points and Strong. Sun said Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted. This and many other points made by Sun relates to sports and me as a person and many different ways. One day I plan on coaching a team of my own. Even though war should never be compared to athletics there are many qualities that each share in common. As you might prepare for a war you will also have to for a game. You will even have to adjust your laying plans because of terrain and have to attack certain ways such as war. This is what makes this book special and unique. Sun Tzus thought process of strategies and tactics during war could be express by a coach, a business owner, and really anyone who is in a position of leadership. The reason I choose this quote by Sun was because it applies to me as a coach and as a person seeking future work. I believe in being early all the time, never late. As a coach I believe in being early and having may kids all ready to go come game time. Also the earlier a team begins working for a goal will always has an ad ...

Understanding the Bush Doctrine

Understanding the Bush Doctrine The term Bush Doctrine applies to the foreign policy approach that President  George W. Bush practiced during this two terms, January 2001 to January 2009. It was the basis for the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. Neoconservative Framework The Bush Doctrine grew out of  neoconservative dissatisfaction with President Bill Clintons handling of the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein in the 1990s. The U.S. had beaten Iraq in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. That wars goals, however, were limited to forcing Iraq to abandon its occupation of Kuwait and did not include toppling Saddam. Many neoconservatives  voiced concern that the U.S. did not depose Saddam. Post-war peace terms also dictated that Saddam  allow United Nations inspectors to periodically search Iraq for evidence of programs to build weapons of mass destruction, which could include chemical or nuclear weapons. Saddam repeatedly angered neo-cons as he stalled or prohibited U.N. inspections. Neoconservatives Letter to Clinton In January 1998, a group of neoconservative hawks, who advocated warfare, if necessary, to achieve their goals, sent a letter to Clinton calling for the removal of Saddam. They said that Saddams interference with U.N. weapons inspectors made it impossible to gain any concrete intelligence about Iraqi weapons. For the neo-cons, Saddams firing of SCUD missiles at Israel during the Gulf War and his use of chemical weapons against Iran in the 1980s erased any doubt about whether he would use any WMD he obtained. The group stressed its view that containment of Saddams Iraq had failed. As the main point of their letter, they said: Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy. Signers of the letter included Donald Rumsfeld, who would become Bushs first secretary of defense, and Paul Wolfowitz, who would become undersecretary of defense. America First Unilateralism The Bush Doctrine has an element of America first unilateralism that revealed itself well before the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, the so-called War on Terror or the Iraq War. That revelation came in March 2001, just two months into Bushs presidency, when he withdrew the United States from the U.N.s Kyoto Protocol  to reduce worldwide greenhouse gasses. Bush reasoned that transitioning American industry from coal to cleaner electricity or natural gas would drive up energy costs and force rebuilding of manufacturing infrastructures. The decision made the United States one of two developed nations not subscribing to the Kyoto Protocol. The other was Australia, which has since made plans to join protocol nations. As of January 2017, the U.S. still had not ratified the Kyoto Protocol. With Us or With the Terrorists After the al-Qaida terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Doctrine took on a new dimension. That night, Bush told Americans that, in fighting terrorism, the U.S. would not distinguish between terrorists and nations that harbor terrorists. Bush expanded on that when he addressed a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. He said: We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. In October 2001, U.S. and allied troops invaded Afghanistan, where intelligence indicated the Taliban-held government was harboring al-Qaida. Preventive War In January 2002, Bushs foreign policy headed toward one of preventive war. Bush described Iraq, Iran and North Korea as an axis of evil that supported terrorism and sought weapons of mass destruction. Well be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the worlds most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the worlds most destructive weapons, Bush said. As Washington Post columnist Dan Froomkin commented, Bush was putting a new spin on traditional war policy. Pre-emption has in fact been a staple of our foreign policy for ages and other countries as well, Froomkin wrote. The twist Bush put on it was embracing preventive war: Taking action well before an attack was imminent invading a country that was simply perceived as threatening. By the end of 2002, the Bush administration was talking openly about the possibility of Iraq possessing WMD and reiterating that it harbored and supported terrorists. That rhetoric indicated that the hawks who had written Clinton in 1998 now held sway in the Bush Cabinet. A U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq in March 2003, quickly toppling Saddams regime in a shock and awe campaign. Legacy A bloody insurgency against the  American occupation of Iraq and the U.S. inability to quickly prop up a working democratic government damaged the credibility of the Bush Doctrine. Most damaging was the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Any preventive war doctrine relies on the support of good intelligence, but the absence of WMD highlighted a problem of faulty intelligence. The Bush Doctrine essentially died in 2006. By then the military force in Iraq was focusing on damage repair and pacification, and the militarys preoccupation with and focus on Iraq had enabled the Taliban in Afghanistan to reverse American successes there. In November 2006, public dissatisfaction with the wars enabled Democrats to reclaim control of Congress. It also forced Bush to usher the hawk most notably Rumsfeld out of his Cabinet.

Women in the Second World War Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Women in the Second World War - Case Study Example While Germany, Italy, and other allies seized majority of Europe, President Roosevelt of the US accepted to back Britain. Concisely, due to the significant booming of the Harbor of Pearl, the US president declared a war through the congress. Consequently, with the declaration of war by President Roosevelt, Hitler responded by declaring war on the US; hence the commencement of WW II (Library of congress, 2011). The exhibition has featured numerous women chosen based on their strength, as well as, variety in the library collections. Significantly, similar to their friends, they concentrated on certain ways in their wartime assignments. This document has selected three from the eight women in order to explore a comparison, as well as, a contrast in order to reveal who was significant in the exhibition. For instance, all women in WW II employed photographs in their elaboration of what happened in the WW II. Accordingly, my document has chosen Therese Bonney, Esther Bubley, and Toni Frissell. Considerably the three women attracted about million viewers with their WW II images. However, they differ significantly because Bonney’s pictures portrayed images of numerours homeless nurses, soldiers in the front line, WACs, afro- American airmen, and numerous orphaned children. In contrast, Bubbley’s images portrayed wartime subjects around the capital of the nation. In addition, her ima ges portrayed the life of the city, especially the boarding houses for workers of the war. It is worth noting that, Bonney’s images reveal that, she could go forth alone and try to establish the truth and bring it back by trying to make the others intermingle with it and act on it. Therefore, she believed that, the emergency of the WW II had significantly threatened civilization in Europe. Consequently, Bonney wanted to reveal that, people would find measures I order to end the war. Another critical point of contrast was Frissell’s desire t

The Cost of Computers Over 10 Years Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

The Cost of Computers Over 10 Years - Essay Example (Moore, 1965). Simply put, computers have been getting exponentially more powerful since their invention. How is this important to an economic analysis of computer costs? For many years this has been a simple formula for predicting the future cost and efficiency of computers. If we compare the specifications of a computer to what consumers require in order to complete tasks, run software, surf the Internet, and much more, we can see that the advancement of integrated circuits is much faster than the requirement of users. For example, if a student required a computer 10 years ago research, write papers, surf the internet, and communicate, a standard pc of that era would be perfectly suitable. The same student today would require a computer able to perform very similar tasks to the computer of 10 years ago, ignoring the need for graphical gaming and media. Therefore, a computer with the same specifications today and one 10 years ago, or even 1 year ago, can be created with less transis tors, meaning the cost of production is less too. The second law that applies to our analysis is Metcalfe's Law. Robert Metcalfe, the inventor of Ethernet, stated that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of that particular system. (Metcalfe, 1993). Originally talking about telecommunications networks, this law can be applied in general to the Internet – a huge, if not the biggest, driving force of the computer. Simply put, it means that every one new user added to a particular network adds more value to that network. A common example of this is the fax machine comparison. â€Å"The first person to buy a fax machine was a fool.† (Metcalfe, 1993) A user would find it quite pointless to send themselves a fax and having no recipient,... This paper approves that the last factor regarding supply and demand is the substitution effect and alternative effect. Although each good is unique, it has substitutes – there are always other goods that can be used in place of it. Twenty years ago, it was very common to write one's letters manually and type script on a typewriter. Ten years ago, the computer was certainly very popular, although many alternatives were considered over owning a personal computer. Typewriters were still in use, Internet cafes were popular, and sharing computers was considered quite acceptable. Today, we can observe that the demand for typewriters has decreased, as it is an inferior substitute. Furthermore, the supply of typewriters is also reduced, as it is comparatively more expensive to produce than computers. In the same way, personal computers are affordable, resulting in a reduction in Internet cafes and computer sharing. Cost plays a vital role in determining which products a buyer will su bstitute in order to maintain viability. This report makes a conclusion that we can observe the many forces that have attributed to the success of the personal computer and laptop. We can perhaps look to our formula, laws, and economic models to predict the cost of the computer, or technological equivalent, in the future. Although, if in this short span of time computers have become such a ubiquitous part of our daily lives, we can only wonder as to the extent of influence it will have on us in the next 10 years.

Are states the driving force behind globalisation, or its victims Essay

Are states the driving force behind globalisation, or its victims - Essay Example It is for this reason that arguments and counterarguments have been advanced, concerning states as the driving forces in international relations, or victims of the same. A clear analysis of international relations and politics reveals that states are the main actors or the driving force in international relations, as shall be seen in the discussion that ensues forthwith. That states are the main actors behind globalisation, is a matter that is well underscored by the events that surrounded and succeeded Cold War. Although globalisation can be said to have started towards the end of the 16th century AD as feudalism was being replaced by capitalism in Western Europe, yet states played a pivotal role in triggering the advent of globalisation. The role of the state in globalisation is underscored by the fact that the pace in which globalisation takes place has mainly been commensurate with interests and input of the major powers in international relations. This is in complete consistence with all the theoretical frameworks that make attempt at explaining international relations. This is to say that if states have the might to hinder globalisation, then they also have the wherewithal to catalyse globalisation (Peet, 2009, 105). Scholte (2005, 125) is poignant that the role that states play in international relations is even more pronounced when international relations is viewed through the prism of realism. Realism has it that the world of politics is driven by self-interests which are highly competitive in nature. Realism continues that the very international system wherein states compete is anarchic. By this, it is not meant that international system is inherently chaotic, but that there is no higher power that can hinder aggression or make arbitrations on disputes. Because of this, this anarchical system forces states to arm themselves in