greeks

In Primo Levis retelling of his experiences at Auschwitz, the Nazi concentration camp, he describes both the horrors and the hopes that the Jews experienced. During Levi’s time at Auschwitz, he recalls the Nazis telling them they would keep their shoes and clothing. It gave the prisoners hope that they would come out alive. However, as soon as the Nazis gave the Jews Hope, they would take it away from them, by sweeping the shoes away and taking all there clothing.

The Nazis obviously had a strategy to make the Jews seem there was some hope, even of there wasn’t. They had to give the Jews hope; otherwise they wouldn’t work and would die sooner. The Nazis made it seem that if one worked hard, then they would be rewarded.

This is where the Greeks come in. I believe that the Greeks were a ploy by the Nazis, to show Jews that the idea of “work pays off” was true. These Greek were the “few survivors” who had earned the right to live. They ran the Market in the Concentration camps. They created the illegal system of trading for clothing and food. The Nazis saw this market as a way to manipulate their ploy further. They knew what the Greeks and Jews were doing. Yet they chose not to punish people for it, except on the rare occasion, to show that they were the dominating power still. All of these things were ways to keep the Jews alive just a little while longer so that the Nazis had them to work on hard labor and to belittle their existence as well.

What was the single most important cause of WWI?

It is obvious that there are many causes that lead to the start of the World War I. The first and most important in my eyes is the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand which upset Austria in many ways. There was a lot of assumption about why or who was behind the assignation but lead to the attack on Serbia. The second in my view is the invasion controlled by Germany into Belgium. Later France, Russia, Britain, Italy, Serbia and Hungary all started to mobilize their troops. If the assassination did not occur World War I may have not even started.

Joseph Mazzini

Joseph Mazzini, a great Italian politician, who by today’s standards would be mistakenly considered a political contradiction, no doubt. Mazzini had great love for his country, and his countrymen. He believed that national existence was vital to people’s self existence. He had based much of his essay on nationalism, and why one should love their country. “In labouring for our own country on the right principle, we labour for Humanity. Our country is the fulcrum of the lever we have to wield for the common good. If we abandon the fulcrum, we run the risk of rendering ourselves useless not only to Humanity but to our country itself.” This is where Mazzini’s liberal/socialist thoughts come to be seen. He believes that through growth and development of ones country, we all can help others of other countries that are oppressed or have their liberties restricted. He argues the safety and advancement of ones country is paramount, but says it is for nothing if it is not put to good use in serving humanity. Mazzini cared about humanity and thought that those at the top should reach out and help provide for those on the bottom. He also argues that by helping others, you are indeed helping yourself in return, which is quite clearly seen in his closing sentence, “And so long as you are ready to die for Humanity, the life of your country will be immortal.”

Virginia and French Declarations of Rights

Both Declarations were written roughly about the same time, with the French Declaration of Rights following its Virginian counterpart by 13 years. The two documents share many similarities. The first, and most obvious, is that both documents are lists of rights, detailing what is endowed to the citizens of each government. Both documents are also written by representatives of the people they represent, presenting a democratically written declaration. Furthermore, the documents both explain how each government is mean to protect the rights of its citizens through different aspects of law, including due process. It also protects the citizens from their governments by acts of separation of powers. The two documents are very similar; however they do have their discrepancies. The French version goes without a citizens right not to self incriminate themselves. They also do not mention a trial by a jury of their peers. Additionally, the French declaration does not require search warrants to be issued for searches.

The French declaration also has additions that the Virginian declaration does not. For instance the French proclaim that the press and speech can be restricted by law. They also point out that law is the expression of the general will, leaving general will to have a loose definition. The French court system is also clearly written out, with detail especially to each person being innocent until proven guilty. The French made these changes because it was trying to achieve the best of both worlds, the worlds being America and England, without giving up too much control and power.

Putney Debates (forgot to upload)

The Putney debates mark an interesting time in British history. The debates between Colonel Rainborrow and Commissary Ireton have been recorded and truly voice the opinion of what a nation has wanted for ages. Throughout these debates Colonel Rainborrow argued that regardless of income and position in the class structure, anyone has the right to vote and to run for public office. He argues that the soldiers had fought to enslave themselves, and that they died in vain because people still are not free. Rainborrow argued for his soldiers and for the common people. Generally speaking, a man in Rainborrow’s position does not argue these points considering his stature. Commissary Ireton argued almost the complete opposite of Rainborrow. Ireton prefers fewer people running the government, and he argues that change is not needed within their system. Ireton argues that only those who invested interest in the land should be able to vote, ruling out the foreigners and slaves. He argues that these types of people should not be able to vote. He uses the guise of education, and the lack thereof to make an educated vote. Ireton is in the upper echelon of society, and those with the power wish to retain it, and give away as little as possible.

Mazzini

By today’s standards, the words of Mazzini would seem very nationalistic and conservative. But when taking a closer work, Mazzini’s nationalist views are very liberal, especially for the time period. His nationalist ideas oppose all others, in that what they think as nationalist, he does not.

Mazzini’s liberal views stand out compared to Nationalist at the time. He believes that HUMANITY is the key to a nation’s success, “Your first duties - first as regards importance - are, as I have already told you, towards Humanity. You are men before you are either citizens or fathers.” He believes that all humans were created to have an equal amount of duties to their nation, even though God had divided men into different social classes. It was the governments that skewed this idea of divine power, “Evil governments have disfigured the Divine design… They have disfigured it by their conquests, their greed, and their jealousy even of the righteous power of others.” He does not believe that nationalism is wanting your nation to be greater in size, power and military over others. It is to have a better understanding for humanity than other nations.

Mazzini believes that one day this skewed vision of the conservatives will change and that, “The map of Europe will be redrawn. The countries of the peoples, defined by the vote of free men, will arise upon the ruins of the countries of kings and privileged castes, and between these countries harmony and fraternity will exist.” He believes that men can change their government in a peaceful manner and that it is there right by God to do so.

Mazzini is a nationalist because he strives to make his nation a better place and a powerful center. His liberal aspect are that he believes that a nation can be a wonderful thing when all of its people are untied in brotherhood, not separated by the caste systems of the governments, “There is no true country where the uniformity of that right is violated by the existence of caste privilege and inequality.” This was not a common idea seen through out the nationalist party. Mazzini has faith, though. Faith that people could come together in association to form a better nation. This is an idea that anyone, conservative or liberal, should respect.

Mazzini

Mazzini was a socialist and seemed very odd. Mazzini had much dislike towards the Italian government. Even though he had hatred towards a lot of things he still felt that everyone was created equal. Mazzini also showed interest towards religion and god. He believed that it was Gods rules that should be followed and used. He felt that god had written how everyone was supposed to be. His dislike towards the government also involved the religious side. He felt that the government should be abolished. Mazzini was a true religious man and had a lot of pride for his country and the people.

declarations

It is evident from comparing the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen and the Virginia Declaration of Rights, that the writers of the French Declaration were heavily influenced and even copied the idea of Masons Declaration. These Ideas are evident in each numbering of the French and the Virginian Document. Even both documents have similar introductions stating the purpose of the documents.

The Documents similarities begin with the first lines of each document. The two documents make it know that that they were written by representatives of the People. So, in turn, the ideas written down are those wanted and expressed by the French and Virginian people.

Each Document states the rights that Man is born with, Liberty, property, safety, and happiness. It is obvious that the french took the rights of men straight from The Virginian Declaration. The French declaration states plainly, “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights…These rights are liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.” The writers of the Virginia Declaration hadthese ideas, but were much more elaborte in thier execution of words, “That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

The comparisons are through out the whole two documents. Following the basic rights of all men, both documents begin to go into more detail. Both documents state that the job of the government is to protect the people and the rights of them. The government should also be run by the people and not anyone man. The French revolutionaries even borrows the idea of separation of state, which is used in today’s American government, “A society in which the observance of the law is not assured, nor the separation of powers [is not] defined, has no constitution at all.” If it were not Mason's ideas, then the French Revolutionaries would have not gotten the ideas that our government is based off of. The French Declaration even borrowed many ideas that would become the First ten amendments. If it were not for the ideas of the Vriginia Declaration the French Revolutionaires might not have had such a solid foundation in trying to start a new form of government.

declarations

Declarations of Rights

Both Articles are very alike in many ways but both have stregnthes and weaknesses. I'll start off by saying that
the goal of both was very simlar in protecting citzens rights and freedom. The French declaration seems to be very
upfront and direct and the Virginia Declaration seems to be full of details and not so much to the point. The French
seem to give the same speaking rights however they have some extra rules about not abusing that right. Both give great democracy rights. Also the declarations have
differences in the court systems. The rights in the courts are just a bit different as well. Both counties are different due to these small minor differences today.