White Privilege in Politics Essay Example for Free

White Privilege in Politics Essay What is White Privilege one may ask? White Privilege is the ideological assumption and belief based in political practices placing white people and communities in position of privilege financially, politically, socially and educationally. In the book Race, Class, and Gender in the United States, written by Paula S. Rothenberg, it focuses on the time that white privilege came about politically. Donald G. Baker, in his book Politics of Race, talks about the restrictions against the Blacks. Manning Marable, in his book Beyond Black White, he focuses on elected Black officials over the years. With the help from these three books the reader will be able to see the huge amount of white privilege in political issues over the years to the present, where there are still an insufficient amount of African-Americans in politics. Rothenberg introduces white privilege when it is first of a political fashion. It was first used in a political way when White servants were given their freedom at the end of their indenture, but the Black servants were not. Whites but not Africans had to be given their freedom dues at the end of their indenture (p. 33). Whites were given more rights then Blacks. They had the right to bear arms and the right of self-defense. White servants could own livestock, while the Black servants could not. The White servants were also given the easier things to do. Blacks were not allowed to have their own family, while Whites had the right to control their wives. White men were given the right to control their women without elite interference; Blacks as slaves were denied the right to family at all since family would mean that slave husbands, not owners, controlled wives (p. 33). All of the African women were considered laborers, while the White women were just considered the keeper of mens homes. It was illegal to whip naked White men, but a person may inflict as much pain as they want onto a Black man. So, a person can see how white privilege in politics was first used, and that Blacks had basically no rights. Baker focuses on when the black slaves were given their freedom. They were free, but there were laws and restrictions basically stating that they werent a citizen. As the number of free blacks grew, there were more restrictions set for them. Many cities didnt want to have anything to do with the free blacks and some banned blacks from entering their cities: Many colonies during the eighteenth century took steps to prevent the manumission of slaves, to force out any free blacks who might be in residence, and to bar any other free blacks from entering (p. 54). Baker states that some blacks were active in politics, but none could vote: Blacks were politically active, but restrictions were usually placed on their voting privileges (p. 54). Also blacks werent able to testify against whites: Blacks, including free blacks, were generally barred from testifying against whites (p.54). So, blacks werent given any rights back then and werent seen as equals. Marable first points out that thirty years ago there were barely one hundred black officials and only five African-Americans served in Congress. Also he states that the number of black mayors of U. S. towns and cities was zero. the number of elected black officials nationwide was barely one hundred; the number of African-Americans in Congress was five; and the number of blacks serving as mayors of US cities and towns of all sizes was zero (p.205). Marable then says that today there is over forty African-Americans serving in the U. S. Congress and over another eight thousand have government positions. Today, forty African-Americans sit in the US Congress; more than forty African-Americans are mayors; and over eight thousand blacks have been elected to government positions (p. 205). Although there has been a major increase of black representation, African-American officials, elected and appointed, only make up 2 per cent throughout the nation. Even in areas with a high population of African-Americans, there are few or no elected black officials. In dozens of counties with substantial black constituencies, there are few or no African-American elected officials (p. 205). Blacks are underrepresented within the electoral structure of power and decision making in the U. S. Marable then states that many of the African-American elected officials have what he calls responsibility without authority. His example is that many of the black mayors have little control or authority over local governmental bureaucracies. This can lead to a decline in voter registration and political participation rates. So, over the years the numbers of black officials has risen, but still isnt too high. In conclusion, white privilege in politics has come a long way, through years of slavery and the African-Americans trying to gain their freedom to become equals with the Whites. There is still white privilege in politics to this day and the Blacks are slowly making there way to becoming more involved in the U. S. Congress and the government. People need to understand that this is a very diverse country of many ethnic backgrounds and cultures, and that one day white privilege in politics will be abolished and an African-American is going to be President. Works Cited Baker, Donald G. Politics of Race. Lexington, Mass. : Lexington Books. 1975. Marable, Manning. Beyond Black and White. New York, NY: Verso. 1995. Rothenberg, Paula S. Race, Class, and Gender in the United States. 6th edition. New York, NY: Worth Publishers, 2001.

The cost of the Vietnam War

The cost of the Vietnam War The United States Military took part in the Vietnam War, which started in 1957 and ended in 1975. At that time of war Vietnam was divided into North Vietnam (Communist system) and South Vietnam (non communist). North Vietnam didnt want the U.S. to support South Vietnam. South Vietnam took U.S. help to make Vietnam single nation. When Harry Truman was president, the United States had established a doctrine called containment. Originated by George Kennan and other diplomats and policy advisers, the policy of containment aimed not to fight a determined war with the communist Soviet Union, but instead to narrow communism and the Soviet Union to their existing boundaries. This containment led directly to the Vietnam War. The Soviet Union was determined to expand communism on the rest of the world. Communist governments would without doubt be part of Soviet kingdom but according to the doctrine of containment there could be no such thing as a neutral, one nation. It must be either part of the Soviet Union or Unites States. So, the belief was that all nations must be associated with either the United States or the Soviet Union. The United States was afraid of spreading of the communism, but the doctrine of containment made it difficult to see nations as separate, as places with different cultures, different problems, and different histories. The Vietnam was part of French Indochina in 1946. The Vietnamese fought with French to get their independence. Military equipment was provided by the United States still French were defeated in 1954. Then Vietnam was divided into North and South Vietnam. The war was mainly between the South Vietnamese and North Vietnamese known as the Viet Cong from 1957 to 1965. The military was provided by United States. The U.S. troops went to Vietnam in March 1965. They did most of the fighting with North Vietnam until 1969. By the end of 1969, the War seemed never-ending. Gradually United States began to pull out U.S. military. In January 1973, a negotiating meeting was arranged. Two months later last U.S. troops left Vietnam. Even though the fighting between North and South Vietnam resumed soon afterwards, U.S. troops did not return. On April 30, 1975, South Vietnam surrendered to North Vietnam and ended the war. The American military was not defeated in Vietnam. The American military did not lose a battle of any consequence. From a military standpoint, it was almost an unprecedented performance. (General William Westmoreland quoting Douglas Pike, a professor at the University of California, Berkley a renowned expert on the Vietnam war) [Westmoreland] Professor Pike does not categorically state that the United States did not lose the war in Vietnam; however, I believe that his comment is generally understood to mean that the United States did not lose the war. President Nixons secretary of defence James Schlesinger regretted that the military had too many restraints placed upon it during the war. Generals Maxwell Taylor and William Westmoreland lamented that they could have won the war if only the American people had not succumbed to a failure of will. Historian Henry S. Commanger like other humanists was sickened by the immorality by events taking place in Vietnam during the war stated, in part, †¦that some wars are so deeply immoral that they must be lost, that the war in Vietnam was one of these wars†¦ Here we have two viewpoints as to whether or not the war was won or lost. The first point is by Professor Pike, who seems to believe that the United States did not lose the war in Vietnam. The second viewpoint is expressed by James Schlesinger, Generals Taylor and Westmoreland and Henry Commanger. The comments by Secretary Schlesinger, Generals Taylor and Moreland seem to indicate that the United State did lose the war. One of Saigons wartime prime ministers, Nguyen Kao Ky, took an exceptional position among Vietnamese veterans living in the United States. He saw the roll of hearts and minds in Saigons defeat. In his book How We Lost the War in Vietnam he described the U.S. role in Vietnam as misguided and naive concerning the opinions of the common Vietnamese [Macros History the world report] The most famous nationalist leader in the twentieth century was Ho Chi Minh, born in 1890 to a low-level government employee. At the time of World War I, Ho travelled to Europe and joined other Vietnamese to plead for independence. The Communists seemed to be the only political force to strongly disapprove colonialism, so Ho and other nationalist joined the Communist party. In 1930 and 1931 the French brutally suppressed a Vietnamese uprising, killing 10,000 and deporting 50,000. In 1940 and 1941 the Japanese took over Vietnam but left collaborating French officials in charge. The Vietnamese, including Hos Communists went underground, used China as a base and in 1941 organized the Viet Minh. In the final days of World War II Viet Minh guerillas fought Japanese troops and worked with the United States. Ho sent formal messages to Washington describing himself as the George Washington of Vietnam and often mentioned the American Declaration of Independence and the Atlantic Charter. In August 29th, 1945 the Viet Minh organized the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) and established headquarters in Hanoi. Vietnam seemed closer to independence than ever before. In the fall of 1944 State Department officials told President Roosevelt that Indochina and South east Asia were potentially important markets for American exports. Roosevelt never formulated exact plans for Indochina, so the French, with British and American military help, returned to Vietnam. They were not welcomed. Abandoned by the United States, receiving no support from Russia and now facing French forces the Viet Minh accepted a compromise with France in March 1946. Viet Minh and French soldiers clashed in December. One French bombardment of Haiphong killed several thousand civilians. The Viet Minh responded with guerilla terror. For the next eight years, Vietnam was wrecked by bloody combat, with the French holding the cities and the Viet Minh in the countryside. When Richard Nixon became President in 1969 he stated a plan Vietnamization that would end the war. He bombed North Vietnam, and in 1972 U.S. air power encouraged Vietnam to establish an agreement with the United States. The U.S. part of the agreement was that it would pull its troops out of Vietnam and take apart its bases. According to the agreement, the U.S. could replace arms, on a one-to-one basis, that had been supplied to the Saigon regime. President Nixon planned to use air power again to discourage Vietnam if they violated the agreement. U.S. citizens were turning against United States involvement in Vietnam War. They were influenced by what they saw on television including children running from bombings. The U.S. Congress responded to the change in public opinion on the war, and it voted for restrictions on material support to the regime in Saigon. During the ten year period that followed the military triumph of the communist forces in Vietnam, the much feared spread of communism to other nations in the Far East did not happen. Thailand, Burma, Indonesia or the Philippines did not follow communism. A communist force had taken power in Cambodia but did not remain in power long. Neither did the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia in opposition to that communist force. Few lessoned were learned by the United States in this war. One was the removal of terror bombing. The second lesson was to restrict access for journalists and with military-led television. And the third lesson was that no U.S. troops should be committed to battle without a clear goal, a feasible plan and public support. Facts about the end of the war: The 140,000 evacuees in April 1975 during the fall of Saigon consisted almost entirely of civilians and Vietnamese military, NOT American military running for their lives. There were almost twice as many casualties in South east Asia (primarily Cambodia) the first two years after the fall of Saigon in 1975 then there were during the ten years the U.S. was involved in Vietnam. [1996 Information Please Almanac] More helicopter facts: Approximately 12,000 helicopters saw action in Vietnam (all services). Army UH-1s totalled 7,531,955 flight hours in Vietnam between October 1966 and the end of 1975. Army AH-1Gs totalled 1,038,969 flight hours in Vietnam. [VHPA databases] Around Fifty thousand Americans lost their lives. The losses to the Vietnamese people were awful. The financial cost to the United States comes to something over $150 billion dollars. Americans who lost their lives in war have their names engraved on a black granite wall. This is called the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, located in Washington, D.C. There are the around 58,000 Americans who paid the supreme sacrifice in the service of their country in Vietnam. References 1996 Information Please Almanac 1995 Information Please Almanac Atlas Yearbook 49th edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston New York 1996, pages 117, 161 and 292. Westmoreland Speech by General William C. Westmoreland before the Third Annual Reunion of the Vietnam Helicopter Pilots Association (VHPA) at the Washington, DC Hilton Hotel on July 5th, 1986 (reproduced in a Vietnam Helicopter Pilots Association Historical Reference Directory Volume 2A) Macros History the world report-http://www.vietnamwar.com/ Macros History the world report-http://www.fsmithya.com/h2/ch26.htm VHPA Databases Vietnam Helicopter Pilots Association Databases.

Home sweet home Essay -- essays research papers

â€Å"Home Sweet Home†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  There are hundreds of people, young and old that live in my apartment complex and each of them have a different and unique story to share. My story is that I come from the typical middle-of -nowhere suburbia, where the grass is always green, and all of the houses look the same. In that community it is easy to become too comfortable, and forget that things aren’t so â€Å"perfect† in the rest of the world. When my step-dad past away, we sold the house and moved into town changing the way I lived my life. The city feels like a different community and it seems to have a different atmosphere than the one where I came from. While writing this paper, it is my objective to become comfortable with my surroundings, and accept this community as mine.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The typical stereotype for apartment complexes is the children are constantly running around causing trouble and the walls are so paper thin that everyone knows every aspect your life. Here at Village at Van Mall, that couldn’t be any further from the truth. The children are confined to one area and the only time you hear from your neighbors is if you happen to run into them on your way out. The quiet community is tucked away in a hollowed out forest just off of Van Mall Drive. The towering evergreen trees provide a pleasing shade and from time to time a () rejuvenating breeze sweeps through the complex. The individual apartments are stacked two high and two across...

Is Freedom of Speech Really Free? :: Argumentative Essay

I sat in last period history class, my eyes fixed on the clock. â€Å"Twenty more minutes† I mumbled to myself, â€Å"twenty more minutes until freedom.† I was hardly engaged in the days discussion topic which was the current status of a post 9/11 world. I casually listened to the ideas of my classmates as I chewed my grape flavored bubble gum and doodled on my notebook, blowing bubbles and quietly popping them with my tongue in an attempt to pass the time. My teacher rambled on about how Saddam Heussein’s time to disarm is up and how Al Queda must be destroyed. One particular point of view from the boy sitting next to me brought my attention back to the discussion. â€Å"Actually, the U.S. gave Saddam Hussein the chemical weapons he is using, and the CIA helped him find the targets to use them on. It is their own fault he has access to these weapons and President Bush is moron. He doesn’t know how to get them back, he just talks big because he is t rying to make a name for himself as an active President.† I was shocked by the boldness of the comment but it was nonetheless an interesting perspective. I looked to our teacher to see his response. Our usually very open history teacher was obviously offended. The class was silent for what seemed like an eternity, before he snapped â€Å"Actually you are wrong, and that kind of thinking will not be tolerated in this classroom.† My teacher then dismissed my classmate from the discussion. I was shocked that a student was punished for having a valid opinion and for voicing it. I began to wonder if freedom of speech is actually free, or if there is in fact always some consequence for having your own opinions. The recent debate over terrorism and America’s reaction to it, has stirred controversy over the rights of free speech. Since the events of September 11, 2001, a large number of people have admitted that they believe the government should have a say over what is being broadcasted and printed The request for government censorship and suppression of free speech following 9/11, is nothing short of an infringement on our Constitution. As Americans, how can we claim be such strong defenders of free speech, and then turn around and put limitations on what we can say regarding the

The African Religion Vodu and Catholicism Essay examples -- voodoo, bla

The terms voodoo, hoodoo, black magic and conjure arouse different ideas and interpretations such as fear, fascination, or repugnance. For some, the image of voodoo dolls, which are used to bring pain to the one’s enemy are associated with these words. Others might consider curses and spells used for evil intentions to be at the heart of voodoo. A more innocent notion of voodoo encompasses the idea that it is to be used for the communal good. All of these ideas came together and merged with Christian and Catholic beliefs after Africans were transported to the Americas and subjected to unimaginable horrors as slaves. Many historians define voodoo as â€Å"a syncretism between the African religion Vodu and Catholicism.† Voodoo is an entirely new creation, which was born as the African slaves were confronted with New World religions. These new ideas were â€Å"camouflaged as European saints, the Orisha divinities continued to be invoked, fed, and celebrated by thei r transplanted New World devotees, who in turn expected protection and assistance from their ancient spiritual guardian.† In some cases, slaves used the culturally accepted Catholic saints as a cover for their ancestral beliefs which were often seen as foolish and heretical by their masters. This new belief system â€Å"met new world needs that the settled and passive African modes could not match.† Voodoo held an important part in many slaves’ lives as remnants of their African beliefs evolved into a meaningful and powerful force. Voodoo was an essential element of survival for many slaves because it helped them cope psychologically with the physical torment they endured, it gave them a sense of power in impossibly difficult situations, and it served as a unifying force. Vo... ...e and was treated as an evil force which needed to be shunned by all. The views of voodoo within the outside community continued to transform into something that was more entertaining than menacing. Eventually the practices spread beyond slave communities and continued after slavery was abolished, leaving behind a legacy that looked almost nothing like the original African predecessor. Works Cited Wilkie 141. Fandrich 776. Suttles 98. Chireau 17. Long 92. Chireau, 16. Chireau, 15. Chireau, 16. book Wilkie, 142. Pinn 44. Anderson, 22. Chireau 24. Touchstone 374. Tallant 10. book Chireau 18. Chireau 18. Suttles 98. Suttles 99. Suttles 99. Suttles 100. Simson 223. Postma 56. Slave revolts Suttles 98. Postma 56. Fandrich 780. Fandrich 780. Fandrich 780. Anderson 141.

Explore the Social and Political Factors

Explore the social and political factors that led to the formation of the national curriculum. The 1944 Education Act, put in place by the conservative president of the broad of education, R. A. Butler stated that there should be education for all, from primary all the way up to secondary education. That the duty of the local education authority should be one as to develop the spiritual, moral, mental and physical development of the community, that of school. However, during this time the only key requirements set out within the national curriculum based on what should be taught was for all schools to teach religious education.The national curriculum was not a guide for teacher to know what to teach, but rather the curriculum was largely determined by the teachers themselves, based on work topics commercially available within textbooks. Pupils were taught based on what was available rather than what was necessary to have a strong academic understanding. The curriculum for older pupil s tended to be based on examination syllabuses chosen by their teachers, again availability outweighing basic needs.There was limited influence from professional teaching bodies to introduce central direction of the curriculum allowing teachers to continue teaching an array of subjects and topics limited to resources of their textbooks. With such concern over falling standards of the education system within the UK, the early 1960s saw the Conservative minister of Education, David Eccles introduced a curriculum study group within the Department of education and Science. This group was then replace with the school council by Eccles successor Sir Edward Boyle in 1964 to look and develop the curriculum and education.The school council was formed with central and local government and teachers in order to oppose the accusation that the study group was self-ruled when governed by Eccles. The school council looked at new ways of teaching and assessing of subjects in order to create a consis tency. In the 1970s, concern rose again from the public, that the UK school system was not being well served. Under Shirley Williams as Labour Secretary of state, the Department of Education and Science and Her Majesty’s inspectors published papers on the curriculum issues, criticising both primary and econdary schools for their lack of balance in their curriculum and not accounting for changes occurring in society. In 1979 the Conservative Secretaries of State, Mark Carlisle, indicated that there should be a national consensus on a desirable framework for the curriculum following on from the Circular 14/77 report and review. This report led to Carlisle overseeing the abolition of the School Council and replacing it with the Curriculum and Development Committee and the Secondary Examinations council.Under Sir Keith Joseph as Secretary of State, 1985 saw the Better Schools White Paper recommended a proceeding with a nationally- agreed curriculum. In 1987 the Department of Educ ation and Science, under Kenneth Baker, issued a document that set out the foundation for a national curriculum. The document identified four key points: stability and consistency within the curriculum; a broad and balanced curriculum; support schools accountability and pupil attainment and aiding public understanding of the work of the schools.Following this, the 1988 Education Reform Act, passed by parliament set out the framework for the National Curriculum. Parliament’s key point in this development and centralisation of the curriculum was as follows: to promote the spiritual, moral, cultural and physical development of pupils which echoed the 1944 Education Act and to prepare pupils for the opportunities of adult life. The development of the National curriculum was overseen by two new advisory bodies, the National Curriculum council and the school Examination and Assessment Council.They sought expertise from a wide variety of educational backgrounds that drew on evidence and expertise throughout the education system emerging with a detailed framework for subject context which schools should be required to follow. The curriculum would be structured around Key Stages and be subject based, all subjects would be studied from age 5 up to age 16, covering the core subjects of English, Mathematics and science and foundation subjects of art, history, physical education, geography and music. Modern foreign languages would be taught from age 11.The syllabus would be set out in a Programme of study which would map out each subject at each Key Stage and include a scale of attainment levels to guide teacher’s assessment. Life and skills subjects were to be integrated within school teaching, including religious education and personal, social and health education. Testing within the National Curriculum was also implemented. These were drawn up by the Task Group on Assessment and Testing (TGAT). The TGAT sought to use a range of assessments that could be de livered and marked by teachers.Teacher’s assessments would be accompanied by national-administered standardised tests, known as key Stage Tests. These test results would then be published in performance tables to exhibit pupil’s levels of attainments. In 1989 the national curriculum was introduced into primary schools and was then rolled out across secondary throughout the 1990s. In 1991 key stage testing had began and by 1993 the inspection of schools was transferred over to Non-Ministerial Department of State from Her Majesty Inspectors and local authority inspection teams. The new inspection team was a independent body, the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted).

Organic food vs. non-organic food Essay

When you go to the supermarket, what type of food do you buy? Organic food or non-organic food? Maybe you buy some of both? However, when it comes to price, health and environmental protection, there are significant differences between these two types of food. Then you can decide which is best for you. First, price is usually the very essential factor considered by a consumer. We all know that most organic food is more expensive than conventional food. Take milk for example, usually milk certified as hormone and antibiotic-free in a supermarket costs twice than grocery milk. â€Å"Higher prices of organic food are due to more expensive farming practices, tighter government regulations and lower crop yields† (â€Å"Organic vs Non-organic Foods†, n.d.). In contrast, although non-organic food is cheaper, it â€Å"contains many hidden cost like taxes and the cost of the treatment for the harm caused to the environment by conventional farming† (Pragyaï ¼Å' 2011). Second, while buying food some consumers consider price first, but other consumers care more about health. â€Å"As animals are given antibiotics in conventional farming, human body, when sick does not accept the same antibiotics, thus reducing the body’s immunity in the long run† (Pragya, 2011). Besides, conventional growers use pesticides to protect their crops from molds, insects, and diseases, which is harmful to humans and especially harmful to women and children’s health. Compared to it, in organic farming animals are given organic feed and can get access to the outdoors in order to help minimize disease (â€Å"Organic vs Non-organic Foods†, n.d.). Moreover, pesticides are not allowed in organic farming. Thus, organic food is obviously safer and healthier. Third, as above-mentioned, using pesticides in conventional farming is harmful to our health, but it is also harmful to our environment. Use of these chemicals containing toxic substances has resul ted less number of wild animals and plants on the farmland. At the same time the quality of soil becomes worse because of the use of too much chemical fertilizer. On the contrary, â€Å"organic farming uses crop rotation to prevent pests, by creating a more diverse ecological system to naturally grow the pest’s predators, for increasing the quality of soil, natural manure and composting is done. Thus, the benefits of organic farming and more long term and benefit in fighting problems like degradation of the environment (Pragya, 2011). In short, both organic and non-organic food consumers have many different points of views. All in all, non-organic food  is cheaper, but leads to an uncertainty in health and does harm to the environment. Even though the relation is not quite proven, organic food is definitely be safer and healthier. Whether or not to buy organic or non-organic food fully depends on your lifestyle and what you are concerned about.