American journalist and writer, David Remnick, expressed the country’s deepest concerns on the Presidential Election in his New York Times article, “An American Tragedy.” Published precisely after Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, the compelling article voiced how utterly distraught Remnick felt about the pressing events and mediated what he felt Hillary supporters, immigrants, and all threatened people felt towards Trump. He began his article on a doomful and defeated note addressing his title and main argument: Donald Trump’s election and presidency are an American tragedy. He presented his “revulsion and anxiety” toward the presidency, the “miseries” we could potentially look forward to, and how the course of events …show more content…
Remnick’s introductory sentence argues, “The election of Donald Trump to the Presidency is nothing less than a tragedy for the American republic, a tragedy for the Constitution, and a triumph for the forces, at home and abroad, of nativism, authoritarianism, misogyny, and racism.” In saying this, Remnick addresses that there are compulsory forces, here in America, that abide by these ideals. His argument folds out that because the people and the electorate have elected Trump as president, that the nation will inevitably decline and suffer politically, economically, and socially. Donald Trump becoming president was only made possible because in the same way that Remnick’s voice mediated for the populace of distraught women, Muslims, Hispanics, Jews, and, African-Americans, Trump mediates for white voters with correlating ideals. Trump is the President of the United States because his supporters and voters see in him they 're culminating America; which Remnick points out will inevitably result in
Smith introduces the concept of ascriptive inegalitarianism, which effectively brings to light the conditions in which the reality of political ideologies exist due to social preconceptions that are passed from one generation to the next about the “natural” superiority of one race, gender, religion, etc. Liberalism and republicanism exist and function within this realm, not allowing for their respective ideological potentials to be fully realized. Hereditary burdens are placed on minorities because of clashing of democratic liberalism and republicanism along with these systematic and cyclical discriminatory practices. When seen through the eyes of society and government, these systems are completely inescapable. Americans, through these ascriptive systems of multiple political traditions, struggle with the contradictions each idea presents against the other and as a society attempt to embrace the best qualities of each. These outlooks help explain why liberalizing efforts have failed when countered with supporting a new racial or gender order. The ascriptive tradition allows for intellectual and psychological validation for Americans to believe their personal and hereditary characteristics express an identity that has inherent importance in regards to the government, religion, and nature. This provides those who are a part of the white elite to dictate which features are the most desirable and holy, giving head to social conceptions like “white wages”, which make them inherently superior to all other races and cultures. These ideologies are institutionalized within all facets of American life such as causing evils like mass incarceration, wage gaps, and rising suicide
He attempts to shock his reader into believing America is falling apart by comparing the diverse cultures that are active in it today. At one point in the essay, Buchanan writes “Our population is down to 67 percent European, and falling; 14.5 percent Hispanic and rising rapidly, 13 percent black and holding, and 4.5 percent Asian and rising” (599). The usage of “Our” in the sense of talking about Americans is a viewpoint that excludes anyone who is not white from being a true American. In addition, Buchanan is segregating the population by the color of their skin and creating an ethnic hierarchy. By only including white people in the definition of an American, Buchanan is showing an ethnocentric trait that Fredrickson analysed in his own essay. Fredrickson describes this changing viewpoint in American society when he examines the acceptance of all white people and the differences between colored people growing “more striking and salient than ever” (567). In general, Buchanan does not recognize the differences between white people, focusing primarily on the differences between white and non-white people. The correlation between the statistics he presents and the color of people’s skin undoubtedly prove Buchanan’s take on skin color and their ability to be American. This trait within Buchanan’s writing, coupled with the non-acceptance of colored people, has a strong presence throughout his essay, ultimately weakening his
Carmichael views America as a system that refuses to acknowledge the issue of race in an honest fashion. Because the holders of the country’s power, Whites, have no sense of urgency in the matter, it is comfortable taking its time in addressing such “inconvenient” problems. When the current power structure leaves those at the top of it in a particularly comfortable state, the desire to make changes that would only allow for others to have equal chance to take such a seat is unlikely.
Stephanie Coontz’s, David Brook’s, and Margaret Atwood all discuss American cultural myths in their respective essays “The Way We Wish We Were,” “One Nation, Slightly Divisible,” and “A Letter to America.” All three authors elaborate on specific cultural myths, whether it is about an ideal family, an ideal lifestyle, or an ideal country as a whole. As a result of analyzing the three texts, it is clear that the authors critique Americas image in their own was. As well as elaborate on why the realistic view of the United States is being squelched by major cultural myths.
On June 25, 2004, Academy Award-winning filmmaker, Michael Moore, released a controversial film, Fahrenheit 9/11, to the nation, that examined the actions of the Bush Administration in the time period following the tragic events that occurred on September 11, 2001. The film was protested by the nation’s conservatives and thought to be rather comical to the nation’s liberals due to the way that Moore portrayed President George W. Bush and the rest of the Republican Party. Moore showed in detail the different events or decisions that he felt were disputable from Bush’s presidency, including the way he feels Bush unfairly powers the nation’s population into following that of the power elite. We will use Mills’s Power Elite Theory to argue that President George W. Bush and the power elite exercise their power over the American people through the many decisions and policies they make on our country.
The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be addressed by the government, when it comes to the presidency, one person, although checked by various other divisions of the same government, has the power and responsibility to literally, as history has proven, change the world. The American people, "like all people everywhere, want to have our (political) cake and eat it too. We want a lot of leadership, but we are notoriously lousy followers" (Genovese). In other words the expectations the public has of the executive office are ever-changing since we demand that our leaders keep up with the evolving world around us and them. Throughout the past seventy eventful years alone, the American people's views, perceptions and demands of the Executive Office of American government have evolved simultaneously with the political and social events of that same time period.
American Psycho is a savage account of a wealthy investment banker in the late 80s that commits heinous acts of murder, rape, and torture. Although on the surface, American Psycho seems as though it is just another horror story, it actually has a much deeper message. This story is a harsh critique of a superficial Wall Street society in the late 80s that was rampant with materialism and greed. This is the society in which the main character Patrick Bateman lives–where appearance, material possessions, and status define a person. This superficial existence leaves him hollow and dead inside and turns him into a psychopathic killer. A society such as this, devoid of any morality, inevitably creates psychopaths such as Bateman. The film shows an excellent portrayal of a vacant, nihilistic killer with no feelings or emotions. However, there is something more to the story that the film did not quite capture. The book seems to not only be a satirical take on this society, but a tragedy as well. Recreating the dinner scene with his secretary Jean shows that underneath the surface Patrick Bateman is, indeed, a human being with real feelings and emotions, and that it is a great tragedy that this superficial society has turned him into a monster.
There are many aspects of Theodore Dreiser's An American Tragedy that involve the moral decision versus the immoral decision and God. The main theme that Dreiser maintains throughout the novel is Immorality. Each character in the novel possesses one or more characteristics that show that he or she is partially immoral. When combined, all these elements have a strong message, that there is consequence to straying from God's path.Clyde Griffiths is the perfect example of how a person is led from God's light. At the beginning of the novel, his character is the son of poor missionary parents.
Rick Perlstein argues over whether "Nixonland", a country at war with itself, still resides in the heart of America. The book took a in depth look at Nixon’s political career from the beginning up to the outcome of the 1972 election, as well as how America’s political scene went from perceived consensus in the LBJ era to the bitterly divided right versus left, also known as the red state/blue state split. Perlstein’s argument is that we are still living in Nixonland. “Nixonland” is a study of the consensus, it isn’t just about Nixon, he isn’t the protagonist of Nixonland although it does include his rise and fall; instead, the protagonist of Nixonland is the American voter who found themselves voting Democrat in 1964 and then Republican in 1972 for the same reasons. This book covers the American political and cultural terrain from LBJ’s liberal landslide in 1964, through Nixon’s comeback in 1968, and land...
Meacham discusses the upcoming elections to show the reader the power is in their own hands. Throughout the article he explains the President’s intentions in their election. He concludes the presidential talk stating, ”… both men will talk about the American Dream, but no single politician can restore the faith of our fathers and mothers. That 's up to all of us.” The President elected cannot restore America himself; the people must also place themselves in the best circumstance for
Similar to the corrupt politician portrayed in Parkman's essay, Donald Trump exudes the qualities of a "wretched, wire-pulling demagogue, who is as ignorant as the constituents that choose him" (167-8). The phenomenon behind his success in the 2016 parallels that of corrupt politicians during the Gilded Age. Disgruntled, uneducated masses throw their support at Trump in an effort to rise in social class. However, they mindlessly disregard that Trump is the embodiment of the wealthy upper class which controls much of the issues that upset them. Despite the many political indecencies that Trump has committed, such as acting racist or making outlandish unconstitutional promises, he retains support from many who, similar to Parkman's Gilded Age, "throw their cap up at the claptrap declamation of some lying knave [who] turns from the voice of honesty and reason" (166). Furthermore, his unbelievable attention from news outlets can be paralleled by Parkman's other quality of a corrupt leader who dutifully protects the rights of Americans because it allows "pulpit, platform, and press, to condone his vices" (166). Evidently, the corrupt politician can make promises to a vulnerable nation that are far from plausible, acting as a source of unrest, rather than a calming and reassuring force. As the Gilded Age was ridden with corruption and social turmoil, Parkman understood the
As one of the presidents during the Progressive Era, Theodore Roosevelt led the United States of America through a series of dramatic changes that interrupted the lives and ideologies that Americans during the time were more than familiarized with. Industrialization, women’s suffrage, the sexual revolution, imperialism, and “muckraking” journalism were just a few of the controversial, yet significant characteristics of this era. However, perhaps one of the largest and most vital influences during this time period came from the outside. Immigration was an issue that Roosevelt himself addressed rather perceptibly in his paper entitled “True Americanism,” which first appeared in a magazine called The Forum in April, 1894. However, it is not the idea of immigration that vexed Roosevelt; rather it was his concern and fear of the possibility that the increase in immigration of foreign people and cultures would culminate the concept of American patriotism, or “Americanism” as a whole. This paper will analyze the different elements of Roosevelt’s “True Americanism” by exploring the historical context of the document, highlighting Americanism as Roosevelt explicates it, observing the rhetoric used throughout the document, and discerning Roosevelt’s intended audience.
Clinton expresses his idea of the essay with a neutral, objective tone. Indeed, he shows what happened to immigrants as the victims of “suspicion and violence and discrimination” by mentioning the incidents in the history of America such as “No dog or Irish,” “Chinese were barred from entering the country,” “Southern and Eastern European were forced to take literacy tests specifically” (Clinton, par. 6). Using the parallel structure in the paragraph “So great was,” “So profound was,” Clinton wants to emphasize the fact that American government has made ridiculous mistakes about immigrants in the past. Furthermore, the opposite words is used for each incidents in order to create the sarcastic mood and mainly to make fun of the “American with suspicion” (Clinton, par. 6). Next, Clinton uses “we” from time to time so as to appeal the common sense among the readers, especially US citizens. “We must decide,” “We must remember,” “We should treat” is used with the specific action as a proposal to join with the president of the United States to solve the immigrants issue. The author successfully build the strong connection between him and the audience because he makes them more important when they are involving in the national great
Life, it can be beautiful, happy, or sad. Life can be any emotion that you can think of. An American Tragedy, by Theodore Dreiser, puts us through all these emotions in showing us the extremes in happiness, sadness, anger, and many other emotions to show us what real life is like. To do this most accurately, Dreiser bases his two-book story on a true-life tale about a man and what his rage did to his life.
The birth of an American nation began with the establishment of various colonies along the east approximately next to the abundant Atlantic Ocean. The colonies can be divided into 4 units. The colonies that settled in the New World were New England, Chesapeake, Middle Colonies, and the Carolinas. The European immigrants thought themselves as being the first inhabitants of the new nation, but were faced with a reality that Native Americans were already settled in the land. What was to come was years of hardship and war.