History has proven over time that the arrogance of a country can be its greatest down fall. America has risen to became a great power in a short period of time, but their contagious ways could become its potential downfall from their own arrogant ways. The author's use of logos helps define the article by the means of describing the faults that he sees with America's arrogant ways. The world sees Americans differently and this changes depending on, if we are at home or abroad. The evidence is in the past, in that America is at a crossroad and should evaluate this necessary arrogance before it collapses. William Fulbright wrote “America is now at the historical point at which a nation is in danger of losing its perspective on what exactly is within the realm of its power and what is beyond.” Mr. Fulbright’s description of how America's potential future could be, if it continues to arrogantly use its power. Furthermore, he "fears that America may be drifting into commitments which, though generous and benevolent in intent, are so far reaching as to exceed even America's great...
Rather than progressing and remaining active for the betterment of America, the country continues to dwell in the past by surrounding itself with fictional stereotypes and overwhelming confidence. Krugman’s tone shifts to a more concerned viewer, as he stressed the importance of relying on factual evidence opposed to cultural biases. America’s formation of a French caricature inevitably backfires when statistical evidence (a chart) reveals about how untrue the nation’s ‘facts’ are about the employment rates in the European country. As shown on the graph, France’s employment rate has grown steadily over the years, while America’s rate has continuously declined, resulting in a substantial gap between the two countries. If America is not willing to improve itself as a nation and a world power, it will no longer be respected by the rest of the world. Its famous reputation as a world power would stripped, leaving it helpless and bare to harsh judgement and criticism of the Earth’s citizens. Although laughing and poking fun at a country’s past mistakes is comfortable and natural for America, it only proves of how distracted we are about the reality of America’s idleness. If we do not take ourselves seriously, who
The United States has a long history of great leaders who, collectively, have possessed an even wider range of religious and political convictions. Perhaps not unexpectedly, their beliefs have often been in conflict with one another, both during coinciding eras, as well as over compared generations. The individual philosophies of William Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, with regard to America’s roles in world affairs and foreign diplomacy; are both varied and conflicted. Despite those conflicts however, each leader has left his own legacy behind, in terms of how the U.S. continues to engage in world affairs today.
As the United States developed into a world economic power, it also became a military and political power. Certain things led Americans to become more involved in world affairs, such as territorial growth. There were also consequences to the nation’s new role, like conflict between citizens and people of power. United States government and leaders had to learn the “hard way”, the challenges and negativity that they would face, such as loss of money and lack of control between certain nations, and the positive effects such as expansion of territory and alliances.
Without understanding the importance of foreign relations the American people’s way of life could be at stake. Not only could the economic strength of the U.S. diminish, but the military might of the U.S. could also be compromised. Mead argues that without the centrality of foreign policy being evident in American politics the happiness of the world is at risk. “Since the United States has become the central power in a worldwide system of finance, communications, and trade, it is not only the American people whose happiness and security will be greatly affected by the quality of American foreign policy in coming years (Mead 176). I contend that without a strong emphasis on foreign policy, we could begin to see the end of American
George Washington, the first president of the United States, had written a very important historical speech and document towards the end of his time in office. He had written the Farewell address which focused on helping America understand the importance of preserving unity, acknowledging the rise of political parties forming, strengthening religion and morality, and he stated his position on American foreign policy. He addressed these ideas with strong tone and used incredible amount of dictions that strengthens his tone as well as representing his appeal to ethos to a strong degree. However, today’s society seemed to forget Washington’s position on foreign policy and has created a new form of the policy. But nonetheless as time grew, change occurs. In today’s society Washington’s foreign policy would include many positive and negative manifestations, but it is still a speech and document that will always apply to America.
After the civil war, United States took a turn that led them to solidify as the world power. From the late 1800s, as the US began to collect power through Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines, debate arose among historians about American imperialism and its behavior. Historians such as William A. Williams, Arthur Schlesinger, and Stephen Kinzer provides their own vision and how America ought to be through ideas centered around economics, power, and racial superiority.
...from the building of skyscrapers to the railroads, and imperialism. We have moved all the way westward and what there is to do is to globalize our nation and continue to help improve the nations that we help guide. We first need to make sure that we are practicing democracy, free trade, our values, freedom, and our beliefs. This is what it means to be an exceptional nation. Other nations look to us, and when we don’t respond accordingly or if we don’t practice what we preach, they will call us hypocrites.
Beginning with the birth of the twentieth century, the United States was in a dilemma. America needed amelioration; the country had a tremendous amount of potential but was unable to put forth the necessary actions without the correct guidance. It was vital that the United States was pointed in the right direction or more problems would occur. America required political reform and the elimination of corruption caused by the government, thus, the time prevailed for the Progressive Presidents.
Introduction Individuals often yield to conformity when they are forced to discard their individual freedom in order to benefit the larger group. Despite the fact that it is important to obey the authority, obeying the authority can sometimes be hazardous, especially when morals and autonomous thought are suppressed to an extent that the other person is harmed. Obedience usually involves doing what a rule or a person tells you to, but negative consequences can result from displaying obedience to authority; for example, the people who obeyed the orders of Adolph Hitler ended up killing innocent people during the Holocaust. In the same way, Stanley Milgram noted in his article ‘Perils of Obedience’ of how individuals obeyed authority and neglected their conscience, reflecting how this can be destructive in real life experiences. On the contrary, Diana Baumrind pointed out in her article ‘Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience’ that the experiments were not valid, hence useless.
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
Before World War II, it became very clear that the US would play a new, and important leading role in the world. Henry Luce, author of The American Century, wrote about the new roles he anticipated the US to have. His essay calls the US to action in leading the rest of the world in our ways. About a year later on May 8th, 1942, Vice President Henry Wallace proposed similar ideas in a speech. He and Luce both saw the US as leading powers but disagreed on how the leading should be done. Wallace portrays the US in a friendlier manner. He calls the upcoming era the century of the common man while Luce calls it the American century. This topic is relevant today. How much involvement should leading countries have in developing ones and how should
For years, America has always been perceived as one of the top world powers due to its ability of achieving so much technological, economical, and social progress within a mere couple decades. Despite their great accomplishments, America is actually regressing psychologically, preventing the country from reaching its true potential as an “opportunity rich” country. In Anthony Burgess’ Is America Falling Apart? , the author unveils the circumstances in which America’s restricting society and selfish ideology cause the nation to develop into the type of society it tried to avoid becoming when it separated from the British Empire.
The Soviet Union’s collapse at the end of the Cold War left the United States without its major global rival. Now alone at the top, the United States’ strategic imperatives have shifted remarkably. The shift has been significant enough to prompt fundamental questions about the international order and whether this new “unipolar moment” will last. Indeed, since 1989, political scientists have clamored to define the United States’ status relative to the rest of the world. Indispensable nation? Sole super...
Authority in a society is a necessary evil which when unfettered, results in the abuse of power. Power has long been considered a corrupting and a disrupting force in function and in influence. Underlying motives and greed fuel those who seek to gain and or abuse this power. The Crucible examines this twisted force as it corrupts societies’ clergy, blinds its justices, and empowers those who seek to abuse it. Arthur Miller shows how power can be a corrupting influence and how it can blind the judgment of authoritative figures.
Although they are very closely related, power and authority are two different concepts. Power is needed in order to establish authority, yet it is also completely distinct from authority (Week 9 Study Notes).