American History

In his book, Toward and American Revolution, Jerry Fresia gives a thought-provoking account of one particular event in Americas political history   the framing and ratification of the Constitution.  Fresias approach differs from other authors in the sense that he sees the making of the Constitution from a different perspective.  Fresia sees something wrong about America based on what happened in 1787.  He views it as the creation of an elite plutocracy rather than a real democracy which is popular in nature. At the end of book, he calls for a  need for revolutionaries  to continue the struggle for real and genuine democracy in the United States.
    Upon closer examination of the Founding Fathers who drafted and signed the Constitution, they were all elites in society whether they were  old money  like George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or the self-made ones like Roger Sherman of Connecticut.  Other accounts considered them as  demigods  because of their stature not only based on their socio-economic background but also by the reputation they built during the American Revolution. They came together in Philadelphia in response to a brewing crisis that threatened to undermine the stability of the fledgling United States of America.  Realizing that the Confederation Congress was not strong enough to promote stability, they decided to create a new government that would be strong and centralized to ensure the survival of the nation.  They decided to create a (federal) republican form of government rather than create their own monarchy.
    However, Fresia saw it differently.  When provisions for the Constitution were proposed and drafted, he noticed that these provisions did not intend to serve the majority but to protect the interests of the framers and their ilk. These educated and enlightened men feared granting too much power to the less educated and less privileged majority. They saw them as a threat who would use their power to promote an egalitarian society. This means that by creating equality, they might take away all their privileges and patrimony that they had built up through the years. In addition, despite breaking away from the British monarchy, most of them admired the system and liked the functions which they wanted to adopt in the new government they created, stopping short however of creating a new monarchy and instead giving the leader (President) limited powers as part of the separation of powers stipulated in the provisions of the Constitution. Furthermore, the framers made sure that the powers of the majority are limited to electing only their representatives to Congress and stopped short in giving them the right to elect senators and a President which was back then reserved to an Electoral College .
    Apparently, what Fresia saw was the same as some of the framers noticed like Benjamin Franklin and George Mason to name a few. In the case of Franklin, he had reservations in signing this  imperfect  document, yet he bowed to the will of the majority and expediency and signed it. As for Mason, he too noticed this and threatened to boycott the signing unless a Bill of Rights was added.  Despite what came out of the Convention, the Founding Fathers (at least some of them) were hoping that the American people would eventually mature and use their newly-bestowed powers judiciously. In one anecdote, Franklin was asked by a passerby what government did they give them and he answered wittily,  a Republic, if you can keep it  Franklins point was the responsibility for having a true democratic government rests with the people if they would be involved and not merely leave politics at the hands of politicians. This is how democracy is supposed to work and to a certain extent, it has and will continue to do so in the years to come.

Winthrop Jordan explored the culprit behind rampant racism in the US. He not only investigates US, instead he goes back from the first contact of Europeans to the Africans. In the book, Jordan suggested that white men encountered black men and monkeys at the same time, they thought that there was a connection between them. He said that belief was not wide spread but was available as a theory for later use. Fast forwarding to America, Dr. Jordan cites the writings of Thomas Jefferson, who seemed conflicted knowing that black men were equal to white men, but doubting that black men were as intelligent as white men.
    This book by Jordan is valuable for its analysis of Jeffersons intellectual entanglement with slavery, but it does not delve into Jeffersons day-to-day relationship with slavery. This is important because Jeffersons practical involvement with the system of black bondage indicates that, while his racist beliefs were generally congruent with his actions, his libertarian views about slavery tended to be mere intellectual abstractions. This is particularly true for the years after 1785 and to a somewhat lesser degree, it holds true for the earlier period as well.
    Jordan dealt with this contradiction by citing Jefferson on his views on abolition and holding that the role of the latter role as an owner of men was entailed upon him. According to Jordan, being born into a slave system, he could not in good conscience abandon his black charges he made the best of a bad situation by behaving as a benevolent and indulgent master.
    Accepting the traditional creation that the Virginian was trapped by a system he abhorred, Jordan analyzed Jeffersons central dilemma as being that he hated slavery but thought Negroes inferior to white men. Taking note of Jeffersons daily personal involvement with the slave system, Jordan concluded his heartfelt hatred of slavery did not derive so much from this harassing personal entanglement in the practicalities of slavery as from the system of politics in which he was enmeshed mentally.(Jordan 1974126-127)
    He then treated the problem almost exclusively in terms of Jeffersons ideas and continued with his perceptive account describing the confusion that emerged from the clash of the contradictory tendencies within the Virginians thought. First, his belief in a single creation and in a universe governed by natural law led him inexorably toward the view that the concept of natural rights applied to Negroes by virtue of the fact that they were human beings too. Second, Jefferson also held an intuitive belief in the inferiority of the blacks, which he tried to cover up with an appeal to science, but which actually stemmed from the interaction between his own psychological makeup and the mores of the society that surrounded him. Jeffersons refusal to accept an environmentalist explanation for the apparent inferiority of the blacks led to confusion which Jordan termed monumental. For if the Negroes were innately inferior, then Jefferson must have suspected that the Creator might have in fact created men unequal and he could not say this without giving his assertion exactly the same logical force as his famous statement to the contrary.(130)
    Lastly, his strong doubt that the Negroes were innately inferior is probably of great significance in explaining his ability to ignore his own strictures about their rights. Thinking of them as lesser men, he was able to argue into himself that his behavior toward them was just and benevolent.

The making of wage labor regulation for the slave owners was the governments alternative solution to the demand of emancipation by the Black Americans.  Due to the westward expansion, capitalist had nothing to do but to follow this new law.  Otherwise, their businesses and the industry in general would surely drop.  On the other hand, anti-slavery organizations were making demands to abolish totally the slavery and slave labor.  However, Black Americans are still in need to have something to earn for their living.  Because their line of expertise came from the time when they were slave laborers to their masters even with no compensation at all, they were as much as thankful for the creation of wage labor regulation as they were certainly at peace and hopeful to be compensated for their hard labor appropriately.
    The height of Black Slavery period began facing its ending following the victory of American Revolution happened in the late years of eighteenth century.  Abolition of slavery started coming to the minds of those in the position which supported by different groups of activists rallying everywhere such as in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and in California where African-American population is enormous.  While talks and debates regarding the slavery abolition took place, the agricultural development and industrialization in the western part of the country was almost getting the remarkable expansion.  Slave masters then were fighting against the slavery abolition as they need their slaves so badly.  Some of them who happened to lose possession of their slaves really wanted to win them back.  With this, slave abolition talks between land owners and the government, who were on the side of Black Americans, set another debatable discussion, which emphasize on how and up to what extent that the land owners would take possess their slaves after having given to chance to get them back once more.  Wage labor began addressing in the context as an alternative solution of slave labor which perhaps the immediate answer to the demand of each side as it could be the best way to meet the interests of both parties halfway.  It could be a forceful action by the government though but the result that patronage of slave labor started declining was expected.  Therefore, slave owners, who were now addressed as capitalists as they are now paying their wage worker, were enforced to abide the new labor law and obliged to pay the wage worker according to the labor and time that they were consumed.
    In my own opinion, the only positive outcome of the wage labor implementation is that the morale of the former slaves are boosted by the creation of the new labor system knowing that they are now be called as wage laborers and not just mere slaves to their masters.  Other than that, there is no difference at all as they still had to experience hard labor and sometimes maltreatment from their masters.  However, I am still for the wage labor system and totally opposed to the old norm of slave labor.  It is clear to me that there were lots of support groups who were sympathizing African American citizens which perhaps urged the government so eagerly in making the said reformation of their lifestyles from slave workers to wage workers.  Finally, I understand that the shaping of our history did not formulate overnight and had to overcome situation such as this to attain liberation and equal opportunity for all as hat we have enjoyed up to this date.
Word Count 579

The 18th century came with the American Revolution which was the beginning of the manumission of the slaves. This was meant to be the beginning of a new life for the slaves though the process was gradual. In the Northern states, the slaves were given some rights for example in capital cases they had the right to trial by jury. Just after the Revolution, there came a trend of separation and segregation. The Americans became threatened by the free slaves more than the slaves themselves especially in the South. This is because with the Revolution, there hold or power over the black community was less (Winthrop 155).The segregation was deemed to be worse than the slavery because the free Negroes were more restricted. These restrictions included separation by race at places that were for social gatherings. Majority of the Americans could not vouch for equality with the black community without incorporating separation. Restraints on personal manumissions were the results of the hostility towards free slaves. The number of free slaves increased from 8 per cent to more than 13 per cent. Separation and segregation lead to the first Negro churches (Winthrop 158).
According to Winthrop D. Jordan in his book The White Mans Burden, after 1790, the free Negroes became a problem. There were more and more free slaves with every passing day. With attempts to deal with the situation, the attitude of Americans changed gradually thirty years after the Revolution. They needed clarity of the status of the free Negroes. In addition to the separation, many problems were attributed to the free slaves. They were said to harbor stolen goods, stolen by slaves. It was so serious that in Maryland there was a judge who accredited the art of theft and harboring of fugitives to the free Negroes (Winthrop 157).The freeing of slaves led to fewer blacks living with the white community. Around 1810 segregated institutions began because Negroes were not allowed as equals in the American churches. The Negroes in Philadelphia and other Northern states were among the first. Before the end of the war there were two self-determining congregations of Negroes. Absalom Jones and Richard Allen were the first Philadelphia blacks to start the congregations. They were backed up by influential white men and this was contrary to American behavior towards Negroes.
 They were the first group that worshipped at St. Georges Methodist Church. But they were still segregated because they were made to seat around the wall of the church. A group of the blacks walked out and on their own initiative formed another church known as Free African Society. In 1793, in the African Episcopal Church of St. Thomas, there was a display of interracial harmony (Winthrop 159).The separation was an experience that gave the black community an identity. It pushed them to do things on their own initiative and this gave the white community clarity of the status of the free Negroes. But at the same time, the separation led to definition of people against racial lines and up to date people are still struggling with racial discrimination.

 In his book,  White Mans Burden,  Winthrop Jordan explored how slavery started in America and stopping his narrative short before the start of the civil war.  It can be seen here that it was not merely an issue of slavery, but an issue of racism as well, an issue which would survive the civil war and be rooted in some, if not a lot of of Americans then and even today.
    Africans arrived in Americas shores as slaves, more often than not, against their will.  They were forcibly taken from their homes in raids and sold in trading posts established by whites in Africa.  Slavery was seen as lucrative business since it had a huge market, particularly in the colonies in the New World which was then agricultural and these Africans served in plantations or acted as indentured servants for these colonists.  It was from here that the colonists (as well as their descendants) would start developing this attitude that blacks were inferior to them. This would go on until the American Revolution and beyond.
    Men like Thomas Jefferson regarded slavery as immoral, tyrannical and inhuman since slaves were not treated like people but like commodities.  They realized that slaves were also human beings and they felt it was not right to treat them that way.  Yet, despite this attitude, even these opponents to slavery still harbored racist tendencies in the sense that they regard the blacks as inferior to them.  This was what made those in the South continue to assert slavery besides being essential to their economy.  When this issue was left alone in the Constitutional Convention, the Founding Fathers thought this would keep the peace only to find out that the peace they bought by not resolving the issue was not enough and blood had to be paid in the civil war.
    All in all, slavery divided a young nation.  One side felt it was economically necessary and an assertion of their superiority while the other regarded it as morally wrong.  When the issue could not be resolved in a debate, war finally did.

The Civil War (1861-1865) was one of the phenomenal event in the history of America. The survival of todays most powerful country was an outcome of the nations ability to bring the ideals of liberty, human dignity, equality and justice during the reconstruction process. This reconstruction process was one of the most chaotic and divisive periods in Americas history. The reconstruction began when President Lincoln issued his proclamation more commonly known as the Ten Percent Plan. This plan was faced with the difficult task of reestablishing and developing the political, social and economic structures within the society including war-weakened economies and highly polarized political and social relations, regaining economic stability, and giving participation for the political groups that offered meaningful participation in various organizations. Consequently, the rebuilding of economic institutions, government institutions and the communities were the primary priorities of the said plan.
The transition from war to serenity posed great challenges for the economic targets, and the reforms were merely needed to enhance the economy and fuse peace and order in the society. Different economic efforts in cooperation with reconciliation and demilitarization reconstruction helped communities build strong and prosperous institutions. In addition, a plan for recovery and reconstruction focused both on short and long term development activities. The government gave people a reasonable access to basic needs like nutrition, education, health care and housing to meet the immediate needs for young children, pregnant women, elderly and handicapped individuals. Furthermore, to eradicate poverty, the government rehabilitated basic physical infrastructure including health and education services, water and sanitations system and other important facilities for the benefit of the poor sector of the society. Long-term development programs include the establishment of market institutions, equitable banking system, and the formalization of economic transactions in government. One of the fundamental requirements for this growth was a state capable of furnishing goods and legal framework for investment. This long term activities required the government to distribute property, enforce property rights and perform necessary economic tasks not fulfilled by markets to strengthen the economic activity.
Therefore, reconstruction understood in terms of capital accumulation is a crucial step on the way towards economic recovery. How reconstruction should be financed is the central theme of the document. Given that domestic savings are the most systematic determinant of investment, one of the priorities in post-conflict countries like what happened during the American civil war must be to rebuild their financial systems. Such a policy could encourage economic agents to save and invest in the domestic economy as political stability returns to the country. However, this process takes time. Regaining the lost confidence of local investors is a slow process and the speed of recovery depends on the nature of the signals sent by those tasked with the management of post-conflict transitions in the process of recovery.

With the end of the Civil War, the enmity between the North and the South ended. Confederate troops returned to the barracks many of them returned to farming or trading. Union troops were disbanded. The one-million strong Union army was severely reduced to 10, 000.  President Lincoln implemented a reconstruction program the purpose of which were as follows 1) rebuilding the economic infrastructure of the South, 2) abolishing the institution of slavery in the South, and 3) emphasizing industrialization in economic planning. The Reconstruction Program, in essence, destroyed the age-old cynicism between the North and the South. It was perhaps the genuine intent of the program (and its administrators) which caused this.
 After Union troops occupied the South, President Lincoln asked the war department to form regional military districts. The president intended the creation of military districts as the focal point of his reconstruction program. The 11 former Confederate states were divided into five military districts governed by Union generals. For a start, Lincoln asked Congress to amend some provisions in the Constitution. Congress unanimously passed the 13th Amendment (institutional abolition of slavery), the 14th Amendment (giving African-Americans full rights as citizens), and the 15th Amendment (giving black males the right to vote). These amendments resulted in the election of seven black representatives in the state legislature. There were, however, disagreements over the direction of the Reconstruction Program. Northern Republicans, or more commonly known as Radical Republicans, wanted to punish the South for fighting against the Union. The president, Andrew Johnson, opposed such stance. As a result, he was impeached. The Blacks though lost much of what they gained in the aftermath of the war. The Jim Crow laws were passed in the US Congress. Blacks were forbidden to carry firearms. They could not testify against whites in criminal proceedings. They could also be arrested for being unemployed. The Reconstruction did, indeed, heal the enmity between the North and the South in the long-run, the black community suffered from gross political negligence. 
    The Reconstruction Period may be viewed as the focal point of a beginning. There was a restoration of political unity between the North and the South. The economic infrastructure of war-torn areas was, essentially, rebuilt. Political rights were granted to former slaves, to blacks. Former Confederate states were allowed to keep a significant quantity of ammunitions, in case of invasion. There was, indeed, a feeling of warmth and appreciation from both the North and the South (hence, the term Brothers War). Behind this curtain of respect and adoration was reality. The blacks were never fully emancipated, having lost several rights in the process.

1 Slavery was something that the North and South held in common before the American Revolution. Yet after the Revolutionary slavery became a polarizing sectional issue that drove the United States to Civil War. How do you explain this development
Introduction
Slavery was an important aspect of economic production before the American Revolution. In deed, both the South and the North benefited immensely from the services that were provided by the slaves. In particular, the South relied heavily on slave labor in its large scale plantation production. The North on the other hand utilized slaves for domestic production due to the fact that its climate was unfavorable for Agricultural production. However, this situation changed when the North assumed a different perception of slavery from the South. This was perpetuated by various factors that are intellectual, spiritual and ethical in nature. The emergent abolitionist movement shunned the practice and advocated for the release of the slaves. This threatened the wellbeing of the South and led to heightened tensions between the two blocks. Historical studies contend that the conflicting ideals and views regarding slavery contributed greatly to the American civil war.
It is against this background that this study seeks to provide an explicit analysis of the relationship between slavery and the civil war. To enhance effective coherence in the essay, it is organized in to two parts. The first section generates an intrinsic evaluation of the status of slavery before the American Revolution. The second section then provides an exhaustive analysis of how slavery contributed to the civil war.
Slavery before the Revolution
The shortage of laborers to work on the American farms prompted the need for slavery by both the North and South. Jones et al indicates that there were huge chunks of arable land with minimal population to work on the same (56). This acute shortage of labor prompted the need for compulsory labor. Since hiring persons of European origin was relatively expensive, most settlers opted for experienced African slaves. In order to secure this status, most colonies declared slavery lifetime servitude for both the slaves and their offspring. Generally, slaves were considered a valuable commodity that provided useful services in the home, ship building and in Agriculture. It is indicated that slaves were bought from New World colonies as direct importation from Africa was considered very dangerous and difficult. Buying slaves from the new world colonies was also advantageous as they were already familiar with the western habits of work and customs. Of great importance was their capacity to survive the long periods of winter as they had already survived one climate change. 
Comparatively, the North had fewer slaves than the South. This can be explained by the different economic activities that the two blocks engaged in. The south practiced large-scale Agricultural production and therefore, more slaves were needed to provide the labor. Douglass indicates that the situation in the north was different because of the harsh climate that undermined large-scale agricultural production (63). In particular, it had long winters that prevented viable agriculture. As such, sustaining slaves was considered expensive and a burden for most parts of the northern population. Most homes in the North owned a maximum of two slaves that were employed in domestic production. At this juncture, it should be acknowledged that slavery was considered prestigious and a refection of ones economic wellbeing. Additionally, Douglass ascertains that unlike the southern slavery that was largely plantation oriented, northern slavery was urban (67). Nevertheless, slavery played a central role in the economy of America, irrespective of the position that the slaves held. In this respect, the slaves that provided domestic services in the North were also important as they freed their masters and enabled them to pursue important careers in medicine, law, religion or civil service.
Slavery after the Revolution
In his review, McPherson indicates that the northern economy differed significantly from the south as the population assumed different modes of production (78). In particular, the north had a rapidly growing economy that was based on mining, family farms, commerce, industry and transportation. In addition, its population that comprised of the British, Irish, German and European immigrants was also increasing rapidly. This population was largely urban and slavery was not practiced outside the Border States. The south on the other hand was largely dominated by a plantation settlement system that relied heavily on slavery. It was characterized by few cities and minimal industrial activities, except outside the Border States. Jones et al indicates that the slave owners in the south entirely controlled the economy and politics of the region (62). Thus, the rapid increase of population and economic output in the North became a cause of concern for the southerners as it threatened their ability to continue influencing the national government. This was further compounded by the declining political activity in the region.
Previously, it is indicated that politicians from both blocks had engaged in various meetings in an effort to moderate slavery. Considering the sensitivity of the issue, it had resulted in to different compromises. These compromises were preferred by both parties for the sake of peaceful co existence in the region. However, Douglass points out that they were not sustainable as they did not resolve the sensitive underlying issue of slave power (71). The inherent hostility that stemmed from the differing ideologies regarding slave trade resulted in to the collapse of the second party system. Essentially, the northerners advocated for slave free labor and economic production while the southerners relied heavily on slave labor and therefore opposed this. The free labor ideology basically sought to enhance economic opportunity of all segments of the society. Southerners considered this a threat to their wellbeing and described it as filthy operation. Douglass shows that they strongly opposed the proposed homestead laws that advocated for providing the population in the West with free farms (71). This opposition was perpetuated by the fear that the small farmers would probably oppose and shun plantation slavery. Unlike the perception of the Northerners, Southerners considered slavery a positive good as it exposed the slaves to modern civilization that made them enhance their intellectual and moral wellbeing through education.
In addition, it is posited that the Northern political leaders considered slavery an evil that is immoral and therefore needed to be shunned. They also believed that the southerners that owned slaves and controlled the national government had an underlying intention of spreading the same to the north. This according to McPherson made it difficult for the politicians to arrive at an anticipated compromise (75).
Jones et al ascertains that the southern social structure that was stratified and patriarchal encouraged slavery (67). Thus despite the fact that only few southerners owned the slaves, the institution was defended by the entire population. Essentially, the individuals that had the biggest pieces of land owned more slaves than their counterparts. As such, they assumed a higher position in the social stratum. In addition, slavery was perpetuated by the racist attitude that the population assumed. The blacks were considered inferior to the whites and therefore, it was contended that their position in the social structure should remain as slaves. Further, social positions such as slave patrols increased racism and acted as unifying factor of the White southerners. Basically, they were an indication of power and honor and hence accorded the poor Whites authority over the black slaves. In particular, the position gave them the power to whip, maim, search and even kill the slaves (Jones et al 73).
 Coupled with the increased abolitionist movement in the North, the rise of literature shunning racial slavery increased the tensions between the south and the north. In particular, literary works such as Uncle Toms Cabin and The Liberator increased the tensions in the South as they directly attacked the practice of slavery. McPherson also cites that the economic rivalry between south and the north contributed to the civil war (79). In this regard, the north abolished slavery and introduced the industrial revolution that was characterized by increased urbanization, reform movements and high levels of education. This led to increased settlement of the immigrants in the north. In some cases, the parts of the southern population migrated and settled in the North. This further exacerbated the hostilities between the blocks that led to increased aggression and defensive attitude by the south. Further, it is worth noting that the south was relatively conservative and sought to further its cultural ideologies. As such, it resisted the revolution that was occurring in the North.
Promotion of the market ideology is also identified as a major cause of the tensions and hostilities between the south and the north. In this regard, McPherson postulates that as commercial activities increased in the north, the market economy began to influence the political power in the region (81). At this juncture, it should be appreciated that slavery in the South had initially been elemental in influencing the economic status of individuals. This shift in the ideologies made the southerners to be worried about their political positions in the national government.
The conflicting interpretation of biblical teachings regarding slavery also contributed significantly to the conflict between the North and South nations. Seemingly, the interpretations between the north and south were different. While the north considered slavery to be evil, the southern interpretation justified the same. Douglass ascertains that the protestant churches were unable to agree on the biblical interpretations of the institution of slavery (88). Arguments for and against slavery were also apparent within the political sphere. The abolitionists believed that the constitutional clause that extended slavery for twenty yeas was not democratic. Democracy in this respect was considered to be a demonstration of equity and liberty. Fundamentally, it was argued that all humans had equal rights and all activities needed to further the happiness of the same. As such slavery was considered a form of oppression that infringed upon the human rights of the slaves. On the contrary, the proponents of slavery based their assumption on the concept of race. In this respect, they argued that Whites and Blacks can never be equal and that the Blacks needed to be submissive to the white race that was conceivably superior.
With time, Jones et al notes that the south realized that it was loosing control over the government to the North (95). As such, they turned to the sates rights argument in order to continue protecting slavery. In this respect, southerners argued that the tenth amendment prohibited the federal government from infringing upon the rights of slave holders. In addition, they indicated that the federal government was not supposed to interfere with the status of slavery in the states that already practiced the same. Seemingly, they believed that the stringent interpretation of the constitution could protect them from the northern abolitionist movement. Adherents of this movement believed that slavery was not only a social evil but also an immoral act that needed to be addressed accordingly. They held different beliefs with the most radical calling for the immediate release of the slaves.  Others proposed a gradual emancipation while the liberal ones simply wanted to bring to an end the spread of slavery and its relative influence.
It is also contended that the tensions between the North and the south were heightened by the collapse of the national party system. This happened after the compromise of 1850. The two political parties of the nation that comprised of the Democrats and the Whigs fractured along regional lines. The Northern Whigs decided to blend in to a new republican party. This party was largely anti slavery and its mandate promised a bright future for Americans. In particular, great emphasis was laid on education, industrialization and homesteading. Although the north considered these ideals promising, the southerners perceived the party to be very indecisive and one that could contribute greatly to conflicts and war.
Douglass indicates that the election of 1860 also exacerbated the tension between the two blocks. It is posited that the election was characterized by apprehension and the lack of a candidate that had the confidence of the entire nation was a symbol of change. The north demonstrated more political power and Lincoln was elected as the president in the region. This election also gave the north complete control over the Free States and deprived the south of this privilege. The subsequent secession highly compromised the peaceful existence of the nation.
Conclusion
As it has come out from the review, slavery was considered an important factor in economic production before the American Revolution. Slaves provided vital services at all levels of production. It is also certain that it contributed significantly to the civil war in America. The conflicting perceptions of slavery by the two blocks increased the tensions between the South and North. It is also clear that other factors like culture, religion and differing economic ideals played augmenting roles in perpetuating the civil war. Of great significance in this regard however was the election of President Lincoln who was a proponent of antislavery. This led to the secession of the Southern states from the Union. Notably, it compromised the unity that the two blocks shared and further perpetuated the differences between the North and the South.

1.The Thinker is a sculpture of bronze and marble created by Auguste Rodin in 1902. Although it is independent and self-sufficient, the sculpture was designed as a part of The Gates of Hell, a portal that depicts the characters of  Dante Alighieris epic poem Divine Comedy. The Thinker represents the Poet, or Dante himself, sitting in front of the Gates of Hell and pondering poem. Auguste Rodin worked on The Gates of Hell for ten years total.
2.Reflection. The Thinker depicts a meditating man, whose mental concentration is greasy associated with considerable physical effort. His pose is closed, his lips are compressed and his eyes, although open, look somewhere inside his own soul, so the man doesnt seem to pay attention to what is happening around him. His muscles are so tense that it seems like the man is doing hard physical work. Therefore, every part of his body is taking part in the act of contemplation.
This work always attracted me. When I look at the Thinker, I feel we are similar in certain sense, as everyone has their small inner Thinker, a hard-working mechanism that ties together logic and intuition and produces great ideas. To me, the sculpture represents the height and depth of human thought, and it always reminds me  that in order to reflect upon and learn from each experience and  episode from my everyday life. This is the path of development.
3.The sculptors style greatly resembles the Ancient Greek and Renaissance tradition, as the thinking man is nude and beautiful in his natural nudity. The idea of physical perfection is close-knit with intelligence and excellence in mental abilities, as the depth of the mans thought is apparent. The idea of perfection is probably relevant to the Thinker, as each poet or philosopher seeks to create a work which would ideally express his thoughts and feelings. The sculpture represents not merely poets but creative profession in general and it is implied that such work requires self-denial and physical effort.
4.Evaluation and application to the historical context. The sculpture reflects the ideas of the nature of art and philosophy of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In this sense, the nakedness of the man can be interpreted as the freedom of art and the urge to find or invent new forms and patterns. Contemporary authors also contended that the true writer or philosopher should experience solitude for deeper contemplation and be able to observe themselves and others. The logical continuation of observation is reflection, which can provide new ideas and allows drawing interesting conclusions. These ideas are further transformed into artworks, inventions or articles, which the author refines and improves through the act of contemplation which can also be understood as critical thinking.   Nowadays, these recommendations are also relevant and applicable. As the number of books published is growing and many of them are of controversial quality, it is important that todays writers keep in mind the idea that talented performance contains 20 percent of inborn gift and 80 percent of hard work.

Consisting of two executive orders, the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. The first order of the Emancipation Proclamation was issued on September 22, 1862. The first part was just a preliminary issue in order to outline the second part. This was a declaration of freedom for all slaves who lived in states that were not controlled by the Union. When the second order was issued on January 1, 1863 most slaves were not immediately freed, but it did bring freedom to a few thousand slaves when it came into effect. The slaves were permanently freed in those states such as, South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas and North Carolina. The Emancipation Proclamation had an immediate impacteffect.
The Emancipation Proclamation was a step towards a new birth of freedom. Its ultimate goal was to abolish slavery within the United States. The Emancipation had a political impact. Democrats, who liked slavery, denounced the proclamation. In the 1862 elections, slavery became an important campaign issue. November 1863, Lincolns Gettysburg Address made reference to the Proclamation to end slavery as a new birth of freedom. The Emancipation not only had a political impact, but it also had an international impact. The Proclamation became popular among foreign opinion.
When the Civil War took place, large numbers of slaves volunteered to fight for their freedom. This war against the Union states was a war for freedom. The Civil War was the Southern Slave States against the Union. The Civil war abolished Slavery, restored the Union, and made the federal government stronger. It brought many changes to America and made the country a united superpower.

   The book is divided into seven sections. The first section deals with the origins of the revolution. The author outlines the major and immediate causes of the revolutionary war. The second section discusses British policies in the colonies. The third section describes the revolution proper  the formalist and royalist views of the war. The author discusses the initial battles of the revolution and the diplomatic tactics of the leading revolutionaries (like Jefferson and Franklin). The fourth section deals with the war proper. Major battles are described in detail this includes an evaluation of the strengthsweaknesses of both the revolutionaries and the British army. This section also discusses the creation of the federal constitution (which governed the direction of the war).
    The fifth section focuses on the creation of a federal republic. It is noteworthy that Lockian philosophy heavily influenced the content of the federal constitution. There was an emphasis on democracy, state rights, individual liberty and happiness, and political institutionalization. The sixth section deals with the habits and customs of the Republican society. According to the author, the so-called Republican Society is far removed from the ideal notion of an equalized society. This is in fact, a society embellished in an imperfect form of democracy which separates the slave from the master, the workman from the owner, the common citizen from the political aristocrats (142). The Republican Society is democratic in form (political) but oligarchic in essence.
    The last section deals with the creation of the Federal Constitution. The US Constitution defined the nature and character of the American government. Two governments were established the state government and the federal government. As such, the powers of government were divided between these two bodies. Dispute on state representation in Congress was resolved by creating a bicameral Congress. In essence, according to the author, the Constitution was a coagulation of political values  with reference of course to the ideals of the revolution. Needless to say, the Constitution may be regarded as the final step of nation-building. With its ratification, the United States of America became a full-pledge nation.
    In a sense, the main objective of the author is to show that the American Revolution is a process  a process of nation-building. All facts and evidences relevant to the study of the revolution are viewed as fundamental elements of this process. Simple cause and effect schema are used as supplementary tools for analysis. The whole thematic content of the book, therefore, is solid from beginning to end, as its vantage point is the same.
    To this, the author succeeds in making his point clear and objective. There is, however, one error which the author could have committed. Historical facts are sometimes accidental. Indeed, history has shown that events often occur in random. Indeed, if this is the case, then some events discussed in the book may have occurred out of randomness  far removed from the thematic direction of the book. The book however is an objective guide to the history of the American Revolution.

My name is John Williams, son of Michael and I am related to the famous Salem, Massachusetts minister, Roger, who was banished to Providence for his controversial sermons admonishing the colony for not doing enough to separate itself from the Church of England. (Taylor, 2002) I reside in Salem, Massachusetts with my wife Amanda, and my young son, Michael. I have lived in Salem all of my life and my family has lived here since 1703, when my father moved here from Plymouth to pursue a livelihood as a fisherman. I am a Puritan and my familys faith came with them to Salem and burns as bright today as it did in Plymouth.
    The life of a fisherman is a difficult one. In Salem and other coastal and open ocean fishing communities, the life expectancy of a fisherman is very short. In fact, very few fishermen can expect to still be commercial fishing by middle age. (Vickers, 2005) There are two reasons for this. One, seafaring on the Atlantic Ocean and in New England winter weather, is treacherous. When a Noreaster blows, there is little an able captain can do than ride it out and hope for the best. The other reason is that life as a fisherman is physically hard and good men get used up early. (Vickers, 2005) As a deckhand on my fathers ship, the work was very difficult and a childs age is not considered as important as the job they are assigned to do. On the sea, I was a deckhand. On the land, I went back to being my fathers son. It has always been that way in New England fishing communities, and it will be that way when my own son is old enough to accompany me as I prepare him for a life on the sea. (Vickers, 2005)
    As a deckhand on my fathers ship, I worked very hard but received very little pay. It is a matter of custom for all wages earned by children to go directly to their parents. (Vickers, 1994) There is a practical reason for this. As I said before, fishermen do not expect to continue their life on the sea into middle age. Many fishermen are injured while at sea, and those lucky enough to survive their injuries are forced to retire, and their sons wages are sometimes the only income that the family has. (Vickers, 2005) This was the case of my father who retired at the age of 43 due to his injuries and I became captain at the age of 24. This is also true for the widowed mothers left behind when their husbands die at sea. (Vickers, 2005) For these reasons, in New Englands fishing communities, a son is groomed for a life at sea from the moment he is born. (Vickers, 1994)
     I have been captain on my ship for ten years now. In that time, I have found operating my ship difficult for many reasons. Not only is life on the sea difficult, but just maintaining the ship and paying for labor is costly. In New England, we have a system that allows ship owners like me to secure money in order to operate. The common name for this system is clientage, and it is a method of extending credit to fishermen by merchants so the fishermen can operate. (Vickers, 1994) The way clientage works is that merchants offer fishermen credit for supplies at set prices. Also, those fishermen that accept this credit are only allowed to deal with the single merchant who offered them credit. (Vickers, 1994) The problem with this for fishermen like myself is that it sets low prices for my labors and eliminates market competition from others who might want to buy my haul for better prices. (Vickers, 1994) Because fishing is seasonal for many of the fish I am trying to catch, I am not able to fish all year long and I have to feed my family and pay for upkeep of my vessel and this unfair system is all that is available for those fishermen such as myself. Despite my fervent religious belief, I curse those greedy merchants and their hold over honest, God fearing fishermen men like me.
    In New England, cod is a primary source of nutrition (Taylor, 2002) and this is what I fish for as well. Most often, the best fishing is at the Grand Banks off of Newfoundland, but it is also one of the most treacherous as well. The Grand Banks have claimed hundreds of New England fishermen and I myself broke my arm and ribs in a storm in 1717, when I was still a deckhand for my father but was training as a rigger. It doesnt matter where a cod fisherman goes for his fish. In New England, we go wherever the fish are, even if it means risking our lives at the Grand Banks or Nova Scotia. (Vickers, 1994) This is the life of a fisherman and we have no choice but to follow the schools of fish, wherever they may lead us and face whatever danger may follow our pursuit of them.
There is a progression to duties and titles for a fisherman. I started out as a deckhand for my father but soon became a rigger. A rigger had to know not only how to tie many knots, but also had to know how to arrange ropes and ties within pulleys and catches so that the rope doesnt fray and split. (Vickers, 2005) In a storm, a sail that is rendered useless because a rope breaks or comes loose can spell doom for the ship and the crew. The lives of all aboard may depend on a riggers expertise and my father would not allow me to become a mate until I had mastered all of the duties of a rigger. As a mate, a mariner learned most of the duties and requirements of being a captain. (Vickers, 2005) In fact, while I inherited my ship and role as captain, those fishermen who sought to be a captain could only do so by first mastering the skills of a mate. (Vickers, 2005) After becoming a mate and working long enough to satisfy my fathers desire that I know all of its requirements, I began to learn the many responsibilities of being a captain. Included in these duties were map reading and navigation. Also, I had to learn maritime law (Vickers, 2005) and how to manage my ship for supplies and picking and supervising my crew. Learning all of these duties, from being a deckhand to mates duties are part of being a good captain and my father made sure I learned all of this in the eight years I accompanied him on the open sea. 
On land, I am well respected in my community as a God fearing, responsible citizen. I go to church when I am not at sea and my hopes for my family walk hand in hand with my religious faith in that I trust God to watch out for me, especially when I am at sea and not able to look after my family. Soon, my son will begin his life as a fisherman. This is not a matter of choice but rather one of necessity and although he looks forward to being with me on the open ocean, I fear for him for the sea can be fickle and deadly. Nonetheless, I have hope for the future and with the help of almighty God, I know my life will be blessed.

Greg Landon viewed the war in Vietnam as morbid. In his letter to his parents, he said that eventhough the morale of the men is fairly good considering the situation they were in, there is still an underlying gloom about the war that they were engaged in. This means that the people and even the soldiers do not have the clear idea why they were having war. There had been no effort form the military to explain the war which resulted to total ignorance to the people and soldiers about the rationale of the said war. As what Landon describes about the war in his letter, people merely viewed Vietnam to be a real hell-hole. Because of the war, the people only suffered from different human miseries such as mysterious disease, poisonous plants and snakes, contaminated water and the like.
In the University of Wisconsin campus in Madison, students staged an obstructive protest at the Commerce Building against recruiters for Dow Chemical Company, makers of napalm and Agent Orange, because they believed that what was happening in Vietnam was unfair and unjust. There merely became protesters because of the abuse done by the government.
There was indeed a great dilemma in Johnson administrations policy-making. There was no unity and clarity in the commands which were received by the soldier. In fact, the soldiers do not even have the clear idea about the rationale of the war. In this light, Johnson can be considered as a failure in his decisions that resulted to great problem on the part of the soldiers.
The war in Vietnam and the protest demonstration of the students were the result of the oppressed freedom of speech, rights and privileges, liberty, leadership and responsibility. Most of the people, as described in the story, were confused and bombarded with huge dilemma because of the clash on national interest and conflict on political advocacies.
What the students had done during the war can be considered just as such they were the ones who were really affected by the war. During the war, the lay person remained affected and abused by the government while the soldiers remained ignorant about the rationale of the war. In this light, the lay persons and the soldiers were both oppressed and humiliated.  

Higher education in the United States of America has been shaped and influenced by various historical factors. There exist traditions and trends of higher learning which have been brought over from Western Europe. More so, the Native American conditions are found to have affected and brought about improvements and modifications of these institutions. From the association of these two elements that are quite vital, and more significantly, from the development in democracy in all aspects of the American life, the US has developed a truly one of its kind system of higher education.
History and development of the American university and its impact on society
The roots of the American university can be traced back in the setting up of the colonial colleges which include institutions like Princeton, Harvard, William  Mary, and Yale that came up during the 1600s and the 1700s or just after the American Revolution. These institutions depended on the medieval sources and the Cambridges and Oxfords tradition to give out a set down curriculum of ancient classics, philosophy, mathematics, rhetoric, and Christian ethics. The goal in this was to offer education to a minor group of elite leaders for the church, the academic professions and the civilians for the new nation. Their aim was the maintenance of learning and its spread through teachings to the following generation. The immense population of the liberal private arts colleges in the country these days that provide baccalaureate degrees that take four years alone, goes on with these colonial colleges tradition in America nowadays.
    Towards the end of the nineteenth century prior to the civil war in America, there was emergence of a completely new university in America. This university was in the company of the spread of western American settlement that included the states that had come up in the West Coast and the Great Plains of the upper part of Midwest. Cultivation started on fresh lands and there was connection of the American continent by the transcontinental railroad. This was to mark the beginning of the industrialization age in America.
    The coming up of universities (that were new to meet the needs of this society that had just come up) started with the passing of what was called the Morrill Act that was passed and signed by President Lincoln in the year 1863. According to this act, the government issued out huge pieces of land to every state and the selling of these pieces of land was to avail the money that would be used to set up the universities in all of these states. This was the birth of a unique institution that was American the public university that was land-granted. Such institutions include universities such as the University of Minnesota, the University of California, and the University of Illinois among many other public universities. These universities had various functions. They were meant to offer training to a larger proportion of the population for ever in a society that upheld democracy. More so, they were meant to carry out research and offer training in applied fields especially in the engineering field as well as the agricultural field without leaving out the classical disciplines. These universities that were land-granted were the same as the Frances and Germanys technical universities. With the inclusion of the agricultural extension service later in time, these institutions were in charge of giving out knowledge of the modern agriculture to the American farmers in each and every state.
    These institutions or otherwise referred to as the land-grant universities in those days turned out to be the foundation of the Americas public higher education. They were largely prosperous in offering education to the new immigrant population that was moving towards the west through the American continent. It is not by chance that, not within the West Coast, the universities that succeeded most were found in the United States of Americas upper Midwest where the basic activity was agriculture. These universities set up several schools that could offer training in the agricultural field. More so through the carrying out of research in the agricultural field by these universities, the American agricultural productivity obtained a big boost. In places where gold mining brought about the original settlements like in California, the mining industry together with engineering was of great importance. The combining of the research and learning in the land-grand university together with the combination of the traditional classical disciplines together with an important goal of bringing about the improvement of life in the rural areas in all aspects is actually one of the most important initial contributions the country has offered to the higher education.
Just about the same time the land-grant universities were being set up, America started feeling the influence of the German Universities. As Germany came up as an eminent place of learning during the 1800s, a growing number of the American people went to acquire education in Germany and in turn made an appreciation of the significance the ideal of Humboldts of bringing together the discovery of fresh knowledge with the passing on of the old knowledge.
    Such universities as the University of California were highly influenced by the Germany universities. The leaders of the University of California studied in Germany and were strong Germophiles and tried to emulate the German universities with a lot of awareness.
    More so, the colleges such as Harvard, Princeton among others that were historical colonial colleges started also to adopt the model of the Germany universities to start carrying out research. In the course of the last decades of nineteenth century, these universities started subdividing the classical disciplines which were at that time very wide and narrower in specific areas and the faculty turned to be organized in departments on the rising trends and became active in the disciplines of the organizations nationwide. During this period, many national organizations that specialized in disciplines emerged. These organizations included the American Historical Association that emerged in the year 1884, the American Institute of Electrical Engineers emerged in the year 1885, the American political science Association emerged in the year 1889, and the American Chemical Society came up in the year 1876 among other organizations that came up during this time. With the rapid increase in academic specialization, there was the growth of the curriculum, the setting up of the elective system which enabled the students to choose courses instead of studying the fixed curriculum. Going the German way, many of these universities started offering graduate degrees, with Johns Hopkins taking the Lead.
    At the time when the twentieth century was coming to a close, the American higher education system was made up of the combination of these features from the past. Among the universities, some of them were private, relying on the students tuition fees, grants and revenues from donation for these institutions support. On the other hand, some of these private universities obtained support from the state governments, asking for small amounts of tuition fees from the students or at times even not and ownership of few endowments. The tradition of the colonial colleges was still followed by the Liberal-arts colleges the coming up of private together with public research universities also integrated some baccalaureate colleges cultures on top of the introduction of graduate degrees.
    It is also important to note that, American universities as well appreciated applied research and professional education to a much higher level more than any of the forerunner in Europe. It would not be exaggerating the facts to give a suggestion that the universities that were set up on the model of the Germany universities existed basically for the advantage of faculty. On the other side, those universities that were set up basing on the English model existed basically for the advantage of the students. To a quite high level, the German model and the English model have survived together in an ill at ease tension all through the American university history in the time that has just passed.
    In the course of the inter-war period, another fresh phenomenon emerged that was quite interesting. It turned out to be familiar to have a belief that the coming up of fascism and communism in the European countries posed a threat to Wests foundations. It was believed that the United States of America carried a burden that was special in sustaining the progress of the Western Civilization. Consequently, there was the introduction of a program in Western Civilization at Columbia. This program then extended to other campuses across the United States of American. This turned out to be a portion of the core mission of setting up a society that upheld democracy.
    Important changes in the universities of America were brought in by the second word war. There was a call upon the engineers as well as the scientists to make their contributions to the war efforts. As a result, these experts came up with various inventions. Among them was the coming up with the radar whose development was in the laboratories at MIT. Another invention was the setting up of the first controlled atomic reaction that took place at the University of Chicago. More so, there was the Manhattan Project that brought all the scientists from all universities in America to Los Alamos to set up an atomic bomb. By the Manhattan Project going through, this was an indication that science could play quite a vital role in the national defense.
    Another observable fact brought about by the Second World War was the big expansion of the universities in the United States of America. As a portion of giving reward to the veterans who were coming back from the war, in the other portion as a way of bringing about an immense influx of these veterans in the job market at the same time, and therefore pushing up unemployment and enhancing of the coming back of depression during the 1930s, there was an introduction by the government of the GI Bill which enabled the veterans to get money to go and study in college for four years. The GI bill brought about democracy in the American universities by offering access to a large number of young people who otherwise would not have been able to go and have education. More so, it brought about avenues to a much wider range of the population to the private universities. It created a work force that was very much educated and as a consequence, the economy of America was improved. There was an expansion in the universities both in terms of significance and the size.
A debate arose in the year 1947 at the Berkeley campus on the sense carried in acknowledging the research sponsored by the federal government. This debate was just the same as the debate concerning industrial funding these days. The Cold War invited important expansion government investment in the universities not just in the research that have had impacts on the defense of the nation. A National Defense Act was passed by Congress in the year 1958 for the first time. This act stretched beyond the concern in both science and engineering. The government as well gave out funds in support for the work in humanities as well as social sciences. Other fields that received funds include economics, sociology, foreign languages, and history. There was a generous provision by the government of fellowships in these fields in total. It was taken that national defense relied upon the study of other cultures such as those of Russia, China, Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia. The rapid increase in the number and size of the American universities during the 1960s was attributed to the dramatic increase in population as well as the investment by the federal government in the course of the cold war.
    Among the most perceptive observers of the American universities during that period was the chancellor of the University of California by the name Clark Kerr who later became the president of the same university. He had a recognition that the modern university carried out its activities serving both the government together with the corporate sector and its structure clearly looked like the structure of the corporations. At the same time, he also had the recognition that the mission of the university education, particularly as it related to undergraduates, suffered as a result. His definition of the university ignited a heated debate at Berkeley in the course of the student revolt. The student revolt made a criticism of the connection between the university and the government and mostly during the Vietnam War. The student activities uttered words of resistance against how the university was organized and those words are still part of the history of Berkley and appear on the walls of the library of the undergraduate students.
    Towards the end of the last century, various changes that are quite fundamental have brought in alterations in the nature of the American higher education and to a great extend, in the public universities. Among the initial changes in the recent times are associated with the public mood that is changing concerning the support that is provided to the higher education. In the course of the great expansion done on the higher education in the course of the 1960s, there existed a big support to the universities. The assumption was that the universities were a public good and the investment in this institutions met the needs of the public and that the main party that derived the advantages was the public. At about the start of the year 1980, a traditional mood was widespread among the people within the country and this brought about the election of Reagan as the president of the United States of America. This president took lead in a tax revolt that brought down in a systematic way the public investment in all the sectors apart from the national defense sector.
    While during the 1960s the universities had been regarded as core to national defense, that idea dispelled in the course of the 1980s. More so, under the Reagans leadership, the government made a transfer of several costs that were associated to the states welfare together with health care. In the course of the tax revolt, the state governments which were the main source of public funds given to the public universities found much difficulty in going on investing in universities to the extent that had initially been set up. The idea came up that the group that mainly derived benefits was the students that acquired the university education and not the public as a whole and the idea turned out to be that these students should carry a higher burden for funding the university education. The universities faced with this challenge of the support that was going down together with substantial inflation had no choice but to raise the fees for the university students.
    Since the start of the 1980s up to this day, for instance, the fees paid per year at the University of California have gone up to 3600 in the current times from zero in the early 1960s and 450 in early 1970s. In the course of turning public universities in to private ones, the biggest individual group of those who make contributions that are private are the students and they currently contribute approximately 15 percent of the budget of the university used to operate it.
    The next blow to the universities has occurred in the shape of the immense analysis coming from the conservative movement itself. In the course of the Cold War, the conservatives of the United States of America were often disturbed concerning the universities even as they were aware that the nation had a reliance on them. Beginning from McCarthy epoch and through the anti-war movement that was there in the 1960s, these conservatives took on an express attack on universities, stressing the facultys oaths of loyalty, looking for ways to restrict the students and facultys action. They didnt go through bringing about changes in the universities but just in attacking them. Towards the end of the 1960s, it was eminent that a fresh strategy would have to be employed. This strategy was then to be developed by Lewis Powell who was later appointed by President Nixon to the Supreme Court.
    Upon the request by an officer of the National chamber of commerce who was a friend as well as a neighbor, Powell made a response that was strategic to the perceived universities liberalism. Several calls were made by Powel for the Chambers efforts. The first was that the Chamber should come up with ways of providing funds for those scholars in the social science field as well as humanities with the views that were conservative. The scholars would in turn have a foundation that could not depend on liberal universities that were not in favor of their view. Second, Big Business should set up a network of the speakers that were well-liked and the media personalities who would make popular the conservative point of view especially by using the television. Thirdly, the interests of the business should bring about influence in the curriculum by making an emphasis that the universities business schools should employ their own social scientists and provide them with their own courses and thus bringing an insult to their students from the liberal notions of social science departments.
    The effort undertaken by Powell was different from that of the conservatives who earlier on was to do away with liberal faculty members and this was an effort that had not succeeded. Powell did not employ a direct attack but instead opted for a conservative option. Powells program has greatly succeeded. There has been creation of conservative foundations giving support to the conservative scholars work. The conservatives have been able to give a picture of academic liberals as thinkers who have a closed mind holding on to a politically correct accepted view. These conservatives have passed out a message of a conservative doctrine while being able to convince the public that universities are under captivity of liberal ideologues who do not stand for any other points of view. They have been able to widen the curriculum of business schools among other schools with a curriculum that is not much liberal.
    According to, today there are more than eighteen million students who are enrolled in over four thousand universities and colleges which are currently carrying out their operations within the United States of America. In the course of the coming few years there will still be continued rise in the number of students enrolling in this institutions and the number is anticipated to reach twenty million. Currently, about seventy percent of those people within the age bracket of between 18 years and twenty four years enroll in college and over eighty percent of the graduates from high school as well do the same.
    The American colleges as well as the universities give a definition of their mission in regard to a political ideology which many Americans find it to slightly being strange. Of course this is the idea of diversity that came up from the praiseworthy goal of carrying out the enrollment of a larger number of the minority students in academic institutions but progressively metastasize in to a principle which emphasizes the American history is one of exclusion and oppression of minorities brought about in great part by the obligation of the nation to property, rights of individuals as well as the free market. The leaders in the academic field hold a belief that the work of the university is to make known this oppression and to undertake an initiative to compensate for it through provision of representation within the faculty, the student body, and through the curriculum for several groups which have fallen victims.
    There is a continuous appeal in the promotional brochures as well as academic publications given out by the universities together with colleges. Some academics that look for advancement in their area of specialization have the courage to make the criticism or even raise questions about this doctrine.
Another development in the American university is the recent growth in the online universities like the University of Phoenix, Capella University, and American Intercontinental University among many others. This development is regarded by some people as a coming up source of competition for those institutions that are established. For instance, the University of Phoenix which is the largest online university has an enrollment of more than two hundred students and is taking joy of growing rapidly. These online universities have had the main appeal of the market of adult education putting much emphasis on those courses in the business field and the professional training. So far, there exists no strong confirmation that these programs can offer competition to residential colleges for the support of the young people for whom the higher education is tied up with being set apart from parents and the daily relation to the peers.
    Some people have doubts that the courses offered online can make a substitution of the courses offered by the teacher in the classroom. There has been criticism made against the University of Phoenix that it has not been offering courses that meet the minimum academic standards and for hiring itinerant members of the faculty who just report and once again go away from one semester to another. It is yet to be clear that these online universities will in time offer competition that is serious to the four-year institutions that are already established.
There has been suggestions from various sources that new graduate schools, colleges as well as universities should be set up in order for them to be established beginning from the start on principles that are sound. Other people have advocated restoring a required core curriculum that has a base on the great books of Western Civilization. More so, other people make an urge for the setting up of fresh academic centers that have a base in some way on the American institutions ideals or on the Western Civilizations works. The conservative reformers have the knowledge that to bring change in the university there must be following of a course that is well thought out incremental action. There can not be the use of the plans of demand and argument which leftists used during the 1960s to invert their institutions.
    The setting up of new institutions is an enterprise that poses several challenges nowadays in terms of the costs associated with it and the big hardship of getting over the advantages that are reputation of the established institutions.
    As noted by, enrolling of international students will be highly emphasized in the next coming years. The programs in the academics of America will on the rise not emphasized with the reasons that these programs are parochial in the same manner as what was done to the programs of Western Civilization. In case universities as well as colleges go on augmenting their strength in finances, some of these institutions may get to level at which they will not any more depend in whichever measure on the grants from the government or any other kind of support from the government. It tends to be quite unusual and to a particular level impossible to bear in mind that the universities can operate on their own without attaching themselves to the nation that provides funds, offers protection as well as giving these institutions encouragement and yet it would have looked just as unusual a hundred years ago to have made an emphasis that these universities would separate themselves from all religious influence.

Every year, a considerable number of people die of gun related injuries in the United States of America. The growing trend has worried a majority of the American society with many of them calling for more stringent laws to control arms ownership by private citizens. What has furthered the debate even is the fact that most of the incidences have involved minors who have no approval from the law to carry any weapon. The argument has been that the licensed adults must be careless to allow access to the weapon by the juveniles. Compared with other developed nations, America has recorded higher rates of both owning a gun and murder crimes. Though the two dont have a direct relationship, the involvement of the gun usually makes criminal violence to be more lethal (Ludwig  Cook, 2009). There is need for gun control in the United States and the same time, citizens have the Constitutional Right to own arms as provided for in the Second Amendment to the American Constitution.
Criminal activities of the great depression era led by John Dillinger, Capon and their associates were a wake up call to the administration of the day. They had to device means of reducing the rampant criminal activities in the country. The government demonstrated no ability to protect its citizens from either financial or personal harm. Criminal gangs that had been formed had a free day in America. Criminal activities and kidnappings were on the increase. The depression did much to alter the perception of people on crime. In 1933, the government was amused by the increasing crime, enriched the FBI department making it a super police force in an effort to deal with the increasing criminal gangs (Girardin  Helmer, 2005).
This research paper will thus look at the repercussion the guns in the wrong hands have had in the population, and basically show the importance of having gun control in the society.  This will be in relation to the existing laws that pertain to the gun control.
Laws regulating the issuance of guns
    The need to have laws governing the guns came in as a result of the famous Second Amendment to the United States Constitution that allows ownership of guns as a Constitutional Right to private citizens. The Second Amendment was effected on December 15, 1791, together with the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment in part reads, a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed, (Halbrook, 1989, p vii-viii,).
    Crimes in the United States are common and therefore many people think it is important to own their personal guns for protection. Laws and regulations have been put in place by the different States to regulate the issuance of the weapons. These laws might be different from one state to another but they carry a fundamental principal of putting control on the proliferation of the weapons. The individuals who are ineligible to own firearms in the United States, includes those below the age of 18 years, those dismissed from the Army forces, illegal foreigners, those who have renounced their citizenship, those convicted in a court of laws of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, persons subject of a restraining disorder, criminals, illicit drug abusers, mentally incapacitated persons, among other groups of people (DOJ. 2009).
The first ever major gun control Act was put in place in the year 1934 with the enactment of the National Firearms Act that imposed strict registration requirements for the possession of the gun. This Act only targeted the fully automatic fire arms including sub-machine guns. It also imposed a transfer tax on machine guns and short barreled long guns (Almanac of Policy Issues, 2004). In 1938, the Federal Firearms Act imposed the first ever limitations on the sale of ordinary firearms. Individuals selling these weapons have to be in possession of a Federal Firearms License and should maintain records of the names and addresses of their customers. Selling weapons to individuals convicted of violent felonies was against the law under this Act. Another Act was put in place in 1968, famously referred to as the Gun Control Act of the 1968, whose main purpose was to keep firearms out of the hands of the unfit groups. The Act prohibits mail-order sales and sale of arms between any two States. It also set licensing requirements, limits access to new weapons, prohibits minors from possessing weapons, and imposes penalties. The list of the individuals banned from acquiring weapons broadened to include the convicts of non-business related felony, mentally disabled individuals, and illegal drug dealers andor users (Almanac of Policy Issues, 2004).
In between the years we have had several Acts targeting the control of firearms before the groundbreaking Brady law of 1994. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act requires that there be a period of five days before one is allowed to purchase and own a gun. The period is to be used by the local authorities to conduct background checks on the profile of those buying the handguns. Those opposing this law went to the Supreme Court in 1997 challenging the Act and won their case. In 1998, there was an amendment to the Brady law, which replaced the five day waiting period with an instantaneous felon ID system. Registered dealers were to conduct this background search on all weaponry purchase. The bill however, did not get enough support in the Congress and never went through (Agresti, 1999). In the years that the Brady law was in place (1994-1997), 242,000 background checks had led to denial of purchases of hand guns (Agresti, 1999).
In some states like Texas, the laws governing gun ownership are not very strict. One can buy a short gun, riffle, or hand weapons without a permit. The weapons do not necessarily require registration and one does not necessarily need a license. A permit is only required for the hand weapons. Some States however, are quite strict on registration, permit, and a license for the weapons (Daria.no, 2007).
Several cases have been reported on licensed guns being used in heinous crimes across the country. Most cases have involved school going children or adults with some mental or psychological problem. Some criminals have found access to the guns following the legal procedures but with a criminal intention. The bizarre shootings that have occurred involving juveniles can be attributed to careless handling of the weapon by the licensed adults but nevertheless, this occurrence has just been a once in a while occasion. This is a fact considering that many Americans own guns compared to the rate of reported misuse. Crime and mortality statistics are often used in the projected debate concerning gun control. The number of homicides annually committed by guns is said to have shot by 173 from the year 1985-1993, and decreased by 47 in the year 1999. Fatalities arising from the firearms is said to have decreased by 22 for all age groups and by 40 for the juveniles in the period 1993 to 1998 (Almanac of Policy Issues, 2004).
For the gun control advocates, they see the law as essential in curbing access of guns by criminals, juveniles, and other high-risk groups. They argue that with federal control, there shall be success in reduction of the guns availability to the public. Some activists demand for near prohibitive policies of non-police handgun possession whereas others want policies that would not deny legitimate ownership and transfer of firearms but offers tight control of the arms. Those opposing the gun control have argued that such controls will only burden the law abiding citizens and deny them the Right as provided for in the Second Amendment. They also argue that, widespread gun ownership is a deterrent to crime and potential tyranny either by the government or gangs. Also they are critique of enhancing Federal police powers as opposed to state powers (Almanac of Policy Issues, 2004).
A strict gun control measure is likely to increase criminal activities because the self-defense aspect will have to be out of the options. In the United States, those using the guns as per the regulations by far outnumber the criminal use of legal guns. Criminals are usually afraid of armed citizens. To quote one Philip Van Cleave, a former reserve deputy sheriff in Texas, but I have seen a criminal who was so frightened by an armed, seventy year old woman that in his  panic to get a way, he turned and ran right into a wall(Lott, 2000). What makes people think that legal guns contribute to increase in crimes is the media hype that follows a rare incident that happens involving a licensed gun. Take the case at Ft. Texas in which the unfortunate incident led to the death of 13 people and 38 others sustaining injuries, here, we saw the media condemn laxity in the current laws governing firearms in the country and called for stiffer rules (Knickerbocker, 2009).
 The media information is usually blown out of proportion to attract more sales hence loosing objectivity, which should be their primary mission. In another case, a student of Japanese origin was shot on his way to Halloween party in Louisiana in 1992, and this attracted international attention showing how defensive guns can go wrong tragically. Such incidences do happen occasionally, considering that only 30 people are accidentally killed annually in the United States by private citizens who mistake them for intruders. In comparison, the police accidentally kill as many as 330 people every year (Lott, 2000). The medias portrayal of guns as defensive tools has taken a low profile compared to the negative publicity given to the private guns. Whenever there is an incident, the media will rush to cause a spectacle without elaborating on the issue. In many occasions, the media will cause a stir and later, when the matter has lost priority recognize that indeed the person that was at the center of the spectacle had some mental or psychological problems. To be fair, the media has to strike a balance in reporting issues concerning private weapons.
Conclusion
    Given that the gun licensing has double impact, there should be a mechanism of vetting to ensure that the flow of guns to high-risk group is put under strict control. This however, does not imply that genuine law abiding citizens should not enjoy the Constitutional provisions as per the Second Amendment. In a real sense, there can never be complete denial of gun access to high-risk groups unless issuance of guns will have to be totally done away with in the United States. It is therefore important to note that gun control is becoming a concern to the Authorities and citizens alike. As much as the citizens would want to fulfill their Constitutional Right, the authorities have the great challenge of ensuring that there is law to govern the possession of weapons by private citizens. Gun ownership should prevail but tight control should be initiated. Whether the current policies are preserving access and preventing misuse of the weapons is open for debate.

The American war effort during World War II could  encompass volumes of research and dedicated scrutiny however, the American war effort could be concisely stated into three categories Leadership, Logistics and Production. These three categories which straddle both military and civilian efforts comprise the core concepts of the American war effort. In the following paragraph
Leadership defined is the ability to lead a group or a nation of people into a common cause. In the case of the Second World War this leadership took the shape of both political and domestic figure heads who both inspired and motivated their respective peer groups. From Douglass Macarthur to Franklin D. Roosevelt as military leaders to Bob Hope and Glenn Miller as domestic leaders these men asked soldiers and civilians alike for  great sacrifice which the populace gladly gave.  As for logistics, the ability for the American military and civilians to move large tonnages of raw and finished goods enabled the American war effort to be established on two fronts. Some basic examples of logistics would be the control of the Panama Canal, the well established rail roads across the country and air security over the continental United States. War production often quoted as the main reason for allied victory during World War II , is of importance, but I would place it last in the above three. Having a reserve of female workers though important, was nothing new as Germany had had instituted the same. However, it was in fact the ability of the American war effort to still produce some normal domestic goods that allowed the civilian population some sense of luxury whereas the axis powers by the end of the war had moved completely and solely to war production.
It is in these three points Leadership, Logistics and Production, that the American war effort during the Second Would War could be summarized. These concepts though not detailed here cover both the military and domestics aspects of the United States war effort.   

Fear, cold unadulterated fear. The children and families of the 1950s and 1960s felt fear. It was an everyday thing. At least once a week every child in America learned how or reviewed how to get under their desks and cover their heads. That was just in case an A-bomb was dropped. World War II ended by dropping nuclear bombs on two cities in Japan. It worked, the war ended, or so everyone thought. The awesome power of a nuclear bomb then began to weigh heavily on the minds of all those who were growing up in the United States at that time. Their fathers were coming home from the war and everyone talked about the war and the power of the instruments of war.
    The technologies of World War II made it a long and awesome war. Many men died. The United States itself was attacked in Pearl Harbor. The fighting went on and on and the bombs became more and more awesome until that day that THE BOMB was dropped. The destruction was terrible. We dropped it because it was believed that it was the only thing that would stop the war.
    The Russians might have something even bigger and the arsenals got larger. Once the war was over Russia and the United States began to build huge arsenals of nuclear weapons and now we could send them across the ocean or great landscapes to kill big cities everywhere and Russia had the same ability. Everyone had to protect their own country so there was great reason to build up these reserves of awesome technology.
And so, there was fear. What would happen next Would Russia send a bomb here Will we send a bomb there
    Everywhere you looked the fear was multiplied. You heard it on the radio. You saw it on the new TVs. There were tests being held in New Mexico and Nevada. They were underground at first, then above ground. Children saw pictures on TV of the awesome power of what the bombs could do. Many families built bomb shelters in their back yards and whole families learned how to filter the aire and water that might be needed if there was fall out. Everyone stowed away canned goods and bottles of water in their shelters.
    The United States had huge shelters built and stocked with food and water for many and everyone debated as to whether or not there would be enough to save a few. The side effects of fall out were studied with an attempt to come up with treatment for radiation treatment. Everyone thought about what might happen a lot.  The fear was very real and in most cases very justified but you often wondered what the fear might do to you when you had to make a decision. Would the President press the button at the wrong time Would we retaliate or did we need to be first.
    Alas, Babylon brings all of this fear to us in the form of a story about the era. On page 2 the Sputnik has been sent up and the Americans in this small town are very fearful
that Sputnik can watch them very closely and would know what they were doing. Would this fear cause the President to push the button This was a fear that was created because of new technology. The war was ended but the people did not understand what was coming next. The technology of the time included things like Sputnik, the beginnings of space travel, the BOMB and wartime developments that everyone was afraid they did not
know about. They were not even sure that the government was being honest with them.
    Other technology that became an issue, of course was the missals. The United States and Russia both had missiles available and were testing. In fact, they were testing frequently. No one really seemed to know if those missiles were going to be used. There were always the tests and the radio was a major source of getting information. However, the invention of the television and the fact that it was often in households made news a much bigger deal than it had been before.
    Alas Babylon tries to tell us what it was like, much like the conversation at the beginning of this paper. Alas, Babylon probably ends on a positive note which, I am not sure were the way most people felt at that time. Throughout the book, there was a deterioration of how people felt as far as their safety and the influence of other governments but in the end all was well. In truth though, much of that fear lasts even into today. Today, we still wonder, even though there are many less nuclear war heads than before, whether or not they will somehow push the button and cause the war. That is because so many of our families grew up in the 1950s and 1960s and the fear that was ingrained in them by their parents have in some ways been instilled in this generation. Though we are not asking children to practice ducking under desks, we are very suspicious of our government and what they are doing. Are they telling us everything That kind of a question stems from the fears of the cold war.
    When you compare Alas, Babylon to what the people of the day expected to happen. It is probably pretty close. The technology of missiles and bombs as well as Sputnik were really great technological advances but because it was really the beginning of that kind of advancing technology and the fact that it came so soon after the end of World War II, it was viewed with great suspicion. That suspicion continues now. In some ways it is worse now because we think that we do not know what might be out there. We think that the government is keeping all those things from us.
    In conclusion, suspicion and fear were the things that ruled the 1950s and 1960s. Everyone feared that their world would disappear under the nuclear threat. The technological advances were great but would they have been greater had the Cold War not occurred. The Cold War truly was a frightening time. Did that fear prevent us from being what we might be Surely even to this day we are having great difficulty getting past the suspicion of that day.
    The book Alas, Babylon was a well written, though thank goodness, fictional, account of the times that people lived through then. In our classes, we have learned that there were good reasons to fear that technology. Maybe we should say that there were good reasons to fear, not the technology, but what the technology could do and after all a demonstration had been shown at the end of World War II. It was an interesting time that has affected not only what we do now, not only technologically and humanly, but what we will do in the future.

The implementation of a stronger domestic and foreign policy of the Reagan administration deters its hold on its economy as well as its credibility to hold office, the cutting of taxes and invitation of anticommunist movement to help countries suffering from a war only worsen the current situation of the administration.
The Reagan administration imposes a cut-off on taxes of the citizen in the expectation that it would help increase the inactive economy of the United States, but with the execution of the said policy the economy become more unstable from unemployment to bankruptcies and great recession was experienced, but the remaining year of Reagans presidency the United States experience inflation dropped during that remaining term and were able to recover. The  Foreign policy of the Reagan administration invites for anticommunist movement and refusal of bargaining with terrorist, but it was found out that the administration itself not only fooled the citizen but also the Country, they exchange weapons for the release of hostage, this issue was called the Iran-Contra affairs, in which guns and weapons were secretly sold to Iran. The scandal not only put Reagans credibility on edge but also his capacity as the leader of United States, many of the citizens lost their trust to their president and also their government.
The biggest lost for United States was the trust they have given their president, while advocating for non-bargain of terrorist demands and finding out the Iran-contra affairs, it was the darkest moment for America. The Reagan administration is not successful in the implementation of domestic and foreign policy since it does not able to provide enough for its country and people, what it did was made a more chaotic setting for the citizen to face. Honesty and action should be enough to save the United States situation.