Analysis of Howard Zinn's Argument in his Article "Dying for the Government" In June of 2003, Howard Zinnâ€™s â€œDying for the Governmentâ€ was published in â€œThe Progressiveâ€ newspaper. He discusses the governmentâ€™s claim to military victory in Iraq, and he believes that many innocent people have died for an unjust cause in that war. His claim is that soldiers died for their government, not their country. An important part of his argument is his discussion of democracy, which he says is what our country is supposed to be based on. He also brings up some history of U.S. wars and quotes Mark Twainâ€™s statement about the invasion of the Phillipines by the United States. Even though some of his assertions lack evidence, Zinn uses authority and structure very well to make his argument effective. Some of Zinnâ€™s assertions are a bit sketchy in his essay because there is no evidence that proves them true. One that really stands out is when he writes, â€œ[they] died for Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. And yes, they died for the greed of the oil cartels, for the expansion of the American empire, for the political ambitions of the President. They died to cover up the theft of the nationsâ€™ wealth to pay for the machines of deathâ€ (159). His argument may seem true to many, but he does not provide us with any evidence that these statements are accurate. He does not say where he got this information, so it may be hard for some to believe this, unless they share the same opinions as him. Another statement he makes is that â€œ[we] have not been given in the American media (we would need to read the foreign press) a full picture of the human suffering caused by our bombingâ€ (159). This is a very strong assertion, but he does not tell us if he... ...ifth of whom grow up in poverty?â€ (161). Questions like these make his argument very strong, and they are purposely added towards the end to make the reader consider their own thoughts about them after already having been given information on the topic. It is obvious that he is against the expansion of U.S. power, and he is very passionate in his writing about it. Authority and structure make Zinnâ€™s argument very effective, even though some of his assertions do not have much evidence. Throughout the essay, he makes it very clear how he feels about the government and war. He feels soldiers are dying for their government so the U.S. can gain more power. Towards the end of the essay, he writes, â€œ[instead] of being feared for our military prowess, we should want to be respected for our dedication to human rightsâ€ (161). I could not have said it better myself.
â€œBoston Against Busing: Race, Class and Ethnicity in the 1960s and 1970sâ€
The book â€œBoston Against Busing: Race, Class and Ethnicity in the 1960s and 1970sâ€ written by Ronald P. Formisano examines the opposition of court-ordered desegregation through forced busing. The author comes to the conclusion that the issue surrounding integration is a far more complex issue than just racism that enveloped the southern half of the country during this time period. Formisano argues that there were broader elements including a class struggle, white backlash and â€œreactionary populismâ€ that contributed to the emotions of those involved.
Â Â Â Â Â Formisano is persuasive in his arguments that the Boston anti-busing movement was a led by â€œgrass-root insurgentsâ€ from the dominate Irish-Catholic working-class neighborhoods in South Boston. These protesters felt that their tight knit existence was being threatened by the rich, suburban liberals whose children were not effected by the enforcement of the busing.
The author points out that it was an issue of â€œwhite resistanceâ€ rather than racism that played a role in the violence of the protests. I believe that this is a contradictory statement. What Formisano calls â€œwhite resistanceâ€ is the violent reaction to the
movement of African American students into predominantly white neighborhood schools and the mixing of two separate but legally equal peoples.
Is the rock throwing at buses carrying elementary age children, stabbings at South Boston High School and riots on the streets outside the schools affected by the integration any different from the U.S. Army escorting nine African American students into school in Little Rock, Arkansas?
Â Â Â Â Â The author skirts around the central issue of racism by calling it a â€œclass struggleâ€ within the white population of Boston during the 1960s and 1970s. Formisano discuses the phenomenon known as â€œwhite flightâ€, where great numbers of white families left the cities for the suburbs. This was not only for a better lifestyle, but a way to distance themselves from the African Americans, who settled in northern urban areas following the second Great Migration.
Â Â Â Â Â Throughout the text Formisano ignores the voices of who I believe play a key role in the forced busing era: the students involved and the African Americans from West Roxbury. His primary focus is on the Irish of South Boston, the school committee members including the most vocal opponent Louise Day Hicks and the white politicians and judges who enforced the busing. This leaves the work a bit unbalanced and does not give first hand accounts of what the students felt.
Liberal Arts current political controversies - Research Paper Example
Simply speaking, if one takes into consideration the ethical, political and strategic issues related to the usage of drones as warfare devices, one simply comes to the conclusion that the drone usage is not only unethical and wrong, but pragmatically speaking, it is also counterproductive. One salient factor that both ethically and practically puts to question the combat usage of drones is the number of civilian deaths that could be attributed to drones (Clodfelter 252). Though the CIA and the military emphatically try to dilute the overall emotional and ethical significance of the civilian deaths caused by drones by labeling these deaths as the â€˜collateral damageâ€™, yet, the fact is that a responsible and ethics driven nation like the United States of America simply could not resort to the usage of a technology that has the potential to cause unwanted civilian causalities (Clodfelter 252). The Bureau of Investigative Journalism tends to put the civilian deaths caused by drone strikes between 446 and 978, of which 179 to 209 happened to be children (Matthews 1). There is no denying the fact that the usage of a technology that has the potential to kill innocent children and civilians simply could not be justified by extending any tactical or strategic reason. Besides, the global association of drones with the death of innocent children and civilians jeopardizes the very image and reputation of the United States of America (Brunstetter & Braun 340). The civilian deaths caused by drones make people associate US with arrogance and highhandedness and makes them go against the US (Brunstetter & Braun 341). Thereby this depletion of the nationâ€™s image and the unwanted and unwarranted civilian deaths must immediately be stopped by putting a ban on the usage of drones for tactical strikes. Besides, the drone usage in the light of the civilian causalities is counterproductive as it embarrasses the politicians who have to deal with the ramifications of such blunders and many a times make the non-combatants take the enemy side. The other big factor that puts to question the tactical usage of drones without US is that the drones not only negatively impact the collective moral of the military personnel, but they also hamper the gaining of situational awareness by the forces deployed on the ground (Hazelton 30). Deployment at the forward posts or behind the enemy lines, while evincing a sense of camaraderie with the fellow colleagues and working on the basis of the inputs facilitated by the intelligence agencies and the informers, turns the military personnel into highly motivated and skilled combatants. Besides, the forces deployed on the ground do have the ability to differentiate between the civilians and the enemies and this immensely decreases the scope for collateral damage. The other thing is that an effective military campaign is always based on the situational awareness gained by the forces at the ground level (Hazelton 30). The warriors operating on the frontline have a thorough understanding of the ethical and tactical objectives they aspire to achieve. However, both these objectives are simply curtailed by the usage of drones. The people operating drones from the faraway locations neither tend
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.