The period following World War II was marked by tension and terror in a variety of realms, including political, social, and economic. The primary source of fear was fascism and socialism philosophies adopted by the main antagonists, the USSR and the United States, after their rise as the two world superpowers following World War II. Internal tensions emerged in the imperialist world, such as those between England and the United States. The capitalist internal war eventually leads to wars which can be categorized into two; these are the war of intervention against socialist countries and intra-capitalist war, which is a war between two capitalist states. Capitalist countries that did not have interests for the intra-capitalist war chose the former, which is the intervention against the socialist states.
The fear that existed was propelled by the mistrust between the capitals world and the socialist world as they sort dominance in both economic and military power. As much as the capitalist world is considered ‘bad,’ by the socialist, there are elements in it that are enlightened and acceptable to communistic parties. Other elements such as democratic or progressive have been seen to be objective to the interests of the USSR. The negative aspects in capitalist include the social democratic leaders or the moderate socialist. Lenin refers to them as friends of the people. However, it can be deduced that internal conflicts in capitalist states do not entirely or necessarily lead to war. After the elimination of Germany and Japan, intervention in USSR was no longer a necessity . Capitals and socialism conflict spread across other countries with Russian and the United States fighting over control of various states thereby increasing more fear of an armed confrontation between the United States and its capitalist allies against Russia and its socialist states .
Essay 2: Negative Liberty and Positive Liberty
There are two main concepts of liberty, that is positive liberty and negative liberty. These concepts were the works of philosopher Isaiah Berlin. He defined positive liberty as people having a choice on who governs the society; it also involves self-mastery. Negative liberty, on the other hand, provides a unique and contradictory concept of liberty. After the second world war, various constitutional changes were made to enhance equality and grant liberty to the marginalized groups in the united states . The American civil rights movement and other groups such as the american civil rights unions have been in the forefront to advocate and uphold liberty that was stipulated in the Constitution of the United States. Most of these groups were marginalized or discriminated upon and segregated. For instance the there were two sets of the school in the united states, those belong to the black which had poor curricula and poor facilities while those of the whites was well equipped and followed a richer curriculum. However, after the advocacy of liberty by the civil rights moment, the schools were integrated . As much as this was perceived as liberty to the whites, there was still a high level of discrimination due to race in those schools. The civil rights movement the liberty rights union used demonstrations and campaigns to enlighten the people and put pressure on the government for equality
Black women also had their union referred to as black feminist who advocated for their liberty from the claws of men. According to this movement, the women were not given equal opportunities like those that men had especially in employment opportunity and wages. All these movements took upon themselves to pressure the United States government to grant them liberty as their constitutional right.
Essay 3: Saving the Souls of America
There have been critics of scholars and social critics on whether the united states has committed to its values. The basis of these questions has been the various historical events and eras such as slavery, the jim crow, discrimination, xenophobia, and nativism5. There are various groups of people as well as individuals who fought to restore the dignity of the united states after the second world war. These groups were the civil rights movements that advocated equality and freedom from discrimination due to color . The civil rights movements mobilized mass boycotts and struck to force the Congress to pass laws against racial segregation in the united states. Other movements that sought to restore the values of the American constitution were the feminist movement that was organized by women to fight for equality in the workplace, regarding employment opportunities as well as fair wages .
White evangelicals also expressed their concern over discrimination by openly condemning in churches and urging their fellow Christians to join the movements. The Congress also played an important part towards the upholding of American ideas and traditions. Congress passed the civil rights act in 1964. The civil rights act was signed into law by the then president of the United States Lyndon Johnson. His contribution to the civil right movement was very significant and brought plenty of changes such as outlawing discrimination of people due to race, gender or religion. The road towards a peaceful co-existence between Americans of all decency was a collective effort from various groups of americans who wanted to bring uphold the values the founders of the country laid down by the constitution of the United States .
Kenan, George. “exerpts, telegraphic messeges from moscow of february 22 1946.” 2010: 36.
Margulies, Joseph. “what changed when everything changed.” what the US is all about 19.
Daniel, Berigan. “America is hard to find.” four freedom, 1972: 4.
springs, kimberly. “The black feminist responds to black masculine .” 8.
Washington, booker T. “The atlanta exposition.” to redeem a nation 35.
kerner. “The 1968 report of the national advisory commision on civil disorders.” The kerner report, 1988: 32.
Schrecker, Ellen. “The age of McCarthyism.” The world of american communism, 1979: 36.
spencer, herbat. “The paranoid style in american history.” studies in the american rights, 1964: 32.