Saturday, June 27, 2020

Media and Vietnam War Research Assignment Paper - 1100 Words

Media and Vietnam War Research Assignment Paper (Research Paper Sample) Content: Name:Professor:Course:Date:Media and Vietnam WarThe Vietnam War was also referred to us the Second Indochina War or the Resistance war against the America. The war took place from November, 1 1955 to April, 30 1975. The war took places in locations such as North Vietnam, Cambodia, South Vietnam, and Laos. The Vietnam War was the one that followed the 1st Indochina War which occurred between the years 1946 to 1954 and which was fought between the North Vietnam and South Vietnam. The North Vietnam was supported by China and the Soviet Union among other communities, and the South Vietnam were being supported by the U.S. together with other anti-communist friends. The Viet Cong that was also known as the National Liberation Front, a South Vietnamese front with the help of the North were fighting against the guerrilla war forces in the region. My research paper will address the topic of the media and the Vietnam War.In the early days of the war, the United States Media sho wed no interest in the ongoing Vietnam War. When the damages started to occur in the course of the Vietnam War is the time that Americans and the media started following carefully about how the war proceeded. Over three million people that included about 58,000 Americans died in the Vietnam War where more than the half were the Vietnamese Civilians. By 1969 which was the peak of the United States involvement in the Vietnam War, over 500,000 military from United States were deeply involved in the War. The growing opposition to the Vietnam War in the U.S. led to bitter subdivisions that occurred among the Americans. These occurred both after and before the President Richard Nixon, who ordered the U.S. withdrawal from the war in 1973. Only some few media journalists mainly covered the war until the rise of the communism that occurred in the country. The news covered was afterward being reflected in the United States of America. Media played a very crucial role in both ending the war an d uniting people who were involved in the Vietnam War. When the Americans got their primary involvement in the Vietnam War, the media took a great interest in the war since some of the Americans were killed. The reason as to which they did not involve themselves at first is due to the lack of adverse impact of the American people. When the American media got into involving itself about the proceeds of the Vietnam War, it did not go far before it ended. Media here played an important task of helping the sides that were fighting that they should stay in peace. Staying in peace does not mean that we ought to bomb our neighbors and keep killing them by shooting them. It meant that an agreement can arrive in identifying the reason for fighting and end the war. In the Vietnam War the primary aim of the media was mainly in unifying the people and let them realize that they can live as brothers and sisters.After many American presidents trying to come up with the peace treaties, including D wight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy an American president. Without the involvement of the media, their efforts were ending up being ignored since the fighters had nothing to touch their hearts and give them a good reason for them to stop fighting. What they believed is that each side was fighting for their rights which will be achieved after the other side withdrew from the war. The fighters did not have a picture in their minds of how many people were dying in the course of their fighting. These contributed to the war continuing for long where, on the other hand, many people were losing their lives, some of whom did not require to die during the war. But as usual, when a war occurs it causes the death of people involved and those one who are not involved as well. The intervention of the media particularly televisions played a very grave role in ending the Vietnamese War. It is because the fighters and the observers were bombarded by the horrific images that occurred on their te levisions about the Vietnam War. The images showed how people were killed desperately during the war and the sufferings that befell. The sufferings and painful deaths affected both women, men, and children. But the women and men were the ones who were adversely affected. Through media involvement in the Vietnam War, it makes many peoples heart be touched starting with the Americans and others. These led towards them start contributing about how the war can be terminated and peace to occur again in the area. In 1967 October, some 35,000 American demonstrators staged a mass of antiwar protest that happened outside the Pentagon. The opponents of the Vietnam War were arguing that the Civilians, which were not enemy combatants, were mostly the primary victims of the war. These led to the accusation by the demonstrators that the United States was in support of the corrupt dictatorship in the region called Saigon. Therefore, the American government had to do something in contributing to en din...

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

Political Science Essay - 1925 Words

Political Science (Essay Sample) Content: NameInstructorSubjectDateBook Review:à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Ità ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremismà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ by Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein,The book Ità ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism is an insidersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ look at the extremism that has paralyzed the American political system due to hardline stances adopted by political parties. The book places the blame squarely on the Republican Party for some of the recent stalemates that have bogged Congress, nearly bringing the Legislature into disrepute. Additionally, members of the American media are similarly accused of non-empiricism in pursuit of a à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"balanced reportingà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ thusly falling to inform the electorate on who should rightly take the blame to the recurrent political gridlocks. The authors of this book, Thomas E. Mann a nd Norman J. Ornstein are arguably the most experienced political scientists in Washington, having worked with several key figures in Congress for decades. As acknowledged liberals, both have cultivated a close working relationship with Senators and House Representatives from across party divides, helping them understand the operatives of the legislature. Their altitudinous objectivity has positioned them as a force to reckon, taken seriously by Republicans and Democrats alike.In the preface to the paperback edition of the book published in 2013, the authors assert that their main motivation for writing the book was the growing dysfunctions of the American constitutional system. They concede that the official publication of the book in 2012 was intended to coincide with the 2012 campaign, with a view of giving the electorate a glimpse of the destructive dynamics of the 112th Congress. The objective was to bring to the foreground the deep polarization that had characterized American political systems within the last few decades.Going against the established grain, the authors are categorical that the partisan polarization that has plagued the governing system in America is asymmetric, with the Republican Party taking a galactic chunk of the blame due to their extremities in polity, policy, and process. This asseveration is captured in the introductory remarks, "à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬the Republican Party has become an insurgent outlierà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition." This hard-hitting remark coming from Washingtonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s most seasoned political scientists cannot be ignored. Without fear of appearing partisan, the authors make their analysis as blunt as it could be, well aware that doing so would ruffle some long-standing relationships, yet stil l confident that the time for the truth had come.Tracing the descent of members of the Republican Party from rational thinkers to hardline outliers, Mann and Ornstein identify Eric Cantor and Newt Gingrich as the main architects of this plunge. The latter, antecedently a great admirer of the authors, gets a special place as the first Republican to come to Congress with the sole aim of destabilizing any opposition. The authors describe his plan of entry into the Congress as the beginning of the modern permanent campaign, where policy considerations were dominated by selfish electoral goals. To him, anyone who possessed a divergent opinion was considered a nemesis. Cantor (the former Representative for Virginiaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s 7th congressional district), on the other hand, is singled out as the orchestrator of the debt ceiling fiasco. This was panned out largely as a means of arm-twisting President Obama into accepting spending cuts as a means of advancing the some political capital to R epublicans.From the knee-jerk reaction that this book has elicited, it is only trite to conclude that it is compelling. Never in the history of news reporting and political analysis has any material been so blunt and direct. For the most part, it has been easy to provide a "balanced" reporting of the power games that unfold in Congress in order to appear neutral. However, this book has decidedly apportioned blame as it "should be" blaming the Democrats for moving back on their signature liberalistic approach to national issues, but asserting that Republicans have gone beyond what is expected of a political party in a competitive democracy to a stumbling block on national and international issues. In effect, GOP hardliners are to blame for the infamous downgrading of the credit rating of the U.S. and the debt ceiling stalemate. There is indication that the stalemate was designed to frustrate the Obama administration despite the initial acknowledgment by some Republicans like John Boe hner, that the debt ceiling needed a raise to keep the government operational. The authors are convincing in their evaluation and apportioning of fault. Their evidence is not backed by wild allegation or conspiracy theories, but by sound facts, most of which are in public records. The underlying evaluation is that whereas the truth has always been right here for people to see, people have chosen to gloss it in order to appear non-partisan, all to the detriment of the American political system and a paralysis of the government.The book is divided into two parts, Part I is a statement of the problem. The sub-parts within explain the roots of the new politics of hostage taking, the seeds of dysfunction and the ramifications of the debt ceiling. Part II is the authorsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ solutions and suggestions on how to fix the problem. This sub-parts are headed as bromides to avoid fixing the party system, reforming the U.S. political institutions, and navigating the current system. This div ision is intended to allow the reader understand in a sequential fashion how Americaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s political system got itself entangled in party politics and what can be done to untangle the network.The statement of the problem begins with a recount of an occurrence in 2010 when seven cosponsors of an important Senate resolution to set a deficit-reduction panel turned against the plan purely because President Obama had endorsed it. This is the ideal manifestation of how low American politics had dipped. The authors have done a bit of introduction on the evolution of the debt ceiling as a recap to its significance and future implications should politicians keep toying with it. This is an attestation to the crude hostage taking that has been perfected by the Republicans, leaving the voters angry and less enthusiastic. No wonder votersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ apathy has been on a steady rise in the recent past."The seed of Dysfunction" traces the origin of the deeply fractured political system beyon d pertinent issues like spending and debt limit fiascos. This chapter elucidates the impaired relationship that exists between the President and Congress, the polarized campaigns and the deeply tribal political culture. The authors claim that what is seeing now is simply a nadir of a societal shift that began in the 1960s; nevertheless, they assert that the main precipitation began in 1978 at the height of the election fever. In the same year, Mann and Ornstein started the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) to track the changes that had been taking place within Congress over the years. AEI through its "Congress Project" would come face to face a new breed of rocky politicians who did not conform to the status quo, willing to go that extra mile to deliver votes or castigate opponents to bring them down. Newt Gingrichà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s evolution from a quintessentially flexible conservative to ideological rigidity is traced. His main dilemma then was how to recapture the House from the Dem ocratsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ twenty four years stranglehold. Quickly upon his election, Gingrich set out a "cold" plan of action which involved portraying Congress as an institution that needed a sweeping change in order to reaffirm its place within the American governmentà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s apparatus. It seems Gingrichà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s strategy was to destroy the House from within and then build it afresh with Republicans as the majority. For the next few years, as the Republicans dumped Democrats out of the House of Representatives, it became clear that the strategy was working. The use of politically motivated laws, hyperbolic rhetoric became a norm in Congress.The Media and Political DysfunctionIt is amazing that whilst renegade Republicans like Newt Gingrich used every conceivable trick to discredit Democrats, the mainstream media shied away from reporting this emerging trend of ideological schism. This tradition of portraying a lack of bias has led the media to always look for counter-arguments to j ustify the actions of the other. The authors argue that despite these journalisti...