Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Friday, May 14, 2010
Is Monarchy More or Less Effective Than Democracy?
Throughout the centuries, different governments have been established, demolished, and new ones have replaced them. Monarchies, democracies, even the occasional anarchy have been established and recorded. So, the question is which is better: a monarchy, or a democracy? Democracies are better than monarchies, because they give the people more freedom, more voice, and an all-around better chance to have the best country possible.
Monarchies have taken place all through time, and in many places throughout time. One of the places that a monarchy has left a big mark on is England. England has had its fair share of good and bad kings, queens, and both. One of the most infamous kings of England was a man by the name of Henry the VIII. Henry was the first Tudor king of England, born on January 28, 1457. He was crowned king of England, and quickly married Elizabeth of York. Henry was a good king, but personally unpopular as a ruler because of his secretive, acquisitive, and untrusting qualities. (http://englishhistory.net/tudor/hobit.html)He gained a reputation as both a greedy and miserly man. However, he is most well known for his six wives. Henry was married to six women throughout his reign: Katharine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catharine Howard, and Katharine Parr. (http://englishhistory.net/tudor/letters.html) He asked to have a divorce from his wife, Anne Boleyn, from the Church, but when the Church refused, Henry decided to take matters into his own hands. To make a long story short, Henry eventually had Anne executed, because of her inability to produce for him a male heir to his throne. When Henry died, however, his only son, Henry, 18, succeeded him. After Henry VIII, England had two queens: one a famous, beloved queen, and one an infamous, unloved one. When Henry’s son died, Mary, who was his first daughter, ascended the throne. Mary had been raised as a Catholic, and was intent on making the entire country of England Catholic, by all means necessary. The means by which she was willing to go to make England Catholic earned her the title “Bloody Mary”. She lost her power, and her young sister, Elizabeth succeeded her.
Elizabeth was a beloved queen to England, and ruled for forty-four years. At this time, however, Mary was doing as well. She was jealous of the fact that her younger sister was able to rule, and planned many attempts to take back the throne. However, her attempts were unsuccessful, and she was finally taken to trial and executed. Mary was beheaded in 1587, her execution papers signed by a reluctant Elizabeth. (http://englishhistory.net/tudor/exmary.html) It is surprising that Elizabeth was so popular, considering her terrible temper, and the infamous sister that had ruled before her. However, even though Elizabeth was a particularly popular queen, she still was solely ruling the country of England, which was not as efficient as it could have been with a democracy.
Rome had a brilliant Republic in its time, even if it was not as successful as it could have been. Elements of the Roman Republic can be found in Republics around the world today, in countries all around the world. The United States, for example, has a very successful Republican government, using many of the elements Rome’s republic used. For instance, the veto system used today by the president of the United States was seen in Rome’s republic system. Rome used a veto system in the case of patricians and plebians. One plebian representative could veto any law made by patricians, and that would be the absolute decision. Every law had to be run past the plebian representative, just as any new laws made today must be run by the president. The Senates of today and Rome’s republic had similar responsibilities, such as handling public money, etc. As we can see from the Republican government used in the United States today, the democracy-sort of government, where all people get a say in what happens in their country, is better for all, and especially better than a monarchy.
All over the world, countries are coming into a new era. Countries with a monarchy type of government are hard to come by today, and it is not difficult to see the pattern. Developed countries have democracies as the main type of government, because they are the most efficient. The people of the country have more say, more things are free, such as religion in some, and the way that the government runs is overall a lot smoother. Even England, the country that had the Tudor dynasty, and many others, does not have a monarchy as their main type of government any longer. This proves that the most efficient government is, in fact, a democracy. It works well for developed countries, and one day it will work to develop the countries that are undeveloped.
Web Citations:
1. "Primary Sources: The Obituary of King Henry VII, 1509." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 15 May 2010. . http://englishhistory.net/tudor/hobit.html
2. "Primary Sources: Letters Written by the Six Wives of Henry VIII." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 14 May 2010. . http://englishhistory.net/tudor/letters.html
3. "Primary Sources: The Execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, 1587." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 15 May 2010. . http://englishhistory.net/tudor/exmary.html
4. 1. "Ancient History Sourcebook: Polybius : Rome at the End of the Punic Wars [History, Book 6]."FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 08 Mar. 2010.. http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/ANCIENT/polybius6.html
Is Exploration a 'Good' Thing?
Throughout time, people have been exploring the world. Whether discovering large land masses such as North America, or discovering small islands such as those of Hawaii. So this brings up a question. Is exploration necessarily a good thing? Why change things as they are by exploring into new places? Exploration is overall a good thing, but sometimes it can cause damage to an original culture.
A good example of this was when Europeans explored North America for the first time. It was a good thing because of what the area has evolved into today, but a bad thing because of what happened to the people native to that area. Native Americans, or ‘Indians” as they are sometimes called, were pushed back farther and farther from their land, until the area that they were forced to live in became an extremely tiny area.
Today, Native Americans can live in peace on reservations, but the area on their reservations is still much too small. The Native American culture is also in danger, not only because of the reservations area mass, but because some Native Americans embrace the cultures of today, forgetting about the lives that their ancestors lived. Some are even ashamed to talk about or show their Native American heritage, making it disappear even faster. So, in this case, exploration was not a good thing, because it hurt the Native Americans and their culture.
However, exploration into the New World was not only a bad thing. A lot of good came out of this, as it created the country of the United States as it is today. The United States is one of the best countries in the world to live in, and many people migrate here to live lives better than they could live in a different country. The United States has free religion, many job opportunities, and fantastic education and services. In this country, one can go extremely far, and the future may look a lot brighter here than in other places. If the Europeans had not explored this country like they did, perhaps others would have gained control over the territory, and would have made the country into something that would not have been as successful of a country as it is now.
Another good example of this was the Renaissance. However, the Renaissance was a different type of exploring. Instead of exploration of the world, the Renaissance was an exploration of culture. One of the most important people of this time period was a painter and sculptor from Florence named Leonardo da Vinci. Da Vinci studied a variety of things, from drawing, to arithmetic, to music. He often confused his teachers, because of the questions he would ask and the points that he would make during a lesson. (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/vasari1.html)
Leonardo explored ideas for new inventions, things that could help move through mountains, lift heavy weights, and empty harbors. Leonardo also explored the human body, and was able to study it in depth in the first legal autopsy of the time. This was an unheard of thing to do, as the Church ruled it as immoral. (http://ht.ly/1Kahy) However, the curious Leonardo never let anything stop him from studying what he was interested in. Without his work from then, perhaps we may have not been able to make such incredible leaps in science today. Leonardo’s work was some of the finest and most incredible work of his time, and Leonardo seemed to be much more advanced than the era he was living in. With all of the things that he studied, and all of the things that he created, Leonardo was an incredible genius. He was one man who was not afraid to explore, and the world only benefited from this. This proves that exploration is a good thing, as it can lead to many more good events as a result. If people are afraid to explore like Leonardo, then there is no hope to make advances in science, math, and the arts. We just have to hope that geniuses of today are not afraid to show what they can do and what they know.
Web Citations:
1. "Medieval Sourcebook: Giorgio Vasari: Life of Leonardo Da Vinci 1550." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 15 May 2010.. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/vasari1.html
1. "Medieval Sourcebook: Giorgio Vasari: Life of Leonardo Da Vinci 1550." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 15 May 2010.
2. "The Metropolitan Museum of Art - Special Exhibitions." Ow.ly - Shorten Urls, Share Files and Track Visits - Owly. Web. 15 May 2010. . http://ht.ly/1Kahy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)