The Legacy Of Franklin D. Roosevelt - 1333 Words

Wisdom, knowledge, greatness and power are a few words that come to mind when thinking about our 32nd president of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He’s one of America’s greatest presidents who accomplished more than we could have hoped for. A man of few words citizens would say, yet each word was a something to remember. I believe that he was in fact the most effective president the US has had so far. This president was the most precise, straightforward president; he got what was needed to get the job done. He did what no other president would have been able to do with such accuracy, especially given the fact of his physical battle with Polio. Franklin D. Roosevelt was born on January 30, 1882, Hyde Park, New York. Franklin D. Roosevelt was a very educated man who went and graduated from Harvard College in 1903, soon after that he married the wonderful Anna Eleanor on March 17, 1905. The American citizens, family and friends all called Franklin D. Roosevelt â€Å"FDR† for short. FDR lead the American society through troubling times, through war and economic heartache. Franklin D. Roosevelt was a democrat and was elected four times. FDR did his best to make sure the job was done and that he did it wholeheartedly with the American people in mind. Franklin D. Roosevelt was a leader, a supporter and role model. FDR as many would call him was elected for four executive terms. He led the American people through a crisis that no other could have done better than him.Show MoreRelatedThe Legacy Of Franklin D. Roosevelt868 Words   |  4 PagesFranklin D. Roosevelt has gone down in history as one of the greatest presidents to serve our country. He was president from 1933 to 1945, the longest any president has ever served. With the establishment of the new deal, he was able to not only bring the American economy out of the depression but also the people themselves. But it is his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, was a leader herself. She did not stand in the foreground of her husband’s presidency; she actively fought for her beliefs and becameRead MoreA Man With No Bounds Essay1005 Words   |  5 PagesFranklin D. Roosevelt he is not just a person, he is a legacy the way he approached problems in his time â€Å"in charge†. The way he spoke to people was just outright amazing, like in his Infamy Speech after Pearl Harbor when he said, â€Å"With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God.† While in his long presidency, Franklin D. Roosevelt was considered by many, a amazing president who made all the right decisionsRead MoreThe Legacy Of Franklin Delano Roosevelt872 Words   |  4 Pagespreserved it; Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who rescued it from economic collapse and led it to victory in the greatest war of all time.†(Smith XI). Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the only President to serve four terms and had two great, important crisis in his presidency. He truly was a great leader, because he gave the people a sense of security during an era of distress. Although winning victory in the greatest war the world has ever known dominates Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s legacy, his savingRead MoreThe Life of Franklin D. Roosevelt1005 Words   |  5 PagesA mention of the name, Roosevelt D. Franklin to most Americans, rekindles the memories of the Second World War, the Manhattan projects and the subsequent bombing of two Japanese cities. What most of these people fail to understand is that Roosevelts presidency was the Second World War. Turth be told, Roosevelt is one the greatest presidents the United States ever had based on his personality and the challenges he faced while in the White House. This paper discusses a number of aspects about oneRead MoreGeneral Info And Early Political Career1401 Words   |  6 PagesGeneral info and Early Political Career Franklin Delano Roosevelt was born in 1882 in New York to a rich family. He went to Groton School and Harvard College to get an education. He married Eleanor Roosevelt and had six children with her. His hobbies included stamp collecting and relaxing on his yacht. He started his political career in 1910 when he joined the New York State Senate and then continued on as the Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President Woodrow Wilson. He ran for vice presidentRead MoreEleanor Roosevelt : Long Range Goal1005 Words   |  5 PagesAnna Eleanor Roosevelt Isra El-khateeb Long-Range Goal: To inform listeners about the legacy and inspirational status Eleanor Roosevelt left behind. Immediate Purpose: To entertain and inspire my audience by honoring the roles Eleanor Roosevelt played and describing the impact she has on our daily life. INTRODUCTION I. Arouse Audience Interest in the Topic A. It is difficult in a sense to capture the greatness of Eleanor’s life in simple terms through her background, but we will surely uncoverRead MoreFranklin Roosevelt And The Great Depression1458 Words   |  6 PagesFranklin Delano Roosevelt, commonly known as FDR, coined the famous quote, â€Å"The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself.† As America’s 32nd president, Roosevelt served four terms and pushed America towards the future. Franklin D. Roosevelt was prominent during America’s periods of turmoil. During the Great Depression he was well known for his organizations of relief, recovery, and reform; and at the time of World War II, he used his leadership to gain victory for the Allied forces. Roosevelt leftRead MoreFranklin D. Roosevelt : An Effective American President And Leader1509 Words   |  7 Pages1 Bernier Abby Bernier Mrs. Walden Sophomore Honors History Period 1 8 December 2014 The Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt Thesis: Franklin D. Roosevelt was an effective American president and leader. Franklin D. Roosevelt was a powerful leader and one of the most highly regarded presidents in American history. He connected well with American people, had a strong character, possessed a clear vision for America, had valuable political skills, and could lead people in challenging times. With recentRead MoreFranklin Roosevelts New Deal1672 Words   |  7 Pages Ordinary Americans and their families sit together in their living rooms as they turn the knob on their radios. The words â€Å"Good evening, my friends†¦Ã¢â‚¬  echo audibly over the static and ambient noise, and the President of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt informs the nation of his New Deal and planned solutions to the problems of post-Depression America. He speaks warmly and directly, addressing the American people â€Å"you† and himself â€Å"I†. Many people— unemployed or working, poor or wealthy, supporterRead MoreEleanor Roosevelt : a Personal and Public Life Essay751 Words   |  4 PagesEleanor Roosevelt: A Personal and Public Life Longman, New York 2000 This book is about a woman who forever changed the course of womens role in American history. Eleanor Roosevelt was an extremely important figure in the history of the United States, especially during the twentieth century. The way the author uses the book to help the reader to feel included in Eleanors life, makes the reader feel as if he knows Mrs. Roosevelt. Eleanor was the daughter of Anna Hall and Elliot Roosevelt. She

Fish and West Coast Tuna Free Essays

Japan’s Fuchsia Nuclear Power Facility is leaking into the Pacific Ocean constantly. This leak was caused by a powerful earthquake in 2011. Any sort of chemical leak is terrible; however, the location of the Fuchsia facility makes it significantly worse. We will write a custom essay sample on Fish and West Coast Tuna or any similar topic only for you Order Now Because this body of water does not remove or clean itself well, the chemical pollution is Just increasing and taking over the ocean. Marine life is being severely affected by this. One fish that should be a main focus is the West Coast Blue Fin Tuna. The West Coast Blue Fin Tuna is a widely recognized fish and the West Coast Tuna Fishing industry is very familiar with this marine life form. For this industry, the Fuchsia leak is the worst possible event. Phytoplankton, plankton, and many other marine life forms feed on the radioactive chemicals being released by the gallons every day. This consumption of chemicals makes its way up the food chain to the West Coast Blue Fin Tuna. Not only is it now harmful to eat, the West Coast Blue Fin Tuna ingests the radioactive chemicals which in turn begin to eat away t its tissue thus leading the West Coast Blue Fin Tuna to cease to exist. To determine whether or not the rise of radiation levels in the blue fin tuna is due to the Fuchsia leak or any cause that may be natural, I have created an experiment. I would begin by monitoring a set amount of 200 North American Blue Fin Tuna (Group #1). These fish would be in clean water with no radioactive chemicals and superb circulation. My other group would consist 200 of Blue Fin Tuna in clean water that is not well circulated (Group #2). Another group would be made up of 200 Blue Fin Tuna with circulated water containing the Fuchsia chemicals Group #3). How to cite Fish and West Coast Tuna, Papers

The Similarities Between Classical and Modern Liberalism Are Greater Than the Differences free essay sample

Similarities between classical and modern liberalism are greater than the differences. Discuss. (45 marks) Typically, liberalism is categorised into two separate components; classical liberalism, which was fashioned during the 19th century as a result of the industrial revolution, and the more recent Modern Liberalism which emerged as industrialisation continued within the UK. Although both divisions of Liberalism unavoidably overlap in attitudes and approaches regarding the theory behind the ideology, I believe, fundamentally, that clear tensions between these aspects of Liberalism are more evident when analysing this ideology. Some will say that both classical and modern liberalists possess a number of parallel approaches towards this political theory and its key concepts. Firstly, both strands of Liberalism believe in the necessity of some kind of a state, since life without a state, as Thomas Hobbes stated, would be ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’. Both views consider the existence of a state to be essential in order to protect individual rights. Since liberals generally considered humanity to be self-interested and egoistical, a state was needed to ensure that individuals did not exploit other individuals’ rights, through acts of stealing, harming, or even slavery, and was therefore the only thing that was capable of restraining all individuals and groups within society. Hobbes and Locke particularly stressed the importance of creating a ‘social contract’ where an agreement amongst individuals would be initiated, to form a state in order to escape from the disorder and chaos of ‘the state of nature’, which was a society with unrestrained freedom, but lacking any establish authority. Therefore, the state is there to act almost as a neutral referee in society, by implementing laws enshrined in the constitution and by democracy. Thus an approach similar to Abraham Lincolns â€Å"government of the people, by the people, for the people† was adopted and agreed by all liberalists to justify the existence of a state: its primary aim was to protect the rights and freedoms of the people, and therefore of the individual. Another example of corresponding views of Liberalism between modernists and classicists is their superior interest in the individual; both variations of this ideology revolve around protecting rights and freedoms of the individual, as opposed to any social group or collective body. Liberalism encouraged individuals to embrace autonomy and think for themselves, instead of accepting their identity to be based on characteristics associated with a social group or community they belonged to. A serf, for example, became a ‘free man’ and was able to choose who he worked for. Both aspects of liberalism realised that each individual possessed personal and distinctive qualities; each was of special value. The philosopher Kant was one of the first to grasp the importance of each individual, claiming that each person should be ‘ends in themselves’- not merely as means for the achievement of the ends of others. Whether egoism and self-interest is unrestrained or is qualified by a sense of social responsibility, liberals are united I their desire to create a society in which each person is capable of developing and flourishing to the fullness of their potential. Both modern and classical liberalists regarded this ideology to be one very much characterised by a willingness to accept, and even sometimes celebrate moral, cultural and political diversity. Such a versatile acceptance of people made liberals strongly related to the theme of toleration. Voltaire memorably portrays this view is his declaration that ‘I detest what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it’. Although the case of toleration was first adopted by the likes of John Locke who defended religious freedom, the concept progressed so that toleration should be extended to all matters regarded as ‘private’ on the grounds that, like religion, they concern moral questions that should be left to the individual. J. S. Mill then developed a wider justification for toleration that both modern and classical liberalists adopted; toleration was just as important to society as to the individual. So toleration was not simply a guarantee for personal autonomy, but ensured the dynamism and health of society. All liberalists believed toleration brought about debate, argument and contest, which was inevitably bring about social progress. However, I consider the tensions and differences between classical and modern liberalists to be far more apparent when scrutinising this ideology. Although liberals agree about the value of liberty, their views on what it means to be ‘free’ vary significantly. It was Isaiah Berlin who first created the concepts of negative and positive freedom that helped to differentiate between the two liberals’ views of freedom. The concept of negative freedom was adopted by classical liberals, who believed that freedom was defined as being left alone and free from interference. Classical liberals believed this theory to mean that individuals should be free from external restrictions or constraints. Modern liberals, on the other hand, believed in positive freedom. This, modernist’s perceived to means that all individuals have the ability to be their own master, and thus reach full autonomy. Unlike classical liberals, who had little faith in humankind, Modernists conveyed humans in a much more positive light: people are rational beings that are capable, and therefore should be able, to flourish and reach their full potential. Liberals also tended to split on the topic of the role of the state, and therefore, the limits to the interference of the state. Classical liberals believed that the existence of a state was evil, in that it imposed collective will on society; thereby limiting the freedom and responsibility of individuals. Thus, a state’s role should be minimal and should only be used as a system for maintaining laws that protect individual rights and freedoms, as well as acting a protection service from attack by other nations. Some, like the Lord John Acton, perceived any power or dominance given to the state to be disastrous, stating that â€Å"power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. † Thus the state’s role should be minimal, reducing its power so that it was enough to protect individuals, but not enough to become superior to the people. However, Modern liberals on the other hand allowed and even encouraged state intervention, as they believed, similarly to T H Green, that this would ensure that each individual would be able to develop and reach their full potential and autonomy. Unlike classists, who believed in no such support for people, and that they should be left alone to their own devices, modern liberals saw the state as an essential tool to create and maintain a system of ‘equality of opportunity’. This meant that the state should act as a support, helping those in need, to ensure that all people are, as it were, ‘on a level playing field’. Although the state could not determine the same outcomes for everyone, modern liberals believed it to be the states job to make sure everyone had the same opportunities in life to flourish and achieve self- realisation. Another feature that clarifies the differences between liberalism is the approach towards society and welfare. Classical liberalisms believed fundamentally that individuals make what they want, with what they can, of their own lives. Those with the ability and a willingness to work will prosper, while the incompetent or the lazy will not. Such ideas of individual responsibility was widely adopted by those with a ‘laissez-faire’ approach, such as Richard Cobden, the UK economist, who, although advocating an improvement of working conditions, argued that it should come about through their ‘own efforts and self-reliance, rather than from law†¦look not to parliament, look only to yourselves’. However, Herbert Spencer appears to be the boldest expression of a classical liberalists approach. He developed further Charles Darwin’s concept of evolution and came up with the principle, of ‘survival of the fittest’. Here, Spencer was implying that people who adapt themselves best to survive in current conditions and climates will rise to the top, while those rigid in tradition that refuse to adapt will sink to the bottom. Inequalities of wealth, social position and political power are therefore natural and inevitable- thus the government should make no attempt to interfere with them. Thus, the welfare should only provide a ‘safety-net’ to help the most desperate in society. However, modern liberalists have adopted a rather conflicting interpretation of the role of society and welfare. Modernists saw it as a vital role of the state to provide support for citizens’ by overcoming poverty, disease and ignorance. Thus, the 20th century saw a dramatic rise in the appearance of a ‘welfare state’, as many recognised that adopting such a principle would also improve the running of the nation; providing help to citizens would inevitably increase the health of people, which would then prove as a huge advantage in times of war. However, the primary aim of adopting such a principle was not to benefit the nation, but to ensure that equality of opportunity was provided to every citizen. They believed that if particular individuals or groups were disadvantaged by their social circumstances, then the state has a social responsibility to reduce or remove these disadvantages to create more equal chances. William Beveridge created a report to aid the welfare state, which set out to attack the ‘five giants’- want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. In other words, it protected the citizens’ from ‘cradle to the grave’. Therefore, unlike Classical liberalists, modernists believed in a much wider welfare support scheme that should not just be limited to citizens’ with the most desperate situations. Although a great array of similarities and differences shape both variations of Liberalism, having scrutinised this ideology in depth, I perceive the variations of argument, beliefs and desires adopted between Modern and Classical liberalism to be far greater than any similarities that may bind them together. Some may argue that since both adaptations of liberalism are built on the same foundations, such as their shared desire for some kind of state, the superiority of the individual and the approach of toleration, this is enough to fuse together and prove that Modern and Classical liberalists are not so different. However, the differences between both takes of Liberalism clearly dominates; such fundamental details of an ideology, taking for example the opposite beliefs of the role of the state, are clearly to vital to ignore and be overshadowed by the similar principles of Liberalism. Jessica Atkins