<em>Ramona </em>by Helen Hunt Jackson
This book, published in 1884, was a description and celebration of Spanish and Mexican culture in California. However, these depictions were largely made-up and romanticized. Despite this, it created a tourist boom for the state, causing Americans to become interested and excited about California.
True, the revolutions of the 1848 springtime of people succeeded.
Thomas Hobbes believed that people were inherently suspicious of one another and in competition with one another. This led him to propose that government should have supreme authority over people in order to maintain security and a stable society.
John Locke argued that people were born as blank slates, open to learning all things by experience. Ultimately this meant Locke viewed human beings in a mostly positive way, and so his approach to government was to keep the people empowered to establish and regulate their own governments for the sake of building good societies.
Further explanation:
Both English philosophers believed there is a "social contract" -- that governments are formed by the will of the people. But their theories on why people want to live under governments were very different.
Thomas Hobbes published his political theory in <em>Leviathan</em> in 1651, following the chaos and destruction of the English Civil War. He saw human beings as naturally suspicious of one another, in competition with each other, and evil toward one another as a result. Forming a government meant giving up personal liberty, but gaining security against what would otherwise be a situation of every person at war with every other person.
John Locke published his <em>Two Treatises on Civil Government</em> in 1690, following the mostly peaceful transition of government power that was the Glorious Revolution in England. Locke believed people are born as blank slates--with no preexisting knowledge or moral leanings. Experience then guides them to the knowledge and the best form of life, and they choose to form governments to make life and society better.
In teaching the difference between Hobbes and Locke, I've often put it this way. If society were playground basketball, Hobbes believed you must have a referee who sets and enforces rules, or else the players will eventually get into heated arguments and bloody fights with one another, because people get nasty in competition that way. Locke believed you could have an enjoyable game of playground basketball without a referee, but a referee makes the game better because then any disputes that come up between players have a fair way of being resolved. Of course, Hobbes and Locke never actually wrote about basketball -- a game not invented until 1891 in America by James Naismith. But it's just an illustration I've used to try to show the difference of ideas between Hobbes and Locke. :-)
The answer was False.
It was not the loss of slaves but the loss of their source of economy
and riches when the Union under the command of General William T. Sherman
marched into the South and destroyed every factory, building and farm
effectively crippling the South’s capability to produce weapons and supplies
for its troops.
Because LBJ, under the Tolkien Resolution, was given basically infinite power to protect U.S interests in Vietnam. Thus, President Johnson continued to "escalate", or build up American forces, weapons, and intervention in Vietnam. Now, somewhat opposite of this would be "Vietnamization" under Nixon, which was the gradual withdrawal of American troops but a continuation of supplies in order to aid South Vietnam from the Vietcong.
