History of Cold War and War on Terror
The ‘War on Terror’ appears to originate from the Cold War era. Cold War and ‘War on Terror’ are similar in different ways, since the American protagonists created ‘War on Terror’ as the core element of national politics, and enforce their manias on other countries.
The strategies used in Cold War made a strong attempt to prevent war with Soviet Union, while the current strategies of ‘War on Terror’ impose the use of force to stop alliances or nations from posing threats to Americans, their allies, and associates. The strategies used in Cold War intended to reform, not to destroy other countries. The current strategies are to obliterate terrorism wherever they are, and these are extensive objectives.
The latest U.S. air strikes on Somalia and Afghanistan, which killed thousands of people, resemble the tactics that were used in the Cold War (Fleck and Kilby 189). The American authority provided the troops with a green light to resume tactics used in the Cold War, like bombing, as an essential part in American’s international war on terrorism.
In the Cold War, United States intelligence fought to enter the Kremlin that was managing the Soviet Union with an iron hand. On the other hand, the current intelligence experts stated that terrorist alliances, such as Al-Qaeda and Al-Shabaab, offer an even more complex challenge. Therefore the United States army and intelligence representatives intend to revive another Cold War strategy called deterrence, which allows the use of the internet to spread mistrust, dissent, and confusion.
Unlike Cold War, the number of people killed from attacks of 9/11 was less than 3,000, and the sum number of people who died in Cold War between 1960 and 2005 is approximated to be less than 4,000 (Fleck and Kilby 201).
Most people consider President Reagan as the most effective chief executive among all presidents, which led the United States of America between 1945 to date. His government was successful in reviving the economy of America and enforcing federal laws. Despite opposition from his conservative supporters, he continued to appoint Sandra Day O’Connor to the Supreme Court and contributed to ending the Soviet Union, even when most political experts’ opinion considered that the USSR was more powerful than the U.S.
The main task of chief executive is to implement federal laws, and Reagan dismissed about 11,360 federal air traffic controllers because of their participation in an unlawful strike (Reeves 251). He decided to take this action since they were jeopardizing public safety. He showed admiring qualities at his position as chief executive, even though not all Americans agreed to the dismissal of the air traffic controllers. Reagan appointed Supreme Court judges and provided a budget that brought the growth of the economy after extended economic instability.
President Reagan created a successful image of strong-mindedness angered by sporadic self-deprecation, and he impressed most of his people after his strong-minded loyalty to the purposes of reduced taxes. He also raised defense expenditures along with reduced domestic programs.
Regardless of criticisms from political opponents that claimed that he was lazy and inexperienced on several issues, he maintained a normally high ranking in the public opinion samples. Maintaining is the principle of the ‘supply-side economics’ he had hold since 1978, President Reagan convinced Congress to approve it in 1981, three-year cut in rates of taxes, although deficits were almost above $120 billion annually (Reeves 251).
Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X
During the Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King Jr. worked as an activist and followed his ideology on equality for both African-Americans and white Americans. Martin Luther King wished for integration in American society and worked together with several Civil Rights alliances such as SCLC and CORE (Howard-Pitney 57).
He served as a liberal system reformer in his public life who decided to advocate for major changes. While Malcolm X lived most of his public life as a liberal system detractor who later announced that he was working within the system of change.
Malcolm X served as Islamic Civil Rights activist, whose legacy was created after becoming famous and successful advocate during his participation in the Nation of Islam. Malcolm X and Americans called for self-protection and the total political and economic self-rule of African-Americans.
His intentions and advocacy were in contradiction to King’s idea of inter-dependence. However, in mid-1964, he left the Nation of Islam and paid a visit to Mecca where it permitted him to recognize Muslims of various races working together. He considered that Islam should be used as a means where racial issues could be solved.
Malcolm X was mostly seen to be disapproving harshly on the strategy of nonviolent to attain civil rights reforms supported by King. The two activists applied their sacred backgrounds, the mosque, and church, to pass on their ideas. However, Malcolm X did not desire to integrate with alleged ‘white devils,’ and he considered that African-Americans should arm themselves (Howard-Pitney 57).
Martin Luther King advocated non-violent as an effective means to overthrow the issues of segregation and inequality among the Americans that was caused by discrimination. While Malcolm X, a participant of Nation of Islam of Elijah Muhammad, supported equipped self-defense and dismissal of white associates. He stated that all black Americans must use ‘Any Means Necessary’ to meet their objectives of equality.
Liberalism and Conservatism
A liberal person is free and has equal rights and personal rights, and emphasizes on personal rights and believed as appealing open-minded. A liberal Americans are self-governing, are very positive, and do not demand management on others. Liberals support the idea of public sectors and hold of government, and possess a democratic opinion towards political matters.
Liberals consider that the people are collective responsibility of the American Government. Conservative people base their ideology on what they believe as logic, and are naturally individually, while liberal societies base their ideology on ideals, emotion, and are naturally collective (Roark et al. 63).
Societies that have conservative beliefs and values are societies which are traditional and do not vote for much change in the sense that they have used for a longer time. Conservative societies treasure their practices, actions, and opinions, and consider personal responsibility as appropriate.
They support more of private sectors and least government intrusion. Conservatives favor the communism and socialism perspective of political governance and believe that Americans are responsible for themselves and the achievements of their lives lie in their ideas. Unlike liberals, conservatives are not partial to big, rapid, and sudden reforms and are believed to be of classical opinions (Roark et al. 63).
The liberal idea can be considered to be effective in running contemporary liberals. Liberal ideology supports the ideas and responsibility of the government in domestic and global issues since they believe that competitions within the limbs of government will reduce the impact of what James Madison called ‘factions’ (Roark et al. 63).
Anticipating the government to ‘do the right thing’ due to its institutional limitations, liberals are very contented, providing it a bigger responsibility in the lives of Americans. Taxes are very important in managing the lives of Americans, and these are what liberals are advocating for the betterment of the country.
Fleck, Robert and Christopher Kilby. “Changing aid regimes? U.S. foreign aid from the Cold War to the War on Terror.” Journal of Development Economics 92.2 (2010): 185-197. Print.
Howard-Pitney, David. Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and the Civil Rights Struggle of the 1950s and 1960s: A Brief History with Documents. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004. Print.
Reeves, Richard. President Reagan: The Triumph of Imagination. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 2005. Print.
Roark, James, et al. The American Promise: A Compact History. 4th ed. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2009. Print.
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!