Compare And Contrast Washington And Thomas Tocqueville

Both Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson like many of the founding fathers of America share a ideology concerning independence and freedom in general. Although the two were notably talented writers, the difference in their arguments was their respective deliveries, writing styles, and their timing. Personally, I agree more with the way Thomas Paine chose to present his point of view. Common sense, for example, was a significant eye-opener for many Americans. One of the only reasons it made such huge impact was because it was written in a style that was easy to understand for the average American.

Alex de Tocqueville explored aspects of the perplexing American Union Federal system in “From Democracy in America” whilst searching for a successful government style that would eradicate the failing and outdated monarchy of France. de Tocqueville first opens his excerpt by examining the lack of separation of power between head of state and congress, stating how both entities withheld the ability to “use the militias in cases of insurrection or invasion” (From Democracy in America) which consequently caused chaos during the War of 1812. This haphazard policy caused de Tocqueville to question the effectiveness of the federal system because the “absurd and destructive doctrines received not only the sanction of the Governors and the legislature,

General George Washington and Captain John Paul Jones are unique in many ways but also different to. In these texts there are lots of comparisons. In these texts they are both leaders of a army and are ready for war. That is a similarity but there are also differences in these men. General George Washington is getting ready to fight unlike George Captain John Paul Jones is fighting in the story.

General George Washington and Captain John Paul Jones have many similarities but they also have their differences that make them unique. In the first paragraph it talks about General Washington and what characteristics he has that are different than Captain Jones's. In the second paragraph it talks about Captain Jones and what characteristics he has that are different from General Washington's. In the final paragraph it talks about what both Captain John Paul Jones and General George Washington have in common. General Washington has lots of great characteristics that make him unique and different than captain Jones.

The administration of George Washington was the primarily source to bring Thomas Jefferson (Secretary of the State) and Alexander Hamilton (Secretary of Treasury) together. At that time, the government had to address the debts issues from the war. Hamilton and Jefferson began to have different points of views. The two American historical leaders had different philosophies and they were usually enemies in line of their ideas.

Let’s start by saying both John Adams and George Washington did an outstanding job at pulling things together during the time of the American revolution. George Washington was the first president of our country John Adams was the sixth president both men heavily supported Federalists. Both Washington and Adam sacrificed their lives for this country. But John Adam and George Washington did have Their differences which I do think made them quite competitive among one another. Washington was a Virginian a southerner and slave owner.

The end of the Cold War marked the reign of the US as a sole superpower in international relations(IR). Along side other countries in IR, Italy and Germany both wanted to build an even stronger diplomatic relationship with the US than they already had. The Marshall Plan was a major factor behind this, but there were other significant reasons for it too. For Italy, this was because they politically did not want to remain as an ‘an uninfluential player in world affairs’ (Partridge, 1998, p172). To prevent this, they needed to extend their influence internationally and they knew that if they ensured a stable relation with the US after its Cold War victory, it would secure this for them.

In Harry Ammon’s book, The Genet Mission, the author describes how the impact of Edmond Genet, who served as ambassador to the United States of the newly formed French Republic, affected the United States who was divided on the issue of neutrality in the Wars of the French Revolution. Genet attempted to persuade the United States into fostering relations with the new French nation through the creation of a French influence in the states while he rallied American support to enter into the wars that were plaguing Europe. However, the author’s message to the audience shows how vital Genet was, not just in terms of foreign affairs of the United States, but also in its domestic policies. Before starting, it is important to take an in-depth examination of Ammon’s thesis. Ammon rationalizes that the affairs of the ambassador were significant in the development of the political parties of the country.

Post civil war and reconstruction era was supposed to be a time to strengthen the country and finally create a home for all genders, races, religions, etc. However, the treatment of newly emancipated slaves did not change. Strict codes and laws were implemented to keep them enslaved. Specifically, Jim Crow Laws and Black Codes made it harder for “free” African American people to live a life that America once promised. These harsh environments led to the philosophies of Washington and DuBois.

Both Phillis Wheatley's poem "To His Excellency, General Washington" and Philip Freneau's poem "A Political Litany" address the struggle for independence in America during the Revolutionary War, but they do so in different ways. In "To His Excellency, General Washington," Wheatley addresses George Washington directly and praises him as a hero and a leader in the fight for American independence. She describes the "tumultuous war" and "dire events" that have taken place, and she attributes the success of the American cause to Washington's leadership and the "Great Jehovah's aid." She also references the "shrieks of groaning ghosts" and the "dreadful storm" of war, acknowledging the sacrifices and hardships of the American people in the struggle

George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were both presidents that had a huge impact on the structure of our beautiful country. As they built and thought of knew theories and ideas the country expanded to what is now called the United States of America. With very different times and struggles though both presidencies it was always clear that as leaders of the United States they were going to finish anything they started or fought for to keep the country intact. Even though both these presidents were considered successful they were both motivated and raised in totally different ways. Washington was raised in a wealthy lifestyle as he grew up.

When comparing Sam Adams, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams, we can see that there are some similarities and differences between the men. Perhaps the most notable relation this group has, is that they were all formal presidents and had some type of power or ownership. The qualities of all four men are often seen as opposed to each other. One similarity for example, with George Washington and Thomas Jefferson was that they were prosperous Virginian plantation owners and held slaves. Jefferson and Adams were both well educated people and knew about the law.

Thomas Jefferson during the 1790’s-1800’s while working with federalists Alexander Hamilton, his viewpoints were different. During the 1790’s Jefferson was known to be in the democratic-republican party where he progresses an ideal structure of equivalencies between money and weight standards with the American/Spanish currency. Jefferson took charge of the republicans after a conflict created two parties, republican-democratic and the federalist, who empathized with the revolutionary cause in France. While attacking the federalist policies, Jefferson opposed a strong centralized government and granted the rights of states. While Jefferson was in presidency, he cut down on the Army and Navy expenditures, cut the U.S. budget, eliminated the tax

Another benefit of Isolationism is it allows the US to focus on domestic policy and repairing turmoil from WW1. However, one consequence of the US not getting involved is they could’ve prevented the conflicts building up in Europe that led to World War 2. With isolationism, the US can avoid the costs of war. For example, costs in World War 1 for guns, ammunition, planes, and ships in just the US was 19 billion dollars(Vanderlip). In Vanderlip’s speech One Hundred Million Soldiers he talks about how much each citizen will have to sacrifice to contribute to the war effort.

The United States is one of the most militarily built up countries in the world. If anyone was to try to threaten the United States of America, they would get stomped by our military. The foreign policies of the North American continent are vastly differentiated compared to the past as they are today. I wanted to choose internationalism, because it is a way of building bonds with other countries and as a world leader, demonstrates a strong ability to make a just peace among everyone by getting their problems fixed faster. In the search for peace, the world has realized that the abilities to maintain a very great peace is to just be a starting place.