Wednesday, February 23, 2011


Aside from the idea of governmental oppression and public burning I do not see many similarities between these two events. With the Monk Burning he had clear political motive, and had the support of an entire religion backing him. He was clearly going for a cause and not just acting irrationally, not to mention against human instinct, like the fruit vendor. The vendor had been insulted and his pride was hurt; In my mind when I am angry I don't think regularly, I do foolish things. Also being a monk he probably was of trying to help than just cause trouble. In adition the monk's burning simply lead to changes in public policy while the vendors established new people in power in his country.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Option 1

1. Bismarkian system of Alliances
The Bismarkian system of alliances is the system started by German chancellor Bismark. It is a system where where Germany tried to seem like the good guys while neutralizing any enemy by either forming an alliance with them, or becoming to imposing oof a force to even think about attacking them.
For more information click here.

2. If a man says half himself in the light, adroit
Way a tune shakes into equilibrium,
Or approximates to a note that never comes:

Says half himself in the way two pencil-lines
Flow to each other and softly separate,
In the resolute way plane lifts and leaps from plane:

Who knows what intimacies our eyes may shout,
What evident secrets daily foreheads flaunt,
What panes of glass conceal our beating hearts?
by: A.S.J Tessimond

For another copy of the poem click here.

3. There are many ways this ties to the theme of the Bismarkian system which often led to betrayal,
such as, when it says “Way a tune shakes into equilibrium, or approximates to a note that never comes.”  It is clearly referring to situations when you expect someone to do some thing and they don’t. This applies to the system because many times when there were these alliances people wouldn’t follow through with what their treaties said they would, such as how, Russia made a treaty with Germany saying they wouldn’t attack them. Germany violated the treaty by attacking Russia later in the war. Another supporting line is “Who knows what intimacies our eyes may shout,” this talks about how people always appear one way but often act another way. This applies in many ways, like when France was attacked they had no idea what was coming and how hard Germany would hit them. The last quote I would like to talk about is “What panes of glass conceal our beating hearts?” This applies to Germany because when it asks this question I think of Germany trying to act the “good guy” regardless of its bad intentions.


1. Determine what Kipling means by "the White Man's Burden."

In this poem the white man’s burden means the job of the white people to spread their education and, in their opinion, superior culture. “The silent sullen peoples Shall weigh your God and you.” Here it is making reference to the people they took over; They use silent because they do not speak their language and “ Shall weigh your god and you” because many of these take overs were in the name of their religion and its talking about the natives judging your religion.

2. Does Kipling justify imperialism? How so?

He is justifying imperialism and you can tell because of the following information. “Take up the White Man's burden- Ye dare not stoop to less- Nor call too loud on Freedom To cloke your weariness.” In this quote from the poem it is saying that someone has to be controlling these “so called” uneducated people and savages. It is saying that their shouts of wanting freedom really isn’t what they want because they are not able to live as easily if they don’t have European influence. “The blame of those ye better The hate of those ye guard” In this quote it clearly says that the nations they took over ridicule them and hate them even though, in their opinion, They are guarding their people and helping them out ; when in reality they are oppressing and hurting their people.

3. Why might such a justification might be so appealing?

It may be appealing for many reasons such as: They arent really doing anything bad and they are helping this country. They needed this justification because if they did not there would be a chance that they would have to stop the take overs for public appeal but if they stopped there growth would slow and they would be at both economical, social, and military risk.