Recent orders
EI 330 Academic Integrated Skills I
EI 330 Academic Integrated Skills I
Meinhardt, Gretchen
Park University
Nov 22, 2013
Muhammad Ali Boxing
Pre-war struggles and the occurrences of the Second World War formed the basis for the massive Civil Rights movement. The movement began in the early 1950s and persisted for about three decades. The movement brought about numerous struggles, especially for the African Americans. Muhammad Ali, who never dealt with much of the issues that faced majority of the lower class African Americans, felt obliged to represent and defend his people using his personality status as an icon in sports. He used his position as an approach for people to listen and take heed of the pleas put forward by his people.
Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr had begun fighting at the tender age of 12. He won a gold medal in the 1960 Olympic Games, in the 175-pound division, for the first time. After his victory, Clay began fighting in professional leagues. He won his first heavyweight fight against Hunsaker in 1960. In 1964, Clay announced that he had converted into Islam and changed his name to Muhammad Ali (Ali, and Karl 76). Muhammad had a strong relationship with his people and society that he sacrificed much for the African American community. In one instance on April 28, 1967, he was drafted into the U.S. Army during the period of the Vietnam War. He turned down the offer because he believed that war was immoral. Ali believed that, for the Blacks to serve in war, it was a ‘perversion of justice’ since the blacks never enjoyed equality back home. In 1966, Ali famously said that he had no quarrel with the Vietnamese, as they never called him a “nigger” (Ali and Hana 144).
His success in sports became a symbol of hope that spurred black Americans to proceed with their fight for racial equality. It is believed that Ali converted to Islam because of his amity with a Muslim who was also a Civil Rights activist during the same period. The Nation of Islam and Muslims urged the African American to cease cooperating with the “Mass Civil Rights Movement” (Hampton, Fayer, and Flynn 108). He also urged the blacks not to unite with their American oppressors. These radical views of Elijah Muhammad and Malcolm warranted Islam a militant and racist reputation. The society believed that there was a need to maintain segregation due to the turbulence and violence caused by assimilation. Eventually, Malcolm separated from the nation of Islam when he became more liberal in his ideas than in the earlier times. Malcolm sided with the ‘Mass Civil Rights’ that was headed by Dr. Martin Luther King.
Ten years after the assassination of Malcolm, Muhammad Ali abandoned the nation of Islam and converted to a traditional structure of Islam known as Sunni. The tendency of Ali to speak out his mind made him a contentious figure professionally and politically. In 1965, Muhammad initiated a debate with his fellow contender, Floyd Patterson. The debate focused on the conflicting beliefs that Ali and Patterson had on the struggle for civil rights (Hampton 98)
Muhammad was convicted for refusing to be inducted into the U.S. Army, and was sentenced to five years in prison and released four years later. His title was stripped and he was banned from fighting for a period of three-and-a-half years. As time proceeded, Muhammad’s impact was increasing among the Blacks, opponents of the Vietnam War, and people who had grievances against the situation in the country. Many activists could not understand how a sports figure managed to have so much political persuasion on many citizens.
After his comeback into his sport, Ali began reading the Quran with more focus on Orthodox Islam. In 1984, he publicly spoke out about Louis Farrakhan and his separatist principle of the nation of Islam. Ali said that Farrakhan did not teach everything that the Black Americans believed. Ali’s celebrity boosted his ego, promoting his outspoken nature rather than performing the traditionally accepted status associated with the second-class that the whites expected of the black Americans. Muhammad effectively used his persona as a successful and wealthy sports person to create a link between his payment of state taxes and his critics on the US government n how the government was disbursing the funds (Remnick 65).
A record of Ali’s speeches and press conferences reveal the various ways that Ali succeeded in channeling his celebrity using it as a powerful social force in the campaign for social justice that lacks violence.
I chose Ali because by appreciating his rhetoric, I find myself in a better position to understand leaders that led civil rights in the American History than most of the ignorant people in the society. These leaders were pitted sometimes as if they were antagonists in the drama that unfolded in the chaotic 1960s. Most of the people in the society failed to acknowledge the reality that the civil right leaders worked together to attain social justice by fighting racist attitudes, conduct of wars, and racist practices in America.
As a sports person, Ali encourages other sportsmen not to be left out of the society, as they could be very influential in instilling the desired ideals and promote co-existence of persons regardless of their ethnicity, color, and social class. In summary, Muhammad used everything at his disposal, mainly his fame gained from suffering and violence he encountered while boxing, to fight a completely different type of fight involving racism and militarism.
Works Cited
Ali, Muhammad, and Karl Evanzz. I am the greatest: the best quotations from Muhammad Ali. Kansas City, Mo.: Andrews McMeel, 2002. Print.
Ali, Muhammad, and Hana Ali. The soul of a butterfly: reflections on life’s journey. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004. Print.
Hampton, Henry, Fayer Steve, and Flynn Sarah. Voices of freedom: an oral history of the civil rights movement from the 1950s through the 1980s. New York: Bantam Books, 1990. Print.
Hampton, Henry. Voices of freedom: an oral history of the civil rights movement from the 1950s through the 1980s. Uncorrected proof ed. New York: Bantam Books, 1990. Print.
Remnick, David. King of the world: Muhammad Ali and the rise of an American hero. New York: Random House, 1998. Print.
Egyptian and Sumerian Civilization
Egyptian and Sumerian Civilization
Egyptians and Sumerians are two groups that have undergone civilization which many historians to date credit for their current development. Coincidentally, both groups happen to have settled in areas along rivers/water bodies. Sumerians and Egyptians settled along Tigris and Euphrates rivers and River Nile respectively (Greenblatt, Lemmo, and Glencoe, 2001). As history would have it, when the countries were undergoing tremendous changes, they were presumed to have taken up similar responsibilities and lifestyles which justify their having a lot in common. Though they indulged in some similar activities, they equally varied in some ways. In a period where Egypt and Sumer wanted to adjust their living for a better future, a lot was observed in common and equally much was realized to be different among them.
In their ordinary day to day lives, during the period when they were becoming civil, both the Sumerians and Egyptians picked religion and belief in supremacy and supernatural beings. The most significant belief at the time though was polytheism. These features basically characterized their communal lives. However, there were evident differences in these areas as well. While the Sumerians limited their gods and goddesses to four, which was a relatively small number, it was evident that the Egyptians had more gods which was about two thousand gods (Differencenet, 2010). Besides, being the king, Pharaoh was considered a god accrued to the same benefits as the other gods. The realization of this concept of their lives was as a result of the civilization and increased exposure which changed so much to more advanced states. Regard of Pharaohs as living god also contradicted with the Sumerians who maintained the four they adopted.
During the civilization, Sumerians who as mentioned above were ruled by priests began to experience a reduction of their influence. It is worth noting that besides the rule of the priests, warriors were also significant in the chain of command as an authoritative body (Watkins, and Alley, 2001). This period is also characterized by the emergence of kingship as the new ruling authority for the Sumerians. Similarly, the leadership of Egypt during the civilization was quite adjusted as compared to the period before. It is clear that Pharaohs were the commanders and a very powerful authority in Egypt a factor which diminished with a decline in the Pharaoh’s power. Besides the evident change in leadership, we realize that during this period, the rulers differed in sorting their priority as far as safety of their people was concerned, thus partly influenced the inevitable change (Differencenet, 2010). History has been less defensive on the protection of the Sumer people during the civilization. Though in both cases the popular leadership declined, it is clear that the Egyptian new leadership protected its people as opposed to that of Sumer. Basically, the transition in leadership led to a difference as a result of people becoming more exposed and more critical of ineffective leadership.
In terms of finances, the situation of the two countries before the experienced development was quite at par. As mentioned above, agriculture which included nomads was part of the ways of generating funds for their countries (McNeil, 1986). For instance, benefiting from the water bodies surrounding them was manageable and in this case, assisted towards getting the desired results. However, with the civilization especially at the peak came the need for technological advancements. While Egypt was able to take its operations to the next level, it became quite challenging for Sumer to do the same considering the unfavorable conditions along the Tigris and Euphrates. Significant contrasts were observed from that point onwards since it was challenging for Sumer to catch up with the competitive environment. Thus, they leaned much more towards trading rather than agriculture, (Fagan, 1996).
Conclusion
Though the two groups underwent the same kind of transition, it is evident that some elements of the changes differed. However, it is quite ironical that the Sumerians to date are less popular compared to the Egyptians given the similarity behind their histories. Analysts argue that the civilization period was more beneficial when potential is realized. From a different perspective, chances are that the two groups had similar opportunities which were not fully exploited and due to poor governance or weakened system, opportunities surpassed Sumer which today would have been on the same level as Egypt.
References:
Differencenet. (2010). Difference between Sumerians and Egyptians. Retrieved from http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-sumerians-and-egyptians/
Fagan, B. M. (1996). World prehistory: A brief introduction. New York: HarperCollins.
Greenblatt, M., Lemmo, P. S., & Glencoe/McGraw-Hill. (2001). Human heritage: A world history. New York: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.
McNeill, W. H. (1986). History of Western civilization: A handbook. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Watkins, T., & Alley, T. (2001). Sumer. Retrieved from www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/sumer.htm
Egypt In The 20th Century
Egypt In The 20th Century
The history of Egypt began in the 20th century with its finance under control of the Britain and France. During this period, there were two major events that contributed to various changes in Egypt. For example, the 1919 and 1952 Revolution awards made Egypt a semi-independent state and full sovereignty which declared Egypt a Republic country. During the Cold War, Egypt was famous in facing intense political and economical pressure from Eastern and Western blocs which forced them to fight against Israel and to sign a peace treaty in the 1979. The Egyptian chronology events in the 20th Century was mainly based on a dynasties or pharaohs list which were written by the priests called Maneton at the end of the Egyptian period Ptolemaic dynasties. The dates and names offered there is a frame on which the Egyptian chronology was built.
Chronology of Major Events by Moustafa Ahmed
During the 20th Century, different chronology Events by Moustafa Ahmed took place. For example in July 23, 1952, the Egyptian Revolution of the 1952 overturned the monarchy of King Farouk which led to a temporary installation of a new government under Naguib, who was the short-lived president of the revolutionary council. Conversely, in the same year, there were reforms of education such as the installation of a free and compulsory public education for children aged 6 to 12 with co-education at the primary level. In addition, the government as well managed to prioritize the goals of eradicating illiteracy that proved difficult because of lack of facilities in the rural areas (Geoffrey pg.127).
In 1954, there was the rise of Nasser to power. Nasser was known for many years to be very active in getting the British to evacuate the Suez Canal, as well as, suppressing many of the militarist groups such as, the Muslim Brotherhood and establishing a Marxist democratic system in Egypt. In 1955, a reform of implementing family planning clinics were established and in March the same year, the first family planning clinic was opened which helped the state of Egypt to control the population growth within the area (Moustafa, pg.132).
In 1956, there was the introduction of Arab Socialism in Egypt. Arab socialism in Egypt greatly led to the sweeping of various social reforms such as suffrage of women and rights of women to start running for political office. It is reported that in this period, there were two decades period of migration which took place into the urban areas such as Cairo, the Alexandria, Suez and Port Said. These areas were famous to have greater economic and educational opportunities. Despite the fact that there was the abolition of separate Shari’ah courts in this period, there was still personal status law which applied hence made the Ulama independence to decrease further (Geoffrey pg.127).
Between the 1960s-70, the period was known to be a period of feminism in Egypt. The first wave feminism in Egypt was seen to be comparable to the second wave feminism in the United States of America given that they were associated, but not completely with pressures of the late colonialism and westernization efforts in Egypt where many contemporary and postcolonial leaders were ever critical. In this period, Nawal el Saadawi and Andrée Chedid were the most known two people leaders who led in feminists in Egypt, in spite of their influence, the Saadawiís who is said to be still alive continues today. Moustafa Ahmed on the other hand strongly criticized Saadawiís totalizing generalizations in relation to patriarchy, Islam and Egyptian culture. In this era, many changes took place and in 1962, there was the drafting of the National Charter. The drafting of the National Charter mainly claimed for egalitarianism for both men and women; the drafting was then approved formally in 1962 (Moustafa, pg.132).
In the 1967, the Egyptian-Israel war (the Yemen war) broke out leading to the defeat of the Egyptians by the Israel. The war increased the influence of Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic fundamentalism. In his final years, Nasser witnessed the decline of socialist policies and weakening of socialist democratic state, and in the1969, he passed away giving Anwar Sadat an opportunity to serve as the president of Egypt.
Between the 1970s-1980s, there was decline of significant and influence of feminism proper in the Egypt. The veiling only began to increase in 1980s during the decline of Nasserism and egalitarian, socialist reform; however, most scholars argued that the “veiling” was just a protest to westernization and capitalist imperialism. In addition, the issue of hijab was contested to be one among feminists; hijab was popular for postcolonial feminists which resisted the western feminist interpretation of the veil. However, in 1974, the United States and Egypt managed to resume their diplomatic relations, and by September 1975, through the United States mediating efforts, the Egypt and Israel managed to reach several agreements concerning the disengagement of their forces.
In March 1976, friendship treaty with the USSR that was signed in 1971was abrogated by Sadat, and under Sadat’s power, Egypt started experiencing an increase of two conflicting ideologies such as increasing westernization and commercialization. On the one hand, Sadat encouraged the visibility of fundamentalist Islamist groups, who were critical of the socialist government of Nasser; this increased the visibility which eventually led to attacks on Sadat as well (Geoffrey pg.127).
In 1977, Sadat visited Jerusalem where he began process of keeping peace and in January 1980, the Egypt and Israel were able to re-establish the diplomatic relations; however, relations have been strained as most Egyptians are sympathetic to the Palestinians. In 1982, the peace treaty with the Israel was honored by the Sadat’s successor, Hosni Mubarak: however, lack of progress on Palestine issue was criticized (Moustafa, pg.132).
Works Cited
HYPERLINK “http://www.bibme.org/” o “Edit this item”Ahmed, Moustafa. Egypt in the 20th century: chronology of major events. London: MegaZette Press, 2003. Print.
HYPERLINK “http://www.bibme.org/” o “Edit this item”Blainey, Geoffrey. A short history of the 20th century. London: I.R. Dee, 2006. Print.