Experiences of World War One in All Quiet on the Western...

Wars have always been events that I enjoy learning about, reading about and just discovering what went on. So when this project rolled around I had no problem choosing the novel All Quiet on the Western Front, which was written by Erich Maria Remarque. Erich had been a German soldier towards the end of WWI and had, first hand experienced the pure terror that is war. I had heard of this book through my father who is also a major war enthusiast. Him and I have had numerous conversations about both World War I and II, as he was the one that originally suggested I read this book. I have to say that it was a tremendous suggestion in that this novel to me seems to be one of the finest pieces of anti-war literature ever penned. The way the novel is able to portray the mindset of a soldier was beautifully done and shows the complete deterioration that occurs over time. First to understand more about the novel and its author, Erich Maria Remarque, it would be helpful to learn about his life. Erich was born on June 22, 1898 (internet source 4) in the town of Osnabruck Germany. He was born into a poor family to his father, Peter Maria Kramer, and mother, Anna Marie Kramer (internet source 5). His father was a bookbinder while Erich was a kid (internet source 5). He also had 2 other siblings and his family as a whole moved at least 11 during his childhood. To say Erich had a turbulent childhood would be an understatement; he grew up in circumstances most people could not even beginShow MoreRelated The First World War (WWI) Essay854 Words   |  4 PagesHorne, All Quiet on the Western Front, written by Erich Maria Remarque, and the many letters written by soldiers give several different and similar views of World War 1. The letters written by the soldiers talk about his or her individual problems and how they miss and love his or her families. In The Price of Glory: Verdun 1916, Alistair Horne writes day to day stories about the Battle of Verdun and of soldiers discussing his or her feelings at that point. Erich Maria Remarque writes in All QuietRead More A Deconstruction of Erich Maria Remarques All Quiet on the Western Front1519 Words   |  7 PagesA Deconstruction of Erich Maria Remarques All Quiet on the Western Front The young soldiers depicted in Erich Maria Remarques text All Quiet on the Western Front represent a generation without precedent, constancy, or forethought. The men, answering their elders calls to become national heroes, have lost their innocence on the battlefield and remain forever altered in belief and spirit. Remarque contrasts the cold realities of war in the present to the tranquility of the past in order toRead MoreAnalysis Of All Quiet On The Western Front 1884 Words   |  8 PagesAPE, Per 5 10 January 2015 War in All Quiet on the Western Front World War one was a war of severe tribulation. resulting in over 50 million deaths, it was one of the deadliest conflicts in human history. Known as the â€Å"Western Front†, the border of Germany and France was the site to some of the bloodiest battles of the war. There are very few novels that truly exemplify the events that took place along this front. Erich Maria Remarque’s novel, All Quiet on the Western Front, Displays important themesRead MoreThe Horrors of War: Erich Maria Remarques All Quiet On the Western Front2024 Words   |  9 PagesWar, it is one of the most sickening, terrifying and downright gruesome events that have happened throughout history. One of the most devastating wars of all time would be that of the First World War. Trench Warfare became the main method of fighting and basically became a living hell for those who fought. The grime, dead bodies piling up, rats that thrived in the pits, disease, malnutrition, and just unbearable conditions, th e trenches basically became a hell on Earth. The novel All Quiet on theRead MoreFictional Novels and Historical Information in Novel All Quiet on the Western Front829 Words   |  3 Pagesnovel can serve as a useful source for historical information if it the right one. It just depends on the novel and the author who has written it. Also, it makes a difference if the author actually had experience with what they have written about. All Quit on the Western Front, for example, can be used to show the troubles of War World I. The author Erich Maria Remarque himself had been in the war. Nevertheless, there is one negative thing about using nonfiction. For example, a person would still haveRead MoreAll Quiet On The Western Front By Erich Maria Remarque1714 Words   |  7 PagesAll Quiet on the Western Front written by Erich Maria Remarque is a narrative describing World War I from a German soldier s perspective. The story is narrated by Paul Baà ¼mer and predominantly revolves aroun d the experiences of him and his comrades Kemmerich, Katczinsky, Kropp, Mà ¼ller, and Leer. The novel begins with Paul Baà ¼mer and his friends in a cheerful mood as extra rations are being allocated to them due to the missing soldiers. During this event, Baà ¼mer introduces and describes the variousRead MoreAll Quiet On The Western Front1313 Words   |  6 Pages Symbolism in All Quiet on the Western Front It’s no surprise that soldiers will more-than-likely never come home the same. Those who have not served do not often think of the torment and negative consequences that the soldiers who make it out of war face. Erich Remarque was someone who was able to take the torment that he faced after his experience in World War I and shed light on the brutality of war. Remarque was able to illustrate the psychological problemsRead MoreThe Guns Of August And All Quiet On The Western Front1633 Words   |  7 PagesFirst World War took the world by storm; no person could have imagined the horrors and detriments the â€Å"Great War† would cause. Over a span of four years, millions of soldiers and civilians died. Children lost their parents, and wives, their husbands. So unprecedented was this type of vicious warfare that the countries involved were unprepared for one of the worst wars in history. Two books, The Guns of August and All Quiet on the Western Front address and highlight major themes of World War I. TheRead MoreAll Quiet on the Western Front943 Words   |  4 Pages The book All Quiet on the Western Front, by Erich Maria Remarque, is about a group of 19 year old young men who are changed by the ways of war. There is paul: the main character; Tjaden: a tall, skinny locksmith, also the biggest eater; Albert Kropp: a lance-corporal and the clearest thinker; Muller: studious, intelligent, and likes school; Leer: has a preference for the girls from the prostitution houses and has a beard; Haie Westhus: a peat-digger, and big in size; Deterring: a peasant, he alwaysRead More Comparing Irony of War in Dulce et Decorum, Regeneration, and Quiet on the Western Front1165 Words   |  5 PagesIrony of War Exposed in Dulce et Decorum, Regeneration, and Quiet on the Western Front    Many of the young officers who fought in the Great War enlisted in the army with glowing enthusiasm, believing that war was played in fancy uniforms with shiny swords. They considered war as a noble task, an exuberant journey filled with honor and glory. Yet, after a short period on the front, they discovered that they had been disillusioned by the war: fighting earned them nothing but hopelessness, death

About Byzantine Architecture and the Rise of Christianity

Byzantine architecture is a style of building that flourished under the rule of Roman Emperor Justinian between A.D. 527 and 565. In addition to extensive use of interior mosaics, its defining characteristic is a heightened dome, the result of the latest sixth-century engineering techniques. Byzantine architecture dominated the eastern half of the Roman Empire during the reign of Justinian the Great, but the influences spanned centuries, from 330 until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 and on into todays church architecture. Much of what we call Byzantine architecture today is ecclesiastical, meaning church-related. Christianity began to flourish after the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313 when Roman Emperor Constantine (c. 285-337) announced his own Christianity, which legitimized the new religion; Christians would no longer be routinely persecuted. With religious freedom, Christians could worship openly and without threat, and the young religion spread rapidly. The need for places of worship expanded as did the need for new approaches to building design. Hagia Irene (also known as Haghia Eirene or Aya Ä °rini Kilisesi) in Istanbul, Turkey is the  site of the first Christian church ordered built by Constantine in the 4th Century. Many of these early churches were destroyed but rebuilt atop their rubble by Emperor Justinian. Hagia Irene or Aya Ä °rini Kilisesi in Istanbul, Turkey. Salvator Barki/Getty Images (cropped) Characteristics of Byzantine Architecture Original Byzantine churches are square-shaped with a central floor plan. They were designed after the Greek cross or crux immissa quadrata instead of the Latin crux ordinaria of Gothic cathedrals. Early Byzantine churches might have one, dominant center dome of great height, rising from a square base on half-dome pillars or pendentives. Byzantine architecture blended Western and Middle Eastern architectural details and ways of doing things. Builders renounced the Classical Order in favor of columns with decorative impost blocks inspired by Middle Eastern designs. Mosaic decorations and narratives were common. For example, the mosaic image of Justinian in the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy honors the Roman Christian Emporer. The early Middle Ages was also a time of experimentation with building methods and materials. Clerestory windows became a popular way for natural light and ventilation to enter an otherwise dark and smokey building. Mosaic of the Roman Christian Emporer Justinian I Flanked by Military and Clergy. CM Dixon/Print Collector/Getty Images Construction and Engineering Techniques How do you put a huge, round dome onto a square-shaped room? Byzantine builders experimented with different methods of construction; when ceilings fell in, they tried something else. Art historian Hans Buchwald writes that: Sophisticated methods for assuring structural solidity were developed, such as well-built deep foundations, wooden tie-rod systems in vaults, walls and foundations, and metal chains placed horizontally inside masonry. Byzantine engineers turned to the structural use of pendentives to elevate domes to new heights. With this technique, a dome can rise from the top of a vertical cylinder, like a silo, giving height to the dome. Like the Hagia Irene, the exterior of the Church of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy is characterized by the silo-like pendentive construction. A good example of pendentives seen from the inside is the interior of the ​Hagia Sophia (Ayasofya) in Istanbul, one of the most famous Byzantine structures in the world. Inside the Hagia Sophia. Frà ©dà ©ric Soltan/Corbis via Getty Images Why This Style Is Called Byzantine In the year 330, Emperor Constantine relocated the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to a part of Turkey known as Byzantium (present-day Istanbul). Constantine renamed Byzantium to be called Constantinople after himself. What we call the Byzantine Empire is really the Eastern Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was divided into East and West. While the Eastern Empire was centered in Byzantium, the Western Roman Empire was centered in Ravenna, in northeast Italy, which is why Ravenna is a well-known tourist destination for Byzantine architecture. The Western Roman Empire in Ravenna fell in 476 but was recaptured in 540 by Justinian. Justinians Byzantine influence is still felt in Ravenna. Byzantine Architecture, East and West The Roman Emperor Flavius Justinianus was not born in Rome, but in Tauresium, Macedonia in Eastern Europe in about 482. His place of birth is a major factor why the reign of the Christian Emperor changed the shape of architecture between 527 and 565. Justinian was a ruler of Rome, but he grew up with the people of the Eastern world. He was a Christian leader uniting two worlds; construction methods and architectural details were passed back and forth. Buildings that previously had been built similar to those in Rome took on more local, Eastern influences. Justinian reconquered the Western Roman Empire, which had been taken over by barbarians, and Eastern architectural traditions were introduced to the West. A mosaic image of Justinian from the Basilica of San Vitale, in Ravenna, Italy is a testament to the Byzantine influence on the Ravenna area, which remains a great center of Italian Byzantine architecture. Byzantine Architecture Influences Architects and builders learned from each of their projects and from each other. Churches built in the East influenced the construction and design of sacred architecture built in many places. For example, the Byzantine Church of the Saints Sergius and Bacchus, a small Istanbul experiment from the year 530, influenced the final design of the most famous Byzantine Church, the grand Hagia Sophia (Ayasofya), which itself inspired the creation of Blue Mosque of Constantinople in 1616. The Eastern Roman Empire profoundly influenced early Islamic architecture, including the Umayyad Great Mosque of Damascus and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. In Orthodox countries such as Russia and Romania, Eastern Byzantine architecture persisted, as shown by the 15th century Assumption Cathedral in Moscow. Byzantine architecture in the Western Roman Empire, including in Italian towns such as Ravenna, more quickly gave way to Romanesque and Gothic architecture, and the towering spire replaced the high domes of early Christian architecture. Architectural periods have no borders, especially during what is known as the Middle Ages. The period of Medieval architecture from roughly 500 to 1500 is sometimes called Middle and Late Byzantine. Ultimately, names are less important than influence, and architecture has always been subject to the next great idea. The impact of Justinians rule was felt long after his death in A.D. 565. Source Buchwald, Hans. The Dictionary of Art, Volume 9. Jane Turner, ed. Macmillan, 1996, p. 524

The Unfulfilled Aims and Golas of the Ministry Free Essays

To establish whether this statement is true, the promises and reputation of Disraeli must first be identified. In his speeches in 1872 at Crystal Palace and in Manchester†s Free Trade Hall, Disraeli once again showed his skills as an orator. He laid out three basic aims or policies that he wanted to pursue, should he get in power. We will write a custom essay sample on The Unfulfilled Aims and Golas of the Ministry or any similar topic only for you Order Now These were; to conserve the institutions in Britain, uphold British interests abroad and to improve the standard of life for the general population and especially the working classes. Disraeli had also created a reputation for himself with the 1867 Reform Act. He had successfully destroyed the liberal party and due to the nature of the act, extending the franchise by a considerable number, had acquired a reputation for being more open minded about matters of reform, even though the act was mainly passed through necessity, because the act would be passed and it was just a question about which party would do it. He had also tried successfully to establish the Conservative Party as the nationalistic party in the government, the one that would uphold British interest abroad and repair the damage that he claimed that Gladstone was causing. The Alabama arbitration and the dealings that Gladstone had with Russia over the situation in the Black Sea were perfect opportunities for Disraeli to show how Gladstone was destroying Britain†s Empire by his weakness in his dealings with other major powers. This meant that when Disraeli cam into power he had to act upon his criticisms of Gladstone as he had condemned the way that Gladstone had put his faith so strongly in arbitration rather than in action and the way that Gladstone was more concerned about the way that the negotiations were carried out rather than the end result. The only way that Disraeli could fulfil his promises about the welfare and conditions of the people and conserving the institutions was by bringing about various social reforms. In his famous speeches in 1872 he promised the people that he would improve the standard of their lives and give them â€Å"air light and water†. To an extent it would be fair to say that he achieved this although some of the acts that were meant to do this were not very effective at all. The Factory Legislations in 1874, 1875 and 1878 were major steps in Disraeli achieving what he had promised. These were some of his more effective acts because they were compulsory and the consequence of this was that it had a further reaching effect than a large number of the acts that Disraeli passed. In this respect it is very similar to the Public Health Act in 1875 because this also had aspects of it that were compulsory, for example the local councils were compelled to employ a Ministry of Health. The fact that acts like these were compulsory and not permissive is what makes them more successful than the others. While other acts would appear to conform to Disraeli†s claims that he was fulfilling his promises, upon closer inspection they did not have much effect upon the lives of the workingman. The Friendly Societies Act in 1875 was another act that could be used to support the statement that Disraeli†s was a government that lived up to its promises. The societies were formed as a kind of self-help organization and Disraeli†s government supported this, which indicates that he was trying to live up the promise that he would improve conditions for the working classes. The Labour Legislation and the amendment of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act in 1875 were other legislations that lived up to the promises of Disraeli, because they both attempted to change the law in order to make it more fair and even for the workers so that they could negotiate on equal grounds as the employer and to ensure that the laws were equal for both parties involved. The Enclosure of Commons Act in 1876 was an act that showed Disraeli trying to fulfil his promise that he would provide enjoyment of â€Å"air light and water. † However convincing these acts may seem to be in arguing that Disraeli lived up to his promises it must be recognised that there were a great many acts that he passed that were either totally ineffectual or would work in principle but not in practice. The River Pollution Prevention Act in 1876 was a totally ineffectual act. In principle it was supposed to prevent the factory owners who were polluting the rivers from doing so but in practice the pollution of the rivers continued and the act did not stop pollution. This is one of many examples of Disraeli†s government attempting to fulfil the promises that Disraeli made, but in the end passing an ineffectual act that simply does not achieve half as much as was promised. While these acts may have set a precedent to other acts in the future, they do not achieve very much at the time. Other acts like the Sale of Food and Drugs Act in 1875 show how that while the act looks to be a major act, it is only a permissive act that gives the power of change to the local councils who have men on their board who own the shops that are going to lose revenue if they are no longer allowed to adulterate the food or Drugs that they sell. As it was not in their interests, and as it was an enabling act, they simply did not bother to put anything into practice. There was a similar situation with the Merchant Shipping Act and the Artisans Dwelling Act in 1876 and 1875. These two were both permissive instead of compulsory, and both gave the power to change to those who would not benefit and may well lose out if they put the laws into practice. In the case of the Merchant Shipping Act the initiative was left with the owners of the ship who were never personally in danger abroad the ships and profited from the overloading. Again, in the Artisans Dwellings Act it was the councils decision whether to build houses or not, and to do this would require a raise in taxes for the rest of the constituency, and so the council may lose the next election so would not do anything. To illustrate this, by 1881, only ten out of 87 towns would take any action under the act. The Education Act in 1876 was not a very successful act either because it did nothing to ensure that the laws would be carried out until 1891 so there was a high level of truancy and children still worked when they should not, so although it added to the growing improvement of the education system, it did not really change anything significantly. The foreign policy that Disraeli followed between 1874 and 1880 was one that certainly appeared to be consistent with the reputation that Disraeli had acquired. It was very aggressive and he appeared to be fulfilling promises that he had made in 1872. His severe criticism of Gladstone†s weaknesses on foreign policy was one factor that formed peoples expectations that he would act upon the criticisms and that his foreign policy would be constructed so as to protect British interests abroad. Disraeli lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy more than he did at home with his domestic policies. However it was not as he had promised to the people. He had promised to uphold British interests abroad, and to a certain extent he did, but there were events that he could not control and certain concessions that had to make to foreign powers that diminished the influence and threatened the power that Britain held abroad. The problems with Russia were a prime example where he had to concede and let Russia have a fleet in the Black sea even though this was against the interests of Britain. He could not realistically deliver all that he promised, as there would be times like these where he had to make concessions. On the other hand it must be said that Disraeli managed to fulfil the majority of his promises and reputation in regards to his foreign policy, even if at times he did not mean to. In a lot of his speeches a lot of what he said was rhetoric, but when men like Frere and Lytton took him at face value, and started wars with the Afghans and with the Zulus and started wars in order to preserve the British interests in those particular areas, they put action to his words. Even if Disraeli did not actually want these wars, which he did not, the two wars were both in keeping with the reputation that he had gained for being a very aggressive imperialist, even if these wars did work to his detriment. The Congress of Berlin was one of the high points of Disraeli†s foreign policy because in this he managed to rebuild Britain†s reputation as a major imperial power, which adds to the evidence that he did live up to the reputation that he had acquired, and he made secret agreements with the Turks, Russians and Austria-Hungary in order to preserve British interest in that area. The purchase of the Suez Canal shares in 1875 was another one of Disraeli’s best judgements because for years on from then it was one of the biggest trade routes in the world and Britain†s involvement in it was a major asset to Britain†s power as an imperial nation. One side of Disraeli†s foreign policy that cannot be ignored is the fact that Disraeli took massive risks in his policy and could have got Britain involved in a war with Russia without nay powerful allies and with an obsolete navy, and also agreed to defend one of Turkeys frontiers without the resources to do so. The fact that was lucky and managed to steer clear of any problems is a credit to Disraeli as it would have been very easy for him to make a very costly mistake. Though Disraeli passed a large number of reforms for his time, he still managed to fulfil his final promise of his 1872 speeches and conserve the institutions. The institutions that he meant were the aristocracy, like the rich landowners and the Anglican Church. While someone like Gladstone was a fanatical Anglican, Disraeli was only really interested in it to keep everyone else happy. It has been argued that acts like the Education Acts sole intention was to prevent the board schools which were more financially popular with the working or lower classes from getting too much of a hold on the education system because most wanted the Anglican churches from being the dominant force in education and the board schools were not. During his period in rule, he did not do anything that was actively conserving the constitutions, he simply avoided doing anything that would offend or threaten the institutions. It would be fair to say in conclusion that while Disraeli fulfilled some of the promises that he made, he did not do so with all of them. His domestic policy is a hard one to say whether he achieved accomplishment of the aims that he laid down in 1872. He certainly tried to do so, as the number of acts that he passed, and the nature of them indicate that they were probably passed with the interests of the people that it would effect, in mind. However there are some opinions that argue that all of the acts passed in Disraeli†s era were in reaction to public opinion at the time. While this is not totally fair to Disraeli, there is a lot of evidence pointing to this being a major contributing factor to the decision. In the case of the Education Act the other politicians were mainly or all Anglican and so wanted to conserve the churches hold over education, in the 1876 Merchant Shipping Act, the reason was predominantly to pacify the people who worked on the docks and Samuel Plimsoll as he was getting particularly worked up over the issue. However far it is possible to give credit to these ideas, it would be unfair to Disraeli to say that he tried to passed acts solely to pacify public demand it is much more likely to be that he was more genuine in his actions than that. However, the did not live up to all of the promises that he made, he may have set a precedent for governments before him in what their duties were to the people, but to the majority of the people of the time he did not have the ability to pass anything that would significantly change their lives. This was due to a number of limiting factors, like a hostile cabinet and a general public that were already sick of reform after a great reforming ministry from Gladstone. In his foreign policy in upholding the interests of the British Empire Disraeli fared a little better. He did not make any disastrous decisions in terms of upholding British interests abroad, although his attitude to problems got him into trouble at home, and did not make any major concessions to foreign powers. His diplomacy in Turkey in 1878 probably saved the Turkish Empire and he was aggressive to an extent that nearly got him into trouble. He certainly lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy, although certain reckless comments landed him in trouble. Overall I think that Disraeli†s government did not live up to the promises that Disraeli made in 1872 and although his foreign policy was very similar to what people would expect and so lived up to his reputation, he did not deliver on the domestic front. The reasons for this were not solely attributable to Disraeli, but the fact remains that he did not deliver what he promised, and if anything the situation worsened with the depression even though this was not his fault. Disraeli tried hard to deliver what he promised but the government, the budget and the attitude of the people, who were not overly enthusiastic to more reforms, limited him in what he was able to do. How to cite The Unfulfilled Aims and Golas of the Ministry, Papers The Unfulfilled Aims and Golas of the Ministry Free Essays To establish whether this statement is true, the promises and reputation of Disraeli must first be identified. In his speeches in 1872 at Crystal Palace and in Manchester†s Free Trade Hall, Disraeli once again showed his skills as an orator. He laid out three basic aims or policies that he wanted to pursue, should he get in power. We will write a custom essay sample on The Unfulfilled Aims and Golas of the Ministry or any similar topic only for you Order Now These were; to conserve the institutions in Britain, uphold British interests abroad and to improve the standard of life for the general population and especially the working classes. Disraeli had also created a reputation for himself with the 1867 Reform Act. He had successfully destroyed the liberal party and due to the nature of the act, extending the franchise by a considerable number, had acquired a reputation for being more open minded about matters of reform, even though the act was mainly passed through necessity, because the act would be passed and it was just a question about which party would do it. He had also tried successfully to establish the Conservative Party as the nationalistic party in the government, the one that would uphold British interest abroad and repair the damage that he claimed that Gladstone was causing. The Alabama arbitration and the dealings that Gladstone had with Russia over the situation in the Black Sea were perfect opportunities for Disraeli to show how Gladstone was destroying Britain†s Empire by his weakness in his dealings with other major powers. This meant that when Disraeli cam into power he had to act upon his criticisms of Gladstone as he had condemned the way that Gladstone had put his faith so strongly in arbitration rather than in action and the way that Gladstone was more concerned about the way that the negotiations were carried out rather than the end result. The only way that Disraeli could fulfil his promises about the welfare and conditions of the people and conserving the institutions was by bringing about various social reforms. In his famous speeches in 1872 he promised the people that he would improve the standard of their lives and give them â€Å"air light and water†. To an extent it would be fair to say that he achieved this although some of the acts that were meant to do this were not very effective at all. The Factory Legislations in 1874, 1875 and 1878 were major steps in Disraeli achieving what he had promised. These were some of his more effective acts because they were compulsory and the consequence of this was that it had a further reaching effect than a large number of the acts that Disraeli passed. In this respect it is very similar to the Public Health Act in 1875 because this also had aspects of it that were compulsory, for example the local councils were compelled to employ a Ministry of Health. The fact that acts like these were compulsory and not permissive is what makes them more successful than the others. While other acts would appear to conform to Disraeli†s claims that he was fulfilling his promises, upon closer inspection they did not have much effect upon the lives of the workingman. The Friendly Societies Act in 1875 was another act that could be used to support the statement that Disraeli†s was a government that lived up to its promises. The societies were formed as a kind of self-help organization and Disraeli†s government supported this, which indicates that he was trying to live up the promise that he would improve conditions for the working classes. The Labour Legislation and the amendment of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act in 1875 were other legislations that lived up to the promises of Disraeli, because they both attempted to change the law in order to make it more fair and even for the workers so that they could negotiate on equal grounds as the employer and to ensure that the laws were equal for both parties involved. The Enclosure of Commons Act in 1876 was an act that showed Disraeli trying to fulfil his promise that he would provide enjoyment of â€Å"air light and water. † However convincing these acts may seem to be in arguing that Disraeli lived up to his promises it must be recognised that there were a great many acts that he passed that were either totally ineffectual or would work in principle but not in practice. The River Pollution Prevention Act in 1876 was a totally ineffectual act. In principle it was supposed to prevent the factory owners who were polluting the rivers from doing so but in practice the pollution of the rivers continued and the act did not stop pollution. This is one of many examples of Disraeli†s government attempting to fulfil the promises that Disraeli made, but in the end passing an ineffectual act that simply does not achieve half as much as was promised. While these acts may have set a precedent to other acts in the future, they do not achieve very much at the time. Other acts like the Sale of Food and Drugs Act in 1875 show how that while the act looks to be a major act, it is only a permissive act that gives the power of change to the local councils who have men on their board who own the shops that are going to lose revenue if they are no longer allowed to adulterate the food or Drugs that they sell. As it was not in their interests, and as it was an enabling act, they simply did not bother to put anything into practice. There was a similar situation with the Merchant Shipping Act and the Artisans Dwelling Act in 1876 and 1875. These two were both permissive instead of compulsory, and both gave the power to change to those who would not benefit and may well lose out if they put the laws into practice. In the case of the Merchant Shipping Act the initiative was left with the owners of the ship who were never personally in danger abroad the ships and profited from the overloading. Again, in the Artisans Dwellings Act it was the councils decision whether to build houses or not, and to do this would require a raise in taxes for the rest of the constituency, and so the council may lose the next election so would not do anything. To illustrate this, by 1881, only ten out of 87 towns would take any action under the act. The Education Act in 1876 was not a very successful act either because it did nothing to ensure that the laws would be carried out until 1891 so there was a high level of truancy and children still worked when they should not, so although it added to the growing improvement of the education system, it did not really change anything significantly. The foreign policy that Disraeli followed between 1874 and 1880 was one that certainly appeared to be consistent with the reputation that Disraeli had acquired. It was very aggressive and he appeared to be fulfilling promises that he had made in 1872. His severe criticism of Gladstone†s weaknesses on foreign policy was one factor that formed peoples expectations that he would act upon the criticisms and that his foreign policy would be constructed so as to protect British interests abroad. Disraeli lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy more than he did at home with his domestic policies. However it was not as he had promised to the people. He had promised to uphold British interests abroad, and to a certain extent he did, but there were events that he could not control and certain concessions that had to make to foreign powers that diminished the influence and threatened the power that Britain held abroad. The problems with Russia were a prime example where he had to concede and let Russia have a fleet in the Black sea even though this was against the interests of Britain. He could not realistically deliver all that he promised, as there would be times like these where he had to make concessions. On the other hand it must be said that Disraeli managed to fulfil the majority of his promises and reputation in regards to his foreign policy, even if at times he did not mean to. In a lot of his speeches a lot of what he said was rhetoric, but when men like Frere and Lytton took him at face value, and started wars with the Afghans and with the Zulus and started wars in order to preserve the British interests in those particular areas, they put action to his words. Even if Disraeli did not actually want these wars, which he did not, the two wars were both in keeping with the reputation that he had gained for being a very aggressive imperialist, even if these wars did work to his detriment. The Congress of Berlin was one of the high points of Disraeli†s foreign policy because in this he managed to rebuild Britain†s reputation as a major imperial power, which adds to the evidence that he did live up to the reputation that he had acquired, and he made secret agreements with the Turks, Russians and Austria-Hungary in order to preserve British interest in that area. The purchase of the Suez Canal shares in 1875 was another one of Disraeli’s best judgements because for years on from then it was one of the biggest trade routes in the world and Britain†s involvement in it was a major asset to Britain†s power as an imperial nation. One side of Disraeli†s foreign policy that cannot be ignored is the fact that Disraeli took massive risks in his policy and could have got Britain involved in a war with Russia without nay powerful allies and with an obsolete navy, and also agreed to defend one of Turkeys frontiers without the resources to do so. The fact that was lucky and managed to steer clear of any problems is a credit to Disraeli as it would have been very easy for him to make a very costly mistake. Though Disraeli passed a large number of reforms for his time, he still managed to fulfil his final promise of his 1872 speeches and conserve the institutions. The institutions that he meant were the aristocracy, like the rich landowners and the Anglican Church. While someone like Gladstone was a fanatical Anglican, Disraeli was only really interested in it to keep everyone else happy. It has been argued that acts like the Education Acts sole intention was to prevent the board schools which were more financially popular with the working or lower classes from getting too much of a hold on the education system because most wanted the Anglican churches from being the dominant force in education and the board schools were not. During his period in rule, he did not do anything that was actively conserving the constitutions, he simply avoided doing anything that would offend or threaten the institutions. It would be fair to say in conclusion that while Disraeli fulfilled some of the promises that he made, he did not do so with all of them. His domestic policy is a hard one to say whether he achieved accomplishment of the aims that he laid down in 1872. He certainly tried to do so, as the number of acts that he passed, and the nature of them indicate that they were probably passed with the interests of the people that it would effect, in mind. However there are some opinions that argue that all of the acts passed in Disraeli†s era were in reaction to public opinion at the time. While this is not totally fair to Disraeli, there is a lot of evidence pointing to this being a major contributing factor to the decision. In the case of the Education Act the other politicians were mainly or all Anglican and so wanted to conserve the churches hold over education, in the 1876 Merchant Shipping Act, the reason was predominantly to pacify the people who worked on the docks and Samuel Plimsoll as he was getting particularly worked up over the issue. However far it is possible to give credit to these ideas, it would be unfair to Disraeli to say that he tried to passed acts solely to pacify public demand it is much more likely to be that he was more genuine in his actions than that. However, the did not live up to all of the promises that he made, he may have set a precedent for governments before him in what their duties were to the people, but to the majority of the people of the time he did not have the ability to pass anything that would significantly change their lives. This was due to a number of limiting factors, like a hostile cabinet and a general public that were already sick of reform after a great reforming ministry from Gladstone. In his foreign policy in upholding the interests of the British Empire Disraeli fared a little better. He did not make any disastrous decisions in terms of upholding British interests abroad, although his attitude to problems got him into trouble at home, and did not make any major concessions to foreign powers. His diplomacy in Turkey in 1878 probably saved the Turkish Empire and he was aggressive to an extent that nearly got him into trouble. He certainly lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy, although certain reckless comments landed him in trouble. Overall I think that Disraeli†s government did not live up to the promises that Disraeli made in 1872 and although his foreign policy was very similar to what people would expect and so lived up to his reputation, he did not deliver on the domestic front. The reasons for this were not solely attributable to Disraeli, but the fact remains that he did not deliver what he promised, and if anything the situation worsened with the depression even though this was not his fault. Disraeli tried hard to deliver what he promised but the government, the budget and the attitude of the people, who were not overly enthusiastic to more reforms, limited him in what he was able to do. How to cite The Unfulfilled Aims and Golas of the Ministry, Papers

Income Elasticity of Demand Samples for Students †MyAssignmenthelp.co

Question: Discuss about the Income Elasticity of Demand. Answer: Income elasticity of demand Income elasticity of demand signifies proportionate change in demand of good in response to the corresponding proportionate change in income (Fine, 2016). Both the change in income and change in demand is expressed in percentage term. Goods are said to be income elastic when quantity demanded of the good changes more than the changes in income. The measure of elasticity is greater than one. For luxury goods such as sports cars or expensive ornament, elasticity is greater than one. Demand is income inelastic when demand changes at a less proportion than change in income. The measure of elasticity here is less than one (Bernanke, Antonovics Frank, 2015). Necessary good such as staple food has relatively income inelastic demand. When demand changes by exactly same percentage as income then demand has unit elasticity with respect to income. There is no real life example of this kind of goods. References Bernanke, B., Antonovics, K., Frank, R. (2015).Principles of macroeconomics. McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Fine, B. (2016). Microeconomics.University of Chicago Press Economics Books.