Argumentative Essay Essay Example for Free

Argumentative Essay Essay Ever since the war on terror our government continues the abuse of human rights by, always tracking individuals and labeling them, practicing lock downs of cities for when they really need it, and always adding to the list of freedoms there taking away from us. Most people don’t see it as that many people see it still as a war against people that terrorized America. Soon after 9-11 the United States best computers where hard at work beginning a process to find and label terrorist in America and by doing so they invaded everyone’s privacy by constantly scanning emails and texts, voice recognition software on all our phones, Facebook is primarily used to profile people and find more about their personal mind sets and likes. Our cell phones can trigger words that start voice recording software so anyone can listen in on our calls. Right after the Boston bombing the government exercised martial law by having everyone clear the streets and clearing house by house, no one could be outside without being considered a threat, that’s putting people on lockdown and testing out how well it works on big American city’s or towns and to see how well the people listened. One by one our freedoms are being taken away and no one can stop it, it’s part of the new technology and life we will have to grow and live into and our children. Ever since the terrorist act most of our freedoms where taken away right there, and as time goes on and we continue to let our government control us pretty soon we will have no freedoms what so ever and will be under full control as a people. Everyday new and better technology comes out that can help control America one way at a time. The war on terror has contributed to the growing abuse of human rights and no one will do anything to stop it. If we don’t come together as a hole to stop it people will soon be robots living under the control of one ruler or a group of people that decide everything about us.

Realism in Oedipus the King Essay -- Oedipus the King Oedipus Rex

Realism in Oedipus Rex  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚        Ã‚  Ã‚   This essay will examine a feature of Sophocles’ tragedy which causes the reader to doubt the realism underlying the literary work. Specifically, the essay will consider the feasability of the belief at that time – that the Delphi oracle possessed credibility with the people.    At the outset of the drama the priest of Zeus and the crowd of citizens of Thebes are gathered before the royal palace of Thebes talking to King Oedipus about the plague which is ravaging the city. The king is sorely troubled and laments the sad situation. Then he says:    I have sent Menoeceus' son, Creon, my consort's brother, to inquire Of Pythian Phoebus at his Delphic shrine, How I might save the State by act or word. And now I reckon up the tale of days Since he set forth, and marvel how he fares. 'Tis strange, this endless tarrying, passing strange. But when he comes, then I were base indeed, If I perform not all the god declares.    From this passage it would appear that the king has full faith in the awaited advice from the oracle at Delphi. Is this notion historicaly accurate? Did Sophocles’ contmeporaries actually put such trust in their pagan gods and goddesses? As Brian Wilkie and James Hurt state in â€Å"Sophocles†: â€Å"Humanity in his plays is an integral part of a world-order that can be only partially understood at best. The cosmic system includes, besides human beings and nature, those darkly inscrutable forces identified – inadequately – as the gods and fate† (718). When Creon returns, he gives his report publicly:    CREON Let me report then all the god declared. King Phoebus bids us straitly extirpate A fell pollution that ... ...74). Cypselus consulted the oracle, and on the basis of its answer, set to work to make himself master of Corinth (376)which he ruled for many years.    Thus we have seen that Sophocles is not being imaginative when he bases the action of the tragedy Oedipus Rex upon the words of the oracle at Delphi. It is wholly consistent with historical data available from that time period of the fifth century BC.    WORKS CITED    Herodotus.   The Histories. Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt. England: Penguin Books, 1972.    â€Å"Sophocles† In Literature of the Western World, edited by Brian Wilkie and James Hurt. NewYork: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1984.    Sophocles. Oedipus Rex. Transl. by F. Storr. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/browse-mixed new?tag=public&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&part=0&id=SopOedipus   

Symbolism in the Road

In McCarthy’s book, The Road, McCarthy is able to illustrate not only the setting of the book, but feelings, expressions, and actions, by various literary devices. Although he brought into play several devices such as: imagery, tone, metaphors, and a couple of similes, the most significant would have to be symbolism. Symbolism is when the author uses an object or reference to add deeper meaning to a story. The author may constantly use the same object to express deeper meaning. Symbolism is also often used to support a literary theme in a subtle manner, which in this case is what McCarthy did. An example of symbolism, and the most noteworthy would have to be the road. Just like that, the plain road. McCarthy refers to the road on several instances, thus making it imperative to the novel. The road symbolizes hope, as well as courage. The road means that for them it is the only hope of surviving. Hope that when they get to the end of that road they will be safe in a safe place. It also represents courage because they have the bravery of going on without knowing anything about the road, courage of going into the unknown. Not knowing what awaits them. Another example of symbolism is when the man tells the boy that he they are the only ones carrying the fire. In this quote the man refers to fire as being a symbol of them being the only ones left who have feelings in the world, who have a conscience, who still hold true to things that make us human, like empathy, hope, love and the will to survive without sacrificing your beliefs, things other people in this new world have lost. Compared to the others, â€Å"the bad guys,† The man and his son don’t kill, they don’t steal from the living, they help where it’s possible to do so, and, most importantly in the novel’s symbolism, they don’t eat other people, which can differ you from â€Å"good† and â€Å"bad. † Another example of symbolism is the mirror. The man and the boy went into a house and as they turned around a corner there was a mirror, and as the man saw his reflection he instantly reached for his gun, thinking it was someone else. In this case the mirror symbolizes what the man has turned into. It represents and supports the theme of survival present trough out the novel, what they have to be in order to survive in this new world. In another scene the man and the boy come across a river, which symbolizes after death, or the gateway to the afterlife. This symbol goes in hand with the quote â€Å"the grass is greener on the other side,† it is like if they are on the wrong side of it, like if they go to the other side everything would be better, and prettier. Therefore, the sea stands for the other life, the one you get when you’re dead, which in the case of the man and the boy would be best for them since the life they are â€Å"walking dead,† they are living a pitiable life. The boy himself is also a form of symbolism. The boy exemplifies innocence; he demonstrates that there still is purity in the world. He is always looking for the goodness of people. Throughout the novel they run into different people, he always wanted them to come along with his dad and him, and he was always willing to help them no matter if they are â€Å"good† or â€Å"bad. In a certain time the boy is willing to sacrifice himself to help the man they ran into. He was willing to give him his food and not eat himself so the man could eat. A further example that goes hand-in-hand with the boy’s innocence would be his kindness. In this case kindness stands for his vulnerability. Since in McCarthy’s post-apocalyptic world, the line between kindness and vulnerability is very fine. Thanks to his father though, the boy survives, and keeps focused. His father serves as a realistic intermediary between the boy and ideal goodness. The boy’s hair being described as a â€Å"golden chalice,† stands for the boy sometimes being like a divine child who can inspire the man to goodness. The â€Å"golden chalice† makes the boy seem angelical. The boy's gentle nature provides us, readers, with hope for the future. Though he has only known this wild, post-apocalyptic world, he's still full of kindness and innocence. Speaking of the boy another symbol about him is the â€Å"yellow truck†. This â€Å"yellow truck† represented the boy’s youth, and his childhood, despite the fact that they live in a world where he could not be a child. In this world he was not able to live his infancy like any other child, and when he played with this truck, it was like if one saw another side of him, like if we were able to see the child that lives within him. Cannibalism is another form of symbolism that represents what the world has come to, what mankind has turned into. It symbolizes the end of civilization, and that eventually there will be no human in this â€Å"new world† due to it. Cannibalism also forms a major part of the novel since it can differentiate the man, and the boy from the â€Å"good,† or â€Å"bad† guys. However, when you are living in a world like the one in the novel, if you are a cannibal is it being a â€Å"bad guy,† or is it you’re survival instincts coming into play? Does it make you a bad person to want to live? Due to symbolism along with the help of other literary elements McCarthy brings to life a world that no one else could have ever imagined possible. There are so many books and films that try to portray the end of the world, but no other has done so as Cormac McCarthy has.

Life of Cochise, Apache Warrior and Chief

Cochise (ca. 1810–June 8, 1874), perhaps the most powerful Chiricahua Apache chief in recorded times, was an influential player in the history of the U.S. southwest. His leadership came during a critical period in North American history, when shifting political relationships between Native American and European Americans resulted in a complete reconfiguration of the region. Fast Facts: Cochise Known For: Chiricahua Apache chief from 1861–1864Born: ca. 1810 in southeastern Arizona or northwestern SonoraDied: June 8, 1874 in the Dragoon Mountains, ArizonaSpouses Names: Dos-teh-seh and a second wife, whose name is not knownChildrens Names: Taza, Naiche, Dash-den-zhoos, and Naithlotonz Early Years Cochise was born around 1810, in either southeast Arizona or northwest Sonora, Mexico. He was destined for leadership: his father, most likely a man named Pisago Cabezà ³n, was the head chief of the Chokonen band, one of four bands in the Apache tribe. Cochise had at least two younger brothers, Juan and Coyuntura (or Kin-o-Tera), and one younger sister. As is traditional, Cochise received his name Goci as a young adult, which in the Apache language means his nose. There are no known surviving photographs of Cochise, who was described as a striking-looking man with black hair to his shoulders, a high forehead, prominent cheekbones, and a large, handsome Roman nose.   Cochise wrote no letters. His life was documented during a series of interviews conducted during the end of his life. The information from those interviews is somewhat contradictory, including the spelling of his name (variations include Chuchese, Chis, and Cucchisle). Education The Apaches of the 19th century followed a traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle, which they supplemented with raids when hunting and gathering alone could not feed their families. Raiding involved attacking ranches and ambushing travelers in order to steal their supplies. The raids were violent and often left victims wounded, tortured, or killed.  Although there are no specific records about Cochises education, anthropological studies and oral and written histories from the Apache community describe the learning processes for prospective warriors, which Cochise would have experienced. Young boys in the Apache world were separated from young girls and began training in the use of the bow and arrow at the age of six or seven. They played games which emphasized speed and agility, physical strength and fitness, self-discipline and independence. At 14, Cochise likely began training as a warrior, starting as a novice (dikhoe) and practicing wrestling, bow and arrow contests, and foot races. Young men played the role of trainee at their first four raids. During the first raid, they performed menial camp chores, such as making beds, cooking, and standing guard. After completing his fourth raid, Cochise would have been considered an adult. Indian–White Relations At the time of Cochises youth, the political climate of southeastern Arizona and northeastern Sonora was fairly quiet. The region was under the control of the Spanish, who had skirmished with the Apaches and other tribes in the region but settled on a policy that brought a kind of peace. The Spanish aimed to replace Apache raiding with the provision of rations from established Spanish outposts called presidios.   This was a deliberately planned action on the part of the Spanish to disrupt and destroy the Apache social system. Rations were corn or wheat, meat, brown sugar, salt, and tobacco, as well as inferior guns, liquor, clothing and other items designed to make the Native Americans dependent on the Spanish. This did bring peace, which lasted nearly forty years, until near the end of the Mexican Revolution in 1821. The war seriously depleted the treasuries, rationing broke down slowly, and disappeared entirely when the Mexicans won the war.   As a result, the Apaches resumed their raiding, and the Mexicans retaliated. By 1831, when Cochise was 21 years old, hostilities were so extensive that, unlike earlier times, nearly all of the Apache bands under Mexican influence participated in raiding and conflicts.   Early Military Career The first battle that Cochise probably participated in may have been the three-day battle from May 21–23, 1832, an armed conflict of Chiricahuas with Mexican troops near the Mogollon Mountains. Three hundred warriors led by Pisago Cabezà ³n lost after the last eight-hour battle under 138 Mexican men led by Captain Jose Ignacio Ronquillo. The following years were punctuated by a number of treaties signed and broken; raidings halted and resumed.   In 1835, Mexico put a bounty on Apache scalps and hired mercenaries to massacre them. John Johnson was one of those mercenaries, an Anglo living in Sonora. He was granted permission to track down hostiles and on April 22, 1837, he and his men ambushed and massacred 20 Apaches and wounded many more during a trading deal. Cochise was not likely present, but he and other Apaches sought revenge.   Marriage and Family In the late 1830s, Cochise married Dos-teh-seh (something at the campfire already cooked). She was the daughter of Mangas Coloradas, who led the Chihenne Apache band. Cochise and Dos-teh-seh had at least two sons—Taza, born 1842, and Naiche, born 1856. His second wife, who was from the Chokonen band but whose name is not known, bore him two daughters in the early 1860s: Dash-den-zhoos and Naithlotonz.   Cochises son Naiche, Hereditary Leader of the Chiricahua Apaches, taken by Adolph F. Muhr about 1898.   Library of Congress According to Apache custom, men lived with their wives after they married. Cochise most likely lived with the Chihenne for six to eight months. However, he had become an important leader in his fathers band, so he soon returned to Chokonen.   A (Temporarily) Settled Peace In early 1842, Cochises father — Pisago Cabezà ³n, leader of the Chokonen — was ready to sign an armistice with the Mexicans. Cochises father-in-law — Mangas Coloradas, leader of the Chihinne — disagreed. A treaty was signed on July 4, 1842, with the Apaches promising to cease all hostilities, and the Mexican government agreeing to feed them rations. Cochise drew rations with his wife in October, and Mangas, seeing that the Chokonen treaty would hold, decided to negotiate a similar treaty for his own band. In late 1842, that armistice was also signed.   This settled peace would not last long. In May of 1843, Mexican troops at Fronteras murdered six Chokonen men for no apparent reason. In late May, seven more Chiricahua men were murdered at the Presidio in Fronteras. In retaliation, Mangas and Pisago attacked Fronteras, killing two citizens and wounding another.   Deteriorating Conditions By 1844, conditions among the Apache bands in the region had deteriorated sharply. Smallpox arrived in the fall, and the supply of rations for the communities had sharply decreased. Mangas Coloradas and Pisago Cabezà ³n returned to the mountains by February 1845, and from there they conducted several raids on Sonora. Cochise would have participated in these raids.   In 1846, James Kirker, a mercenary sanctioned by the Mexican government, set out to kill as many Apaches as possible. On July 7, under the protection of a treaty, he hosted a feast at Galeana (in what is now Chihuahua state in Mexico) for 130 Chiricahuas, and then had them beaten to death in the morning. It was an ill-chosen moment, because in April of that year, fighting had broken out between the U.S. and Mexico, and Congress declared war on Mexico in May. The Apaches had a new and dangerous source of support, but they were rightly wary of the Americans.   In December of 1847, a war party of Apaches attacked the village of Cuquiarachi in Sonora and killed a longtime adversary, seven other men and six women, and captured six children. The following February, a large party attacked another town called Chinapa, killing 12 men, wounding six and capturing 42, mostly women and children.   Cochise Captured Throughout the summer of 1848, the Chokonen band carried on a siege of the fort at Fronteras. On June 21, 1848, Cochise and his Chokonen chief Miguel Narbona led an assault on Fronteras, Sonora, but the attack went awry. Narbonas horse was killed by cannon fire, and Cochise was captured. He remained a prisoner for about six weeks, and his release was only obtained by the exchange of 11 Mexican prisoners.   Apache Pass, Arizona, as viewed from Fort Bowie facing north.   Mark A. Wilson In the mid-1850s, Miguel Narbona died and Cochise became the principal chief of the band. In the late 1850s, United States citizens arrived in his country, first settling at Apache Pass, a station on the Butterfield Overland Mail Company route. For a few years, the Apaches maintained a tenuous peace with the Americans, who now provided sorely needed rations to them.   Bascom Affair, or "Cut the Tent" In early February 1861, U.S. Lieutenant George Bascom met Cochise at Apache Pass and accused him of capturing a boy who had in fact been taken by other Apaches. Bascom invited Cochise into his tent and told him he would hold him as a prisoner until the boy was returned. Cochise pulled out his knife, cut through the tent, and escaped into the nearby hills.   In retaliation, Bascoms troops captured five members of Cochises family, and four days later Cochise attacked, killing several Mexicans and capturing four Americans whom he offered in exchange for his relatives. Bascom refused, and Cochise tortured his prisoners to death, leaving their bodies to be found. Bascom retaliated by hanging Cochises brother Coyuntura and two nephews.  This event is known in Apache history as Cut the Tent. The Cochise Wars (1861–1872) Cochise became the dominant Chiricahua Apache chief, replacing the aging Mangas Coloradas. Cochises rage at the loss of his family members led to a bloody cycle of revenge and retaliation between the Americans and Apaches for the next 12 years, known as the Cochise Wars. For the first half of the 1860s, the Apaches maintained strongholds in the Dragoon mountains, moving back and forth attacking ranchers and travelers alike, and keeping control of southeastern Arizona. But after the U.S. Civil War ended, a massive influx of U.S. soldiers put the Apaches on the defensive.  Ã‚   By the late 1860s, the war continued sporadically. The worst event was an ambush and massacre by the Apaches of the Stone party in October of 1869. It was likely in 1870, when Cochise first met Thomas Jeffords (Red Beard), a stage driver for the Butterfield Overland Stage. Jeffords, who would become Cochises closest white friend, played a significant role in bringing peace to the American southwest.   Making Peace On October 1, 1872, true peace efforts were established at a meeting between Cochise and Brigadier General Oliver Otis Howard, facilitated by Jeffords. Treaty negotiations included a cessation of hostilities including raiding between the U.S. and Apaches, the safe passage of his warriors to their homes, and the creation of a short-lived Chiricahua Apache reservation, located initially in the Sulphur Spring Valley of Arizona. It was an agreement not on paper, but between two highly principled men who trusted one another.   The brigadier general Otis Howard made a lasting peace agreement with Cochise on October 1, 1872.   Hulton Archive/Getty Images The agreement did not include cessation of raiding in Mexico, however. American troops at Fort Bowie were prohibited from interfering with the Chokonens activities in Arizona. The Chokonens kept the terms of the treaty for three and a half years, but continued conducting raids in Sonora until the fall of 1873. Quotes After the Cut the Tent affair, Cochise is reported to have said: I was at peace with the whites, until they tried to kill me for what other Indians did; I now live and die at war with them.   In a conversation with his friend Thomas Jeffords, then the agent for the Chiricahua reservation, Cochise said: A man should never lie... if a man asks you or I a question we do not wish to answer, we could simply say I dont want to talk about that. Death and Burial Cochise became ill in 1871, probably suffering from abdominal cancer. He met with Tom Jeffords for the last time on June 7. In that final meeting Cochise asked that control of his band be passed on to his son Taza. He wanted the tribe to live in peace and hoped that Taza would continue to rely on Jeffords. (Taza went on to keep his commitments, but eventually, the U.S. authorities broke Howards covenant with Cochise, relocating Tazas band out of their homes and into Western Apache country.) Cochise died at the Eastern Stronghold in the Dragoon Mountains on June 8, 1874. The Eastern Stronghold in the Dragoon Mountains of southeastern Arizona. Mark A. Wilson   After his death, Cochise was washed and painted in war style, and his family buried him in a grave wrapped in blankets with his name woven into them. The sides of the grave were walled up about three feet high with stone; his rifle, arms and other articles of value were laid beside him. To give him transportation in the afterlife, Cochises favorite horse was shot within 200 yards, another killed about one mile away, and a third two miles away. In his honor, his family destroyed all the clothing and food stores they had and fasted for 48 hours. Legacy Cochise is known for his significant role in Indian-White relations. He lived and prospered by war, but died in peace: a man of great integrity and principle and a worthy leader of the Apache people as they experienced massive social change and upheaval. He is remembered as a fierce warrior as well as a leader of sound judgment and diplomacy. Eventually, he was willing to negotiate and find peace despite suffering the great loss of his family, tribe members, and way of living. Sources Seymour, Deni J., and George Robertson. A Pledge of Peace: Evidence of the Cochise-Howard Treaty Campsite. Historical Archaeology 42.4 (2008): 154–79. Print.Sweeney, Edwin R. Cochise: Chiricahua Apache Chief. The Civilization of the American Indian Series. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. Print.—-, ed. Cochise: Firsthand Accounts of the Chiricahua Apache Chief. 2014. Print.—-. Making Peace with Cochise: The 1872 Journal of Captain Joseph Alton Sladen. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997. Print.