Essay on Renting Hearts Essay Example for Free

Essay on Renting Hearts Essay Science fiction is a genre, whose stories take place in an imaginary environment where science, and in particular the technological development has undergone more or less significant changes with effect on both society and individuals. Science fiction is based on more or less imaginative themes of science results and ways of looking. The topics are often about high tech future societies, space travels, time travels, creatures, end of world, different universes etc. [1] The short story takes place in the future where the technology has taken over, and where people can buy their happiness for money, and that human now just can go to a rental shop and get a new heart in order to avoid pain When you fall in love, often you will get or end up with a broken heart. It happens for almost every one, who gets in relations with other people. But in this short story, you can get out and rent a new heart, and meet other relations without having any fear of getting hurt. The short story is about a person that has been in love with a lot of people, and then tries to not getting hurt. When he/she is getting hurt by the relations she/he goes through, he/she keeps going to the â€Å"rental place†, every time he/she falls in love, so instead of dealing with some of the pain and letting it get worse, he/she just visit the rental place and rent a new heart. There is no information or any descriptions about the main characters sex, but I would say that it is a teenage boy because he does not appear to be dramatically, and does not describe the actions detailed, as a girl would do generally. The main character is a teenager, since a typical teenager would say â€Å"And our love was going to last forever, which at our age meant six months. † It starts with his first love with Jacob, where he was very much in love with him, and they were happy for each other. â€Å"†¦ first heart. Jacob was as solid and golden as a tilled field, and our love was going to last forever, which at our age meant six months. Every time Jacob touched me, I felt my heart thud wetly against my lungs. But in the last, Jacob left him which broke his heart. . A year later he meets Anna, who is a girl. She tells him to go and rent a heart so he may be able to fall in love, because he is afraid to fall in love, since his heart has been broken before. Renting hearts made him not to feel any pain again, because of this opportunity to rent a heart. Teenagers are often confused, and a lot of things don’t make sense, especially love and relations. They fall in love quickly, and as they fall in love, they can easily fall off again. Throughout the short story, he meets both men and women, which says that he is bisexual. It may also be quite normal in this society, in the future, where you in fact can simply buy a new heart, where it is possible to try anything without noticing any consequences, otherwise it may be because he is confused about his own sex and therefore he is trying to figure out his relations to both men and women. The main character seems to have it difficult to find a balance in his life, because he cannot live without being with a regular partner, or without having someone who loves him. He cannot even manage to break up with a partner, and naturally calm down, and it is pretty hard for him, where he will feel sorrow for a long time, which he cannot stand, and therefor has to switch his mechanic heart, to get in better conditions and save himself from the pain. Another problem with the main character is that he cannot incorporate his feelings, especially with regards to be an open person towards his relations properly. He fall in love, without looking for his partners criteria, and even don’t find out if the partner matches his expectations, but will instead end up in relation without any feelings and without any fear of falling in love and get hurt. I don’t think that he lives under a safe environment with values such as family, friends or work, or a stable structure. That is what I assume. He is actually locking himself out of the truth, and he knows that his actions are wrong, so he make himself renting hearts as a facade but is still feeling bad about his life because everyone who rent a heart will realize that pain isn’t just in the heart, but also in the mind, and it cannot be obviated.

Willie Stark as Huey Long Essay -- Literary Analysis, Robert Penn War

Robert Penn Warren’s novel, All the King’s Men depicts the tale of the rise of a political leader named Willie Stark. Many readers have speculated that Warren based Willie Stark’s character on Huey Long, a controversial, political leader from Louisiana who was prominent during the early 1900s. Although Robert Penn Warren has â€Å"repeatedly denied that Willie Stark is a fictional portrait of Huey Long,† many aspects of the novel directly correlate to the political career and personal life of Huey Long (Payne). Robert Penn Warren creates a character whose experiences and political career directly correlate to the events in Huey Long’s life. The speculations that Willie Stark is a fictional representation of Huey Long are indisputable due to the events in the novel and the characterization of Willie Stark, Huey Long came from a humble background. His father, Huey Pierce Long, Sr. was a â€Å"livestock farmer† from Winn Parish, one of the â€Å"poorest parishes in a very poor state† (Hueylong.com). Willie Stark also hailed from a modest background. Penn describes Willie as a â€Å"red-faced and red-necked farm boy† demonstrating humble roots similar to those of Huey Long (7, Warren). Willie also comes from a low class family, which enables him to identify with the common man of society. For example, during his impromptu speech in front of the convenient store, Willie uses Germanic diction and speaks to the â€Å"folks† in the town of his being called to â€Å"come home† and the importance of roots (16-17). Huey and Willie’s upbringings are clearly a connection between the two men and directly impact their personalities and decisions that they make throughout their lives. Perhaps a more concrete example of the association between the fictional Will... ... described as a man whoâ€Å"bathes daily in a swamp of corruption, including casual infidelity† (Keller). Willie Stark’s actual death in the novel symbolizes Huey Long’s â€Å"death† in the election for mayor following the unveiling of his less than acceptable actions. Although Robert Penn Warren denies the assumptions that Willie Stark was created as a fictional representation of Huey Long, the correlations between the novel, All the King’s Men and Huey Long’s life are indisputable. Warren’s development of Willie Stark’s character perfectly mimics Huey Long through his political advances, his sexual indiscretions, his personality, and his assassination in the Capital building. The historical parallels shine clearly throughout the plot of the novel, but the internal detail of All the King’s Men clearly demonstrates the connections between Huey Long and Willie Stark. Willie Stark as Huey Long Essay -- Literary Analysis, Robert Penn War Robert Penn Warren’s novel, All the King’s Men depicts the tale of the rise of a political leader named Willie Stark. Many readers have speculated that Warren based Willie Stark’s character on Huey Long, a controversial, political leader from Louisiana who was prominent during the early 1900s. Although Robert Penn Warren has â€Å"repeatedly denied that Willie Stark is a fictional portrait of Huey Long,† many aspects of the novel directly correlate to the political career and personal life of Huey Long (Payne). Robert Penn Warren creates a character whose experiences and political career directly correlate to the events in Huey Long’s life. The speculations that Willie Stark is a fictional representation of Huey Long are indisputable due to the events in the novel and the characterization of Willie Stark, Huey Long came from a humble background. His father, Huey Pierce Long, Sr. was a â€Å"livestock farmer† from Winn Parish, one of the â€Å"poorest parishes in a very poor state† (Hueylong.com). Willie Stark also hailed from a modest background. Penn describes Willie as a â€Å"red-faced and red-necked farm boy† demonstrating humble roots similar to those of Huey Long (7, Warren). Willie also comes from a low class family, which enables him to identify with the common man of society. For example, during his impromptu speech in front of the convenient store, Willie uses Germanic diction and speaks to the â€Å"folks† in the town of his being called to â€Å"come home† and the importance of roots (16-17). Huey and Willie’s upbringings are clearly a connection between the two men and directly impact their personalities and decisions that they make throughout their lives. Perhaps a more concrete example of the association between the fictional Will... ... described as a man whoâ€Å"bathes daily in a swamp of corruption, including casual infidelity† (Keller). Willie Stark’s actual death in the novel symbolizes Huey Long’s â€Å"death† in the election for mayor following the unveiling of his less than acceptable actions. Although Robert Penn Warren denies the assumptions that Willie Stark was created as a fictional representation of Huey Long, the correlations between the novel, All the King’s Men and Huey Long’s life are indisputable. Warren’s development of Willie Stark’s character perfectly mimics Huey Long through his political advances, his sexual indiscretions, his personality, and his assassination in the Capital building. The historical parallels shine clearly throughout the plot of the novel, but the internal detail of All the King’s Men clearly demonstrates the connections between Huey Long and Willie Stark.

In 1485 – 1603 to what extent was the government of England dysfunctional in the mid-Tudor period?

In the context of the years 1485 to 1603 to what extent was the government of England dysfunctional in the mid-Tudor period? During the Tudor Dynasty it is easily thought that the years between 1547 and 1558 were ones of crisis. With the succession of a child and the first woman within England, people have assumed that the years between Henry VIII and Elizabeth I were an unproductive interlude. The mid Tudor period is seen as negative years within the Tudor Dynasty.It is regarded that Henry VIII and Elizabeth I’s reputations were a factor in why historians such as A.F Pollard and S T Bindoff supported the ‘Mid Tudor Crisis’ . The ‘two little Tudors’, referring to Edward and Mary, seemed colourless in comparison to their surrounding successors, so much so that A Pollard says â€Å"Edward was portrayed as a sickly boy who, throughout his reign, was the pawn of two ‘regents’† while Mary was seen as an ‘intolerant, dogmatic and n eurotic woman who failed to produce an heir’ .Therefore it could be seen that people believed the years of crisis were at their most dysfunctional between the years 1547-1558. W R D Jones argued that Edward and Mary’s reigns were a period of religious disruption, large scale disorder and rebellion alongside the inefficiency and sterility in government and administration, social and economic problems and disastrous foreign policy. This supports the description of the mid-Tudor period being dysfunctional. However there could be influence from the 16th Century writers such as John Foxe who was author to ‘Book of Martyrs’, which was written just after Marys death and depicted her as a monster. Foxe was responsible for a lasting picture of Mary as it fitted prejudices of a confident.Under these circumstances it was not surprising that the period 1547 – 1558 were marked by disasters. However historians such as David Loades, Jennifer Loach and Robert Tittl er stress that there was much creativity in the period. Government under Duke of Northumberland and Mary continued to be effective; also there was continuity in religious beliefs and some foreign policy successes. There were problems within Edward and Marys reigns that were also found in times of Henry VIII and Elizabeth’s for example Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536, Spanish Armada in 1588 and social and economic problems in late 1590’s matched those in 1540’s.Therefore the significance of Edward’s and Mary’s reign was what did not happen rather than what did in supporting that their reigns were the least dysfunctional in England. But in order to gain an understanding of whether or not there was a â€Å"Mid-Tudor† crisis in this period, it is important to compare and contrast other periods of the Tudor dynasty. Some revisionist historians argue that certain areas of Henry VII’s reign, 1485-1509, involved a â€Å"crisis†, for exampl e the Pretenders of Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck.Also the death of the next heir to the throne, Arthur Tudor, in 1502, Elizabeth I and the Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536, the greatest rebellion that threatened England during the reign of Henry VIII, which would have caused the monarchy more concern then the alleged Mid-Tudor crisis . Above all this however, was the Spanish Armada in 1588 during the reign of Elizabeth I. The Spanish Armada threatened national security. Revisionist views of this period have already questioned the presence of a dysfunctional government during the reigns of the Mid-Tudors. Historians such as S. J Lee and D.Loades argue that other parts of the Tudor regime were crisis ridden and that the Mid-Tudor period was relatively stable in comparison. When it came to foreign policy, Henry VII was far less extravagant than his son. Henry’s greatest achievement in foreign policy was possibly his alliance with the Catholic monarchs and the Treaty of Medina del Campo in 1489. After his policy successes he suffered a defeat in Brittany which was a low point for the King’s foreign policy. His main weaknesses in his foreign policy were not helped by the successive losses of his family members, firstly his son Arthur in 1502 and then his wife Elizabeth in 1503.He then failed to re-marry and achieve stronger diplomatic relations outside of England following the death of Elizabeth creating a weak government in England. Also the death of Isabella of Castile was another problem for Henry as he would have Ferdinand as his rival instead of an ally over territorial gains in Europe and in the New World. The later years of Henrys foreign policy were definitely his most challenging and difficult period of foreign affairs allowing the government to be weak and therefore vulnerable to a crisis.His son, Henry VIII was a commanding figure who immediately set about wanting to gain respect and authority in Europe. Henry VIII’s foreign policy can be divided into two separate periods of time in which he went to war. The first period was at the beginning of his reign, in 1509-1515, Henry enforced a policy of aggressive and glorious warfare, this policy allowed invasions to occur within in France and Scotland. He was victorious within both invasions however it was an expensive policy to initiate.The second time period was during the years 1540-1547, this is when Henry, yet again, wanted more glory and domination over foreign affairs. This period of foreign policy was extremely expensive and came at a great financial cost. The gaining of Boulogne and loss of military personnel, costing ? 2,144,765, achieved nothing greater than personal glory for Henry showing his reign as one of dysfunction. The disastrous warfare policy in France and Scotland left Henry’s son Edward with little in the treasury and no financial platform to build upon as well as weak alliances with these countries.Therefore Henry VIII weakened the govern ment for his sons reign which could have created a crisis, this supports that the mid-Tudor period was highly influenced by previous successors allowing any dysfunction to be partially blamed outside the years 1547-1558. So when the death of Henry VIII occurred, the throne was left to his child Edward VI in 1547 with England’s financial stability and foreign relation being left in a poor condition with uncertainty on whether it will recover. As Edward was a minor, his two Lord Protectors, firstly the Duke of Somerset and later Northumberland advised Edward with his decisions.Somerset’s administration was faced with rebellions and uprisings in 1549. The rebellions were part of a mixture of religious and social upheaval. Kett’s rebellion in Norfolk, suffered particularly seriously from the enclosure laws . They were not, however, a threat to the ruling dynasty in the way the Pretenders were to Henry VII. With Lord Somerset ruling at the beginning of Edwards reign, England yet again was at war with Scotland; however this time was without royal approval. Somerset funded his efforts against Scotland with money from the debased coinage.It is possible to say that Somerset allowed the foreign policy to dominate over other royal problems, especially the king’s finances, which he lost all control of . The economy within England suffered from inflation after the debasement of the coinage. This was mostly seen in England's wool and cloth exports as they collapsed in 1551, mainly because of prices rising. In 1552, an Act was passed regulating the manufacture of wool to try and encourage trade . The inflationary pressures increased due to a poor harvest in 1548.This led to unrest within the country that then provoked uprisings the following year in Cornwall and Devon . To some historians, it can be viewed that Somerset’s ruling was as if he was the King. This was thought due to Somerset treating Edward as a child and not respecting the Kin g’s authority. The lack of respect and underestimation of Edwards authority ultimately led to Somerset’s death. Due to the rebellions, this period under the ruling of Somerset it would be seen to be leading towards a crisis.The situation was rescued and turned around by the more pragmatic approach of Somerset’s successor, the Duke of Northumberland. Once Edward replaced Somerset and appointed Northumberland as his new protector, Northumberland faced the task of restoring the Crown’s finances. To do this, the expenditure would be reduced to fund the campaigns in France and Scotland. Northumberland entrusted Cecil with reorganising the Crown’s finances. This was seen as an achievement as Cecil managed to gain extra revenue out of the Church.Edward’s protectors Somerset and Northumberland had different ways of ruling. Somerset continued to debase the coinage and spend large amounts of money on placing troops in Scotland and going to war with Fr ance as if the king’s money was limitless. Northumberland on the other hand, helped by Walter Mildmay, the Treasurer, reorganised the governments finances which involved the stopping of debasement and pulling England out of conflicts with France and Scotland. This progress continued in to Mary I reign and then without Mary I, Elizabeth could never have completed the process of recoinage.This is argued in Michael Hutchings article: â€Å"Elizabeth’s government could never have tackled the coinage problem so swiftly had the ground not been prepared† . This allows Edward and Marys reigns to show great improvement and only positive progress regarding finance, therefore turning away from the period being a ‘crisis’. But the greatest action of the Duke of Northumberland’s financial success as Edward’s protector was to put an immediate end to the disastrous foreign wars in Scotland and France, wars which Somerset had financed .Northumberland had gained his funds by signing the Treaty of Boulogne in 1550 this stopped the expenditure flow out of Boulogne. Despite much criticism, Northumberland’s actions in foreign policy were positive due to England gaining financially, a profit of ?133,333 which was received from the French. Even though a truce was decided, there was still a constant threat from the Scots and French to the English security . J. Guy states that Northumberland’s success in foreign policy was due to ending Somerset’s wars . This is because Northumberland had recognised that foreign affairs should not be mixed into a domestic policy, which is something which Somerset failed to understand and led England towards a financial crisis.Edward’s full authority and respect as King is hard to assess, mainly because of his short reign as King and the fact that he had two Protectors at his side constantly. It is well known that Edward was an intellectual and had a strong grasp on how the gov ernment and court functioned due to being well educated and taught about ruling from an early age. But Edward’s death occurred too early to tell if he would have made a successful king.In theory it is thought that he had the skills and knowledge to rule England successfully. In David Starkey’s documentary about the reigns of Edward and Mary, it was said that Edward was â€Å"not a puppet King† and that he made decisions in court due to his knowledge of the government . Edward was naturally studious, intelligent and a devout Protestant. Apparently he was always self-disciplined and gained advanced knowledge of government, economics and the nobility from an early age due to his Father, Henry VIII, relying on his male heir to be his successor.Edward made decisions in his own interests, for example the disposal of Somerset. The King showed a lack of emotion and was described as â€Å"mature and driven† which was a combination of qualities from his two previou s successors. This does not support the belief of the mid-Tudor period being dysfunctional due to the qualities of Edward being a strong combination of the positive and successful qualities of the previous reigns, showing a solid base of a successful reign. After the death of the boy King Edward, for the first time a woman gained the throne of England.Mary’s initial concern before her rise to the throne was marriage and producing an heir for her reformed Catholic society. Foreign policy was not high on Mary’s list of priorities. Therefore the preference of gaining a foreign husband in Philip II of Spain allowed an Anglo-Spanish alliance against European rivals and gained Mary a husband. But her aim to gain a foreign husband was not welcomed by the English people as many felt that a male foreign ruler would take the control of England from the authority of Mary.This led the marriage to result in immediate discontent which brought uprisings in the country. The most threa tening rebellion was Wyatt’s Rebellion in 1554. The Wyatt rebellion arguably was the greatest threat to Mary’s reign. The social unrest brought into England, due to high unemployment figures was evident as many chose not recognise a foreign ruler in an English government. Although it represented a real threat to Mary the uprising never had the backing or strength to take over and control Mary so the possibility of a crisis was avoided.One of Mary’s greatest achievements economically, however, was her government’s plans for recoinage. Even though the completion of the recoinage took place after her death in Elizabeth’s reign, according to C. E. Challis ‘Elizabeth could never have tackled the problem of the coinage either as quickly or as effectively as she did had it not been so thoroughly aired amongst government officials in the immediately preceding years’ . This supports the purpose of Marys reign and shows that her reign was not an unproductive interlude before Elizabeth’s reign.David Loades supports the positive view towards Mary. He states that â€Å"she succeeded in enforcing her will over three major matters: her marriage, the return to Rome and the declaration of war† . In M. Hutchings article of Mary Tudor, he makes the statement that â€Å"Mary gave financial stability†¦ countered unemployment and social problems. Above all, simply by establishing her own claim to the throne and maintaining it, Mary re-established the legitimacy of the Tudor succession† . The Succession of Elizabeth I after Mary I as Queen of England occurred in 1558.The reputation of Elizabeth I is of high standard and she is considered as good as English monarch as some of the male rulers. The foundations of this reputation were found in the impressive nature of the Elizabethan court, the development of the English culture, the defeat of the Spanish Armada and her successful re-creation of the Church of Engl and following the death of the Catholic Mary I . However, during Elizabeth’s reign as Queen was full of revolts and uprisings. These included key revolts the Northern Earls revolt in 1569, The Ridolfi plot of 1571 and the Babington plot of 1586 which aimed to remover Elizabeth from the throne.The plots were due to the social, economic and religious unrest within England. The rise in population and vagrancy were issues in which Elizabeth had to contend with. Therefore these revolts do not portray a Queen who did not face crises throughout her long reign and also display more serious displays of dysfunction than that of the mid-Tudor period. During Elizabeth’s reign the Spanish Armada and social discontent was much more of a threat to the English crown than any other rebellion or foreign policy with the other monarchs in the Mid-Tudor period.The real possibility of invasion from a foreign force was more of a threat than any other rebellion during the reigns of Edward VI and Mary I but due to their successful reigns this was avoided. This is the Armada Portrait which was taken after her victory against the Spanish Armada. It depicts Elizabeth as the gloriana figure in her country. The picture portrays a stormy, defeatist view of the Spanish loss against the English navy with the picture showing light shaded sky, calm and steady water and the English navy in the foreground on the left side.On the right of the picture is the defeated Spanish Armada. However what dominates the picture is Elizabeth herself. The portrait displays Elizabeth in all her glory, with her flame red hair and whitened face . Her dress and jewels show her power as well as beauty. The portrait captures Elizabeth as a very beacon of defiance which suggests that her reign was one of no dysfunction but as one of many successes and victory, however due to much propaganda within the era this could be an unfair representation of Elizabeth’s reign.This portrait is named the Rainbo w portrait and Elizabeth is displayed in a light tone again. The crown symbolises her royalty and her clothes suggest that her royal magnificence and aura over the English people is maintained due to their extravagance. Elizabeth is holding a rainbow in her right hand. The rainbow symbolizes peace, and the inscription reminds viewers that only the queen's wisdom can ensure peace and prosperity . This could suggest that she is an idol to her people for showing defiance in the tough periods of the 1590s when poverty was rife and harvests failed in England.The snake on her left arm also denotes the wisdom of the Queen. The whole portrait is one of a warning to those who oppose Elizabeth. At the time of this portrait, Elizabeth was 60 years of age, the light shades of the portrait show the Queen as a youthful and a beautiful figure who is in control of her country. In the rainbow portrait, Elizabeth is ageless . All this is powerful propaganda and shaped people’s opinions and vie ws of her, this suggests that she needed to create a false view of herself in order to make up for the dysfunction during her reign.During the years 1485 to 1603 it is certain that financially they were extremely unstable in many different moments during the reigns of each monarch. Henry VII was the only monarch that kept control of his money and died with money left to pass down, this is the main reason as to why Henry VII is regarded as a successful King. However the enclosure issue and the Cornish rebellion threatened to drain him financially. So at the end of his reign, Henry’s popularity suffered greatly but despite this, Henry VII was able to provide his son with a large treasury to start him off as King.Henry VIII however failed to follow in his father’s footsteps. Even though Henry VIII did gain financially through the Break with Rome and the Dissolution of the Monasteries in 1536, within his second period of â€Å"aggressive and glorious† warfare he use d all his money to go to war which left him with nothing financially. Even though during the next two reigns social unrest and major propaganda took hold, Mary in particular was effective in controlling the masses with her councillors and effective revenue and recoinage reforms.Also Edward was able to manipulate his two Lord Protectors despite being a minor; he had very good intellectual knowledge of the process of government and had the power to implement his policy into the country. The governments of the two monarchs were kept intact and were not as faction-ridden as Henry VIII’s final years as King. The Mid-Tudors if anything strengthened the finances of the government; stabilized the government and increased the diplomatic skills of the monarchy.The most significant part of the reigns is what didn’t occur as there was no breakdown in parliament, no overhaul of Royal Supremacy, no foreign invasion and no civil wars. Historians such as S. J Lee and D. Loades have pr esented the question of â€Å"Was there a Mid-Tudor crisis? † They reviewed the Mid Tudor period and allowed an argument to support Mary’s and Edwards reigns as the opposite of a crisis. Therefore I believe that the â€Å"Mid-Tudor crisis† is an over-exaggeration to describe the period of Edward and Mary.Even though there were a number of personal crises to test the Mid-Tudor monarchs such as being a child and the first woman on the throne, but nothing that threatened the public order, government and security. This is in comparison to other events during the period of 1485-1603, the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536 threatened national security more than Wyatt’s rebellion of 1554. The pretenders to Henry VII’s throne, Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck threatened to de-stabilize a Tudor regime that had only just begun following the Wars of the Roses in the 15th Century.And Elizabeth was not the â€Å"golden monarch† that she was portrayed as follow ing the succession crisis of 1603. The conclusion is that the Mid-Tudors have been unfairly criticized during their reigns due to the way in which they were depicted by their people and historian commentators, such as John Foxe, and it was until recently revisionist historians started to review the events of the Mid-Tudor period presenting an argument against the time period being a ‘crisis’ but as one of tests and tribulations that were all over come, showing a period of an effective government of England.

The Truth of Disresepct - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 6 Words: 1861 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2019/04/01 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Truth Essay Did you like this example? The tradition of singing the national anthem at sporting events started amid the 1918 baseball World Series. During the seventh-inning stretch of the first game between the Boston Red Sox and the Chicago Cubs, the band started to play The Star-Spangled Banner (it was not the official national song around then). Players turned to confront the centerfield flagpole, and fans, who were at that point on their feet, started to stand at attention. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Truth of Disresepct" essay for you Create order Before the ending of the anthem, nearly the whole stadium was singing and the tune finished to a chorale of loud applause. At the time, World War I was nearing an end. Singing The Star-Spangled Banner that day was a planned presentation of comradery and patriotism in America. Harry Frazee, the owner of the Red Sox at the time, began every proceeding game by having the band play the anthem. The playing of The Star-Spangled Banner before games turned out to be such a hit, that after the war finished, the melody kept on being played at ball games. Be that as it may, it was basically saved for eminent events like holidays, opening day, and the World Series. Amid World War II, the melody turned out to be significantly more famous, as it was a path for substantial groups to demonstrate their patriotism. Moreover, advances in technology implied that the melody could be played over speaker frameworks as opposed to requiring a band, making it less demanding to incorporate into games. When the war had finished, The Star-Spangled Banner had moved from an only baseball custom, to a rapidly spreading tradition which was added into other sporting events. Over the past few years, sports athletes have been peacefully protesting against the star-spangled banner to encourage change in society. Much controversy has been sparked in context with this issue regarding NFL players and the taking a knee movement, therefore, the inquiry remains: Is taking a knee ill bred and unpatriotic, or is taking a knee simply protesting injustice? Two years ago, Colin Kaepernick (the previous quarterback of the San Francisco 49ers) chose to dissent racial oppression. Amid the playing of the national anthem before a game, Kaepernick chose to take a knee. His reasons? Kaepernick has made a name for himself through h is many efforts in trying to raise awareness and better America. In August 2016, Kaepernick stated, I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. Notwithstanding, he additionally put his money behind his route of action. Throughout the season, Kaepernick promised to give $1 million to associations that work to address subjection in areas of color. Funding through Kaepernicks establishment has been distributed to associations in Texas, for example, Texas Advocates for Justice, which endeavors to end the criminalization of our communities of color and to devastate the history of racism in the criminal justice system. After a year, as an ever increasing number of athletes are taking a knee, the discussion and debate about it proceeds. NFL players, mentors and fans have been on the two sides of the discussion. Its astounding that regardless of Kaepernicks enunciated objective and desire to utilize his fame to advance and bring awareness to social change, he has been attacked. The players are standing up or kneeling down to convey attention to the issue of how African-Americans are treated in this nation. Some police are not treating colored individuals with respect and theres a long history to this. This is still a prominent issue in our country, to well known athletes and celebrities, as well. Like as of late when James Blake was bound, pummeled to a Manhattan road, and held for 15 minutes by a white policeman who thought he was a criminal. It was mixed up character, and the primary cop didnt apologize. Along these lines, this is about the network of colored players, and they ought to get the opportunity to challenge it. Colored individuals and other individuals who arent of color are able to protest and speak up since this is about our entire nation. Football players are conveying everything that needs to be conveyed through the First Amendments insurance of the right to speak freely. Theyre stating something with their bodies, regardless of whether theyre kneeling or raising a fist in defiance. Many, including football fans and President Trump, have confused his message. As indicated by the Library of Congress, Section 8 of the United States Code gives us an understanding of the respectful and disrespectful notions toward the flag. There are many statements regarding disrespect, for example, one is that the banner shall not be used for advertising purposes. In our lifetime, I guarantee we can all recount an instance where a disrespectful event like this took place. Yet, there is no explanation or statement that kneeling is disrespectful. A previous teammate of Kaepernicks, Eric Reid, wrote in an on going commentary that they chose to kneel because its a respectful gesture, but that is still being misconstrued as disrespectful to the country, flag and military personnel. For instance, President Trump announced at a rally, NFL owners should fire players for taking a knee during the national anthem, because thats a total disrespect of our heritage. Furthermore, Vice President Mike Pence attended an NFl game and tweeted, While everyone is entitled to their own opinions, I dont think its too much to ask NFL players to respect the Flag and our National Anthem. To me, it appears that we are attempting to maintain systems of injustice. Is it an excessive amount to ask our lawmakers and community leaders to go to bat for equality and racial oppression? It is apparent that having a favored status, such as owning a NFL group, takes into account the prevailing group to manage the message behind the significance of taking a knee. With the end goal for us to push ahead as a general public, we should all unmistakably see what is going on in this nations society, acknowledge the truth that injustice exists, and work to enhance the lives of everybody. It will be troublesome to push for better when the general public cant face reality and realize that Kaepernicks actions were not a form of disrespect toward the flag. In the expressions of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. Kaepernick has embodied this statement. Presently, his career has been put to a hold by his readiness to stand or take a knee for equity in this nation. I challenge the individuals who keep comparing taking a knee with disrespecting the banner and nation to acknowledge his true message and cooperate to enhance injustice in America. Colin Kaepernicks decision to sit or kneel in silent protest during the national anthem has sparked much drama regarding paying the proper respect to the military soldiers who have served and fought for the freedom of our nation. While some call it a slap in the face to the military, many veterans see otherwise. Benjamin Starks, a veteran of both the Navy and Army reserve, told Business Insider, He is exercising his constitutional right, and Im glad that hes doing it. Kaepernick isnt protesting against the military, but the innocent black lives that have been taken from us for no apparent reason. Since taking a knee is not a form of disrespect, military veterans support Kaepernick and his beliefs. Players have the right to challenge and despite everything, theyre offending a few people, similar to the veterans who battled for their opportunity. Veterans have battled for the flag, yet the banner is only an image of our nation of opportunity and freedom. Whats more? The flag doesnt sec ure our right to freedom and opportunity: the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are what ensure our freedom. Much the same as veterans battled for opportunity with poise and pride, players are battling for a similar thing, likewise with nobility and pride. Its people like Donald Trump who further add to the nonsense in this country. During a rally in Alabama, Trump said, Wouldnt you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, Get that son of a bitch off the field right now, out hes fired! Veterans have continued to voice their support against the President as well as the people protesting Kaepernick. They have stood up in support in the same manner at which Kaepernick protested injustice and police brutality. A Green Beret who is the son of a World War II veteran and father of an Army officer who served in Afghanistan said, I can tell you, speaking for three generations of my family, it is PRECISELY for men like Kaepernick, and his right to peacefully protest injustice, that we were willing to serve, said Michael Sands. Want to respect the American flag? Then respect the ideals for which it stands. Bullying language and calling peaceful protesters sons of bitches who should be fired arent among them . Its people like these who understand and acknowledge the fact that Kaepernick has unnecessary hate. A young mans fierce passing on account of the police is found to be justified in an official courtroom because of his suspicious appearance: a dark hoodie and his hands in his pocket. An elderly lady is lethally shot in her home for her connection to a speculated criminal. A hitched man with two little children is gagged to death after a minor activity stop by an officer who later guaranteed that his unarmed injured individual was using a firearm. These individuals all have a couple of shared characteristics: the shade of their skin, their assumed blame at first sight, and their definitive unjustified demise controlled by the law force. These are normal events. The individuals of color who have been either injured or killed by an officer have been supported through Kaepernicks taking a knee movement. Kaepernick, along with his teammates and players, have rose to the occasion that the flag isnt standing for what it is supposed to represent. Because of the astoundingly unbalanced rate of African-Americans injured or killed by the police, and the hidden widespread racial profiling, police brutality towards blacks in America must be given attention immediately. Police brutality is misuse of power or a given force by any given police officer. Examples of this range from physical combat to verbal abuse. In spite of mainstream thinking, numerous types of police brutality incorporate false arrests, verbal abuse, and racial profiling. In many cases regarding these encounters, police brutality has been deemed lethal. Citizens of the United States need to open their eyes and realize the injustices in the American system. In conclusion, Kaepernick and the players supporting him arent hurting the flag, theyre standing for what they believe in: and that is perfectly acceptable. Given the platf orm and names these players have earned for themselves, they feel the need to rise and express what is right. The athletes have risen to the occasion as they know everyone is watching.