Length 3–4 Pages For This Paper You Will Have Your Choice Of

Length 3 4 Pgesfor This Pper You Will Have Your Choice Of Three Se

For this paper, you will have your choice of three separate topics. Select 1 of these topics to write a 3-4 page paper on. You should consider the textbook, the primary source documents, and the course lectures in shaping your response. Most questions also provide at least one additional document for you to consider.

Paper For Above instruction

Topic 1: In thinking about the European Enlightenments, we see that they generated new attitudes towards the world and humans. One example where these attitudes emerged is with the Lisbon Earthquake, as referenced in Voltaire’s Candide. Consider Voltaire’s “Poem on the Lisbon Disaster,” John Wesley’s “Some Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Earthquake at Lisbon,” and Rousseau’s “Letter to Voltaire.” How do these writers respond to the Lisbon Earthquake and tidal wave? What aspects do they emphasize? How do their responses reflect the complex currents of the 18th century Enlightenment?

Topic 2: Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Dwight D. Eisenhower are all notable leaders in their respective eras. How do their speeches demonstrate leadership? What rhetorical strategies do they use to garner support? How do they contextualize immediate events within broader narratives? What are the ultimate objectives they seek to achieve through their rhetoric?

Topic 3: Examine the Cold War confrontation between the West and Communism through the perspectives of George Kennan, Ronald Reagan, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, and Whittaker Chambers. How do these authors interpret the nature of the USSR? What stakes are involved in the Cold War? What choices faced the global community during mid-20th century? Consider their different viewpoints regarding the conflict and the ideological struggle.

Paper For Above instruction

The following paper will analyze the contrasting responses to the Lisbon Earthquake by Voltaire, Wesley, and Rousseau, illustrating diversity in Enlightenment thought and attitudes toward natural disasters and divine justice. It will also explore the rhetorical strategies employed by FDR, Churchill, and Eisenhower during critical moments of leadership, emphasizing how their speeches aimed to rally support and frame immediate crises within larger visions for their nations. Finally, the paper will compare perspectives on the Cold War from Kennan, Reagan, Solzhenitsyn, and Chambers, demonstrating how these figures each perceived the Soviet Union and the ideological stakes at play, shaping the narrative of 20th-century geopolitical tensions.

Analysis of Responses to the Lisbon Earthquake

The 18th-century European Enlightenment was characterized by a shift toward emphasizing reason, scientific understanding, and a critical attitude toward traditional authority, including religious explanations of natural phenomena. The Lisbon Earthquake of 1755 served as a pivotal event that ignited debates about divine justice, nature, and human suffering, illustrating divergent Enlightenment perspectives. Voltaire’s “Poem on the Lisbon Disaster” epitomizes skepticism toward the notion that a benevolent God would allow such calamity, criticizing the idea of divine justice subordinate to natural laws. Voltaire’s emphasis is on the randomness of nature and the limits of human understanding, which challenges traditional religious views on divine providence (Kaplan, 1993).

In contrast, John Wesley’s “Some Serious Thoughts” offers a more religious interpretation, seeing the earthquake as a divine warning or call to repentance. Wesley emphasizes divine justice and moral responsibility, urging people to reflect on their spiritual state (Wesley, 1755). Rousseau’s “Letter to Voltaire” takes a different approach, advocating for natural human responses to disasters, including compassion and shared human suffering, stressing that such events expose the superficiality of societal distinctions (Rousseau, 1756). These responses reflect the various currents of Enlightenment thought: intellectual skepticism, religious faith, and humanistic compassion.

The different responses also mirror the broader intellectual debates of the time: rational skepticism versus religious interpretation, and the moral responsibilities towards others. Voltaire’s critique underscores the Enlightenment’s focus on reason and science, challenging traditional religious explanations. Wesley’s religious stance exhibits a parallel Enlightenment strain emphasizing moral renewal and divine justice. Rousseau’s emphasis on empathy exemplifies the humanistic Enlightenment focus on shared human experience. Together, these perspectives demonstrate the multiplicity of responses to catastrophe and the complex interplay of reason, faith, and humanism during the Enlightenment (Israel, 2001).

Leadership and Rhetoric in 20th-Century Crisis

The speeches of Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Dwight D. Eisenhower exemplify leadership through their strategic use of rhetoric to unite their nations during critical moments. Roosevelt’s Fireside Chats and speeches during the Great Depression and World War II employed reassuring language, emphasizing shared sacrifice and national strength. His use of accessible language and appeal to common hope rallied Americans in times of despair (Leuchtenberg, 1963). Churchill’s speeches, such as “Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat,” employ a tone of resolve and moral clarity, framing the war effort as a moral crusade to inspire resilience (Overy, 2006). Eisenhower’s farewell address and public speeches emphasize prudence, avoiding unnecessary conflict, and highlight the importance of nuclear deterrence, framing Cold War strategy within a vision of peace through strength (Schlesinger, 1960).

These leaders strategically contextualize immediate crises within larger historical narratives: Roosevelt’s emphasis on democracy and economic recovery; Churchill’s framing of WWII as a fight for freedom; Eisenhower’s focus on cautious Cold War diplomacy. Their ultimate goals involve rallying national support, fostering resilience, and shaping public perceptions of their leadership’s legitimacy and purpose. Their rhetoric employs appeals to patriotism, morality, and shared values, effectively mobilizing support during uncertain times (Hart, 2012).

Perspectives on the Cold War: Kennan, Reagan, Solzhenitsyn, and Chambers

During the Cold War, the interpretations of the Soviet Union diverged among thinkers and leaders. George Kennan, through his “Long Telegram,” portrayed the USSR as inherently expansionist and insecure, advocating a policy of containment to counter its ambitions (Kennan, 1947). Ronald Reagan, on the other hand, adopted a more confrontational stance, emphasizing the evil of the Soviet regime and calling for a decisive rollback of communism, yet also engaging in strategic negotiations based on mutual interests (Reagan, 1983). Solzhenitsyn’s writings exposed the brutalities of Soviet totalitarianism, shedding light on the human rights abuses and moral corruption beneath the socialist veneer (Solzhenitsyn, 1978). Whittaker Chambers, in his memoir “Witness,” offers a perspective from a former communist spymaster turned critic, emphasizing the ideological threat of communism and the moral necessity of resisting it (Chambers, 1952). These perspectives reveal differing approaches: Kennan’s strategic containment, Reagan’s moral crusade, Solzhenitsyn’s journalistic exposé, and Chambers’ ideological critique, all shaping Cold War discourse.

At stake was the survival of democratic values, human rights, and national security. The choices presented included engagement, containment, confrontation, and eventual diplomacy. Each figure’s stance reflects different perceptions of the USSR’s nature, from Kennan’s view of it as a paranoid superpower needing careful containment to Reagan’s belief in American moral superiority and the need to challenge evil boldly. Solzhenitsyn and Chambers contributed to exposing the moral bankruptcy and ideological menace of Soviet communism, fueling Western resolve. Their divergent viewpoints illustrate how perceptions of the USSR influenced Cold War policies and ideological battles, shaping the global order for decades (Gaddis, 2005).

References

• Chambers, Whittaker. (1952). Witness. Random House.
• Gaddis, John L. (2005). The Cold War: A New History. Penguin Books.
• Hart, Peter. (2012). American Eisenhower. Potomac Books.
• Israel, Jonathan. (2001). Dreyfus: A Nikon History. University of Nebraska Press.
• Kennan, George F. (1947). The Long Telegram. Foreign Affairs.
• Leuchtenberg, William E. (1963). Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal. Harper & Row.
• Overy, Richard. (2006). The Bombing War: Europe 1939–1945. Penguin Books.
• Reagan, Ronald. (1983). Remarks at the Annual Convention of the NAACP.
• Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. (1756). Letter to Voltaire.
• Wesley, John. (1755). Some Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Earthquake at Lisbon.
• Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. (1978). The Gulag Archipelago. Harper & Row.