Freedom of Speech and Liberty free essay sample

Quotations about Freedom Related Quotes Censorship Human Rights USA Patriotism The fact, in short, is that freedom, to be meaningful in an organized society must consist of an amalgam of hierarchy of freedoms and restraints. †Samuel Hendel He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself. †Thomas Paine History does not teach fatalism. There are moments when the will ofa handful of free men breaks through determinism and opens up new roads. †Charles de Gaulle Freedom has its life in the hearts, the actions, the spirit of men and so it must be daily earned and refreshed else like a flower cut from its life-giving roots, it will wither and die. †Dwight D. Eisenhower Liberty is the possibility of doubting, of making a mistake, of searching and experimenting, of saying No to any authority literary, artistic, philosophical, religious, social, and even political. We will write a custom essay sample on Freedom of Speech and Liberty or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page †Ignazio Silone, The God That Failed, 1950 Liberty: One of Imaginations most precious possessions. †Ambrose Bierce, The Devils Dictionary The patriots blood is the seed of Freedoms tree. Ђâ€ Thomas Campbell Nothing is more difficult, and therefore more precious, than to be able to decide. †Napoleon Bonaparte Here is my advice as we begin the century that will lead to 2081. First, guard the freedom of ideas at all costs. Be alert that dictators have always played on the natural human tendency to blame others and to oversimplify. And dont regard yourself as a guardian of freedom unless you respect and preserve the rights of people you disagree with to free, public, unhampered expression. 2081 Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. I wish that every human life might be pure transparent freedom. Beauvoir Ђâ€ Gerard K. ONeill, †Abraham Lincoln †Simone de Stevenson, speech, Detroit, 1952 It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you. †Author unknown, sometimes attributed to M. Grundler We on this continent should never forget that men first crossed the Atlantic not to find soil for their ploughs but to secure liberty for their souls. †Robert]. McCracken You have freedom when youre easy in your harness. †Robert Frost For what avail the plough or sail, or land or life, if freedom fail? Ђâ€ Ralph Waldo Emerson Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the atigue of supporting it. †Thomas Paine In the truest sense, freedom cannot be bestowed; it must be achieved. †Franklin D. Roosevelt We have to call it freedom: whod want to die for a lesser tyranny? †Mignon McLaughlin, The Neurotics No tebook, 1960 Freedom is the oxygen of the soul. †Moshe Dayan There are two freedoms the false, where a man is free to do what he likes; the true, where he is free to do what he ought. Ђâ€ Charles Kingsley No one is free when others are oppressed. †Author Unknown Nations grown corrupt Love bondage more than liberty; Bondage with ease than strenuous liberty. †John Milton Just, harmonious, temperate as is the spirit of liberty, there is in the name and mere notion of it a vagueness so opposite to the definite clearness of the moral law. †Augustus William Hare and Julius Charles Hare, Guesses at Truth, by Two Brothers, 1827 Freedom means choosing your burden. †Hephzibah Menuhin Most people want security in this world, not liberty. †H. L. Mencken, Minority Report, 1956 †Eric Hoffer Men fght for freedom, then they begin to accumulate laws to take it away from themselves. †Author Unknown Freedom is that instant between when someone tells you to do something and when ou decide how to respond. †Jeffrey Borenstein Liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have. †Harry Emerson Fosdick Freedom is not enough. †Lyndon B. Johnson Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of resistance. Ђâ€ Woodrow Wilson The sound of tireless voices is the price we pay for the right to hear the music of our own opinions. †Adlai Stevenson, speech, New York City, 28 August 1952 We must be free not because we claim freedom, but because we practice it. †William Faulkner They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. †Benjami n Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759 Everywhere the human soul stands between a hemisphere of light and another of darkness on the confines of two everlasting hostile empires, Necessity and Free Will. Ђâ€ Thomas Carlyle, Essays, The Opera We have enjoyed so much freedom for so long that we are perhaps in danger of forgetting how much blood it cost to establish the Bill of Rights. †Felix Frankfurter O Liberty! is it well To leave the gates unguarded? Ђâ€ Thomas Bailey Aldrich No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck. Mass Meeting, Washington, D. C. , 1883 Let freedom never perish in your hands. †Frederick Douglass, speech, Civil Rights †Joseph Addison Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth. Ђâ€ George Washington I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroa chments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. †James Madison, speech, Virginia Convention, 1788 Liberty doesnt work as well in practice as it does in speeches. †Will Rogers Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. †Mahatma Gandhi Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. †Theodore We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. †Edward R. Murrow Freedom has a thousand charms to show, That slaves, however contented, never know. †William Cowper Most men, after a little freedom, have preferred authority with the consoling assurances and the economy of effort which it brings. †Walter Lippmann, A Preface to Morals, 1929 The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. †Daniel Webster Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better. †Albert Camus Men fght for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves. †D. H. Lawrence, Classical American Literature, 1922 I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery. †Author Unknown Freedom is the will to be responsible to ourselves. †Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols, 1888 The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well- eaning but without understanding. †Louis D. Brandeis When the People contend for their liberty, they seldom get anything for their Victory but new Masters. †George Savile A nation may lose its liberties in a day and not miss them in a century. Ђâ€ Baron de Montesquieu Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. †George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman, Maxims: Liberty and Equality, 1905 The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. †Edmund Burke We anarchists do not want to emancipate the people; we want the people to emancipate themselves. Ђâ€ Errico Mal atesta, lAgitazione, 18 June 1897 Freedom is never free. †Author Unknown We are free, truly free, when we dont need to rent our arms to anybody in order to be able to lift a piece of bread to our mouths. Ђâ€ Ricardo Flores Magon, speech, 31 May 1914 Many politicians are in the habit of laying it down as a self-evident proposition that no people ought to be free till they are fit to use their freedom. The maxim is worthy of the fool in the old story who resolved not to go into the water till he had learned to swim. †Thomas Macaulay My definition ofa free society is a society where it is safe o be unpopular. Adlai E. Stevenson Jr. (1900- 1965), Speech in Detroit, 7 Oct. 1952 Freedom is Just Chaos, with better lighting.

How successful was Lord Liverpool in responding to radical challenge from 1812-1822 Essays

How successful was Lord Liverpool in responding to radical challenge from 1812-1822 Essays How successful was Lord Liverpool in responding to radical challenge from 1812-1822 Paper How successful was Lord Liverpool in responding to radical challenge from 1812-1822 Paper To look at how successful Lord Liverpool was in responding to radical challenge, you have to look at what were the radical challenges in this period, what was causing the unrest thought the country. Then you have to look at what Lord Liverpool did to resolve the unrest and stop the challenges. 1815-1820 was a time of unrest; however unrest was not generally revolutionary. Even if Liverpools actions were seen as repressive he had to nip revolution in the bud. For example with the spa fields Meetings. This was a series of mass meetings (mainly in London) and it was aimed to inspire people and to intimidate the authorities. As a result, parliament sanctioned the suspension of Habeas Corpus and passed A Seditious Meeting Act, which meant that people could be held without evidence or a trial for as long as the government needed and it meant that no groups larger than 50 people could gather or have a meeting and talk about politics or revolution. However some critics say that this does not prove he was successful because the suspension of Habeas Corpus only lasted a couple of years. This is just one way in which the government responded to radical challenges during this period. Some historians say that this was very successful and radical challenge drooped as a result, however some say that this forced these radical groups underground and just inspired more people. The government had to nip revolution in the bud because at the time the government had to many weaknesses that revolutionary groups could take advantage of like the fact that Britain was in national debt had risen by  £64 million from 1739 to 1816, the government had to rely on yeomanry which was a small armed forced and if a riot got out of control then they would not be able to stop them and most importantly Liverpool did not have the benefit of hindsight. He did not know that there wasnt going to be a revolution so he had to respond quickly and decisively to stop radical challenges/challenges growing. Unrest in the country was due to many reasons such as: the Corn Laws, the abolition of income ta x, war time contracts had ended and the demobilisation meant that there was high unemployment. Some historians say that Lord Liverpool did not address unrest, but he made it worse by introducing silly little policies like the Corn Laws. The Corn Law guaranteed protection for wheat prices for the agricultural or landowner interest from foreign imports of grain. The concept was not new. A similar law had been introduced in 1804 but to guarantee 80 shillings a quarter ( £4. 00) per quarter tonne or  £16 per tonne for producers before foreign grain was permitted to enter the British market seemed to government critics a little excessive. The whole point of the bill, as far as the government was concerned, was to guarantee landowners profits at a level to which they had become accustomed during the war. Most people saw it as apiece of class legislation in that it saved the landowners from cheaper foreign grain, established prices and made it more expensive for the consumer. This did not help the situation at all, in actual fact this just manifested more unrest thought the country and revolutionary groups took advantage of this. It is fair to say that the country was at a time of unrest; however some say that the government did not do anything constructive but just made the situation worse. the corn laws proves this but also the abolition of income tax in 1816 was a measure which benefited the rich but, because it led to a large increase in indirect taxes on tea, sugar, tobacco, beer and salt, which was harmful to the poor. War time contracts had ended and farmers and manufactures found themselves over producing because there was not enough demand for products. This meant that people had to be fired and business went into liquidation. With the demobilisation there was huge unemployment and this did not help as more and more people got tired of not having money and people were starting to starve. With all of these reasons causing unrest thought the country people stated to want change within the government. The government saw this as a problem and thought that there was going to be a revolution so their actions were to nip revolution in the bud. They felt they had to do whatever necessary to stop revolution. The historians that say the country was close to a revolution in the period 1815-1822 tend to emphasise the sheer volume of radical activity during this period. However those historians say that they threat of revolution was just a huge exaggeration point to the lack of coordination between the individual instances of protest and the states continued ability to respond decisively to it. Most historians say that the popular protest which characterised the immediate post-war periods was essentially traditional a not political but were related to the economic distress at the time. Most historians agree that the activity was economically motivated. During the period from 1816-1821 there was a series of mass meetings which were organise by radical groups. These were called the Spa Field Meetings. Most historians agree that the meetings were aimed at both inspiring the public and intimidating the authorities. The Spenceans were the organiser of the first few meetings. The Spenceans supported revolution but it is not clear as to whether plans were being made for revolution at the time of the Spa Fields Meetings. The first meeting saw a massive 20,000 people attend and was peaceful, however there were a few who after walked through Westminster and started smashing windows at high prices. In the second meeting around 200 people marched towards the tower of London, looting a gun shop on the way. The March of the Blanketeers was a march organised by William Benbow in March 1817. The marchers aims were to present a petition to the Prince Regent, asking him to relieve distress in the northern textile districts. Around 4,500 Blanketeers gathered in Manchester to protest in London. The Peterloo Massacre was when a crowd of around 60,000 gathered at St Peters Field on 16 August 1819 to demonstrate. Magistrates sent in the Manchester yeomanry at arrest the leader Hunt just after the meeting had begun. Because of the amount of people the yeomanry found it very hard to get to Hunt so the magistrates called in the regular forces to hep the engulfed yeomanry and in the panic a stampede followed and 11 people were killed and 400-600 were injured. All of these incidences were seen as a starting point for a revolution. We are now going to look at what the government did in response to these actions. It is commonly alleged that Liverpools government pursued repressive policies between 1815 and 1820. It acted in an unnecessarily harsh manner in crushing popular protest by, for example, suspending Habeas Corpus, passing the Seditious Meetings Act and breaking up the march of the Blanketeers in 1817, massacring those at Peterloo and passing the Six Acts in 1819. Much disorder was actually provoked by the government either indirectly through policies which placed intolerable burdens upon the poor or directly through the practice of employing agents provocateurs who encouraged lawbreaking so that they could collect a reward by informing on the law breakers. Following the Spa Fields meetings in December 1816, the government reacted by suspending Habeas Corpus. This meant that the government could hold someone suspected of radical or anti-government behaviour without trial for an indefinite period. Only 44 were arrested on suspicion of treason, of which 37 were detained when Habeas Corpus was partially suspended in February 1817. One of these was released soon after, whilst a second was discharged on compassionate grounds and a third died in custody. The remaining 34 had all been released by the time Habeas Corpus was fully restored in January 1818. As Norman Gash said It was not exactly a reign of terror. The government did have good right to suspend Habeas Corpus and introduce the Seditious Meetings Act because at the first Spa Fields Meeting Act there were over 20,000 people who attended and went rioting around London. On the second meeting 200 people marched to the Tower of London and Looted a gun shop on the way. The government saw this as a wake up call and had to introduce these policies or a revolution would take place they had to nip revolution in the bud. As a direct result of the Seditious Meeting Act, in the same month there where large scale gatherings for political purposes were banned. A small group of disorganised workers planned a march from St Peters field in Manchester to London to present their grievances to the Prince Regent in person. The protest was mainly peaceful and carried out in a legal fashioned in defiance of the government legislation. One marcher was killed in a heavy handed and needless display of brutality by the authorities in Stockport Cheshire. Local Magistrates declared that the initial gathering was seditious and dispersed it. This just created more unrest and most people saw this as going to far, however other historians say that he had to nip revolution in the bud. How was Lord Liverpool to know that there was not gong to revolution? Lord Liverpool saw a large group of people marching at a time of unrest this was the only action he could take because he could not afford to do nothing. The Peterloo Massacre has been called a symbol of repression by some historians, however some people have said that this was not a decision made by Lord Liverpool but by magistrates and they did not set our to stop the demonstration but just to get Hunt. Some historians say that the radical challenges in this period were such a threat that the government needed to take immediate action to deal with the threat and could not take any chances so repressive measures needed to be taken to nip revolution in the bud. However some historians say that these radical groups were regionally divided, had no weaponry and had poor organisation and end goals to be a serious threat. Looking at how successful Lord Liverpool was in dealing to radical challenges you have to remember how pitifully small Liverpools resources were for keeping the peace. Lacking a sizeable standing army or an effective police force, Liverpools government was obliged to rely upon spies and informers. The government at the time did not have any really power so they had to nip revolution in the bud. There was huge unrest thought the country due to various reasons and this led to radical protests. All of the protests were seen by the government as a starting point for a revolution and so the government had to deal with them through repressive policies. Liverpool had to stamp any possible radical challenges and he did this successfully.