International relations Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

International relations - Article Example This section uses realism theory to explain relationships among state and non-state actors in the international system. Realism is based on the idea that the international system exists according to the Hobbestian state of nature, which is anarchic and brutal. There is no centralized authority in the system. The influential states have powers that they use to subjugate the poor and powerless in the system. The paper evaluates three supranational regimes in order to understand the theory in detail. States agree to form governments that control internal affairs. It is not surprising that any sovereign state has the power to enforce and prescribe laws. These powers are limited in the international system because there is no Leviathan that controls the activities of all members. The manner in which African states and other developing countries conduct politics is a matter of great concern when it comes to the issue of classical realism. From liberalists’ point of view, the drives to power and will to dominate is based on liberty in which peoples’ freedom to determine the nature of politics is given priority in the society. According to Kenneth Waltz and Wendt, people are free to elect the leader they want. They are also at liberty to contribute to the government without restrictions. Neorealist focuses on the international system in which states are considered as the key actors. ... The difference between classical realism and neo-realism is based on how they view the causes of conflict in international relations. Classical realism view unchanging human nature and self-interest as the major causes of conflict in international relations while neo-realism consider state anarchy as the major cause of conflict in international relations (Harrison 89). Question 3: Persistent underdevelopment The dependency theory is utilized in international relations to predict dependency in third world countries. Dependency has been defined as a condition in which the growth and expansion of an economy is conditioned or determined by growth and expansion of another economy. This means that a dependent state cannot experience a self-sustaining development that is; it cannot be self-reliant because its economy is a reflection of the developed state’s economy. The process of dependency is sustained by foreign aid including technical assistance and military aid. The aid does not enhance the economy but it strengthens dependency relations. The aid further marginalizes the dependent countries since they create permanent debts. Marxists argue that neither mercantilism nor liberalism guarantee human happiness this is because the owners of the means of production control the markets whereas the state is the property of the elite. It therefore postulates that people should determine their own destiny through collectivization of interests (Allen and Thomas 69). Liberalism argues that politics and economics have no relationship whatsoever. The market according to liberalists is self-regulating because it operates on its internal logics. It claims that the market

Socio-Political Evidences Of His Controversial Death Essay Example for Free

Socio-Political Evidences Of His Controversial Death Essay United States President John F. Kennedy was assassinated on Friday November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas, at 12:30 PM Central time. He was on a campaign and support trip through Texas in anticipation of the upcoming 1964 presidential election. Kennedy was fatally wounded by multiple gunshots while riding in an open-top automobile. Texas Governor John B. Connally was also severely injured. The crime was officially attributed by the Warren Commission to certain Lee Harvey Oswald who was later killed in prison after two of his arrest. There was existing multi-faceted evidence that can lead to the real killer but as of this time, everything was left in mystery. This paper would like to make it a point that certain political decisions made by John F. Kennedy lead to his death. IN certain phases of the issue, some social events and realities in his life also contributed to his death such as his relationships with women and his religion-the Roman Catholic. The list of suspects goes on with the CIA, the Cubans, the KGB and the MAFIA, the people he emotionally hurt during his illicit sexual relationships, the officials he axed and the personnel he tried to humiliate during his term. The Warren report states, that Lee Harvey Oswald committed the murder alone out of his misguided communist ideals and desire to achieve fame in the only way that he could imagine. Oswald stated after his capture, that he is only a â€Å"patsy†, but since he was killed two days after the assassination by an infamous low level mafia gangster, nightclub owner, illegal drug and gun runner called Jack Ruby, no information could be gained from him. Whether Oswald really worked alone, as the report stated, remains a mystery, but he could also have been the gunmen of a large organization. BACKGROUND OF THE ASSASSINATION EVENT Here is the gist of the Warren Report on the actual assassination event. John F. Kennedy was in a trip to Dallas with his wife Jackie in an open limousine on November 22, 1963. The Presidential motorcade left Love Field at around 11:50am to drive through downtown Dallas. Warren Report stressed that from Love Field point, there were two occasions wherein the President personally requested to stop the limousine: first when he has to shake hands with the people who came to see him in the streets and the second one was when he has to speak to a Catholic nun he found on his way with a group of children (The Warren Report, p. 46). Actual footages and written reports literally would say that JFK, even in Dallas alone have been loved by the people. At 12:30 (EST) the limousine drove off to Elm Street through Triple Underpass. At that point, witnesses have heard several gunshots aimed at the President (p. 48). A certain Special Agent Rufus W. Youngblood confirmed that it was exactly 12:30 when he saw the sign clock situated at the top of the Texas Schoolbook Depository Building. A few seconds after that moment, gunshots were heard (ibid). Other witnesses in the motorcade also confirmed the time. Roy Kellerman who was then at the limousine signaled to the limousine driven, Special Agent Greer that it was 12:30 on his watch. Also, a police log on the radio report made by Chief of Police Curry, reporting the President was shot, confirmed 12:30pm (p. 49). The death of JFK was attributed to a certain Lee Harvey Oswald, who was then employed in the Texas Schoolbook Depository. There are theories that would point to Oswald as the lone shooter but there are also claims that it would be impossible to have just one shooter in that particular instance (Taylor, G. 2008). We will further look into that angle in the later part of this paper. Meanwhile, Taylor (2008) explained that there were a total of seven gunshots fired towards the limousine during the assassination but the third shot, based on Warren Report, was the fatal bullet that went through the head of the President. Other gunshots hit the President at the back while the others hit Governor Connally. Connally, then the Governor of Texas was with his wife in the limousine at the back where the President and his wife were seated. Both were rushed to the Parkland Memorial Hospital but the President did not survive. Soon after the body was removed from the hospital, Mrs. Kennedy opted to have the autopsy done at the National Naval Medical Center at Bethesda, Md. , where the President once served. The autopsy report concluded that the death was caused by a â€Å"Gunshot wound, head† (Warren Report, p. 60). However, there was another gunshot wound at the President’s head located at the right part of the forehead and the one that juts out at the back of the skull (ibid). Another serious wound was found at the back of the neck, according to official report. THE SUSPECTS FOR THE ASSASSINATION The purpose of this paper is primarily to prove that JFK’s death was due to political decisions during his presidency aside from other social factors such as his personal lifestyle. Although JFK’s death was still officially unsolved, decades of investigation and speculations brought to multi-faceted cause of his death and therefore a tree of suspects whose root was not yet particularly identified. Suspects include the Mafia, the Cubans, the KGB, the CIA, his political enemies inside the US Government and even Lyndon Johnson, his then Vice-President. We will examine JFK’s connections to each of these groups and people in order for us to determine the possible motive of each should they be the real assassins. Primarily, this paper will prove that JFK had made real erratic political decisions which made these people want his death the soonest. In the years following the Warren Commission Report, its findings have been repeatedly questioned. In 1979, the House Select Committee on Assassinations suggested that at least two gunmen were involved, and that the probable assassination conspirators were Mafia-connected. Later, two top committee staffers, G. Robert Blakey and Richard Billings, concluded that the assassination was planned and implemented by Mob bosses; that there were two shooters; and that Lee Harvey Oswald was silenced – on Mafia orders – by mobbed-up Dallas striptease club owner Jack Ruby. In 1998, a review board appointed by President Bill Clinton found nothing in secret JFK assassination records to bolster the single-bullet theory. In fact, as the Assassination Records Review Board went out of business, it complained that records of the post-mortem examination of President Kennedys body were incomplete. Such records could have cleared up mysteries about Kennedys head wound, or wounds, and helped determine whether he was shot from the front. In its final report, the review board said: There have been shortcomings that have led many to question not only the completeness of the autopsy records of President Kennedy, but the lack of a prompt and complete analysis of the records by the Warren Commission. While it collected and released thousands of previously secret government documents, the board also expressed worry that critical records may have been withheld from its scrutiny. It stressed that it was not able to secure all that was out there. In 2005, appearing at a scholarly symposium, assassination expert Dr. Jack Gordon went over doctors statements from the hospital in Dallas where Kennedy was taken after the shooting. Gordon produced quotes from nine doctors who gave the same description of a huge softball size hole in occipital-parietal region of Kennedys skull, and one nurse who said, In laymans terms, One large hole, back of his head. This contradicts the official story that the back of the head was completely intact. With all of these contradictions emerging – both during the Warren Commission hearings and in the aftermath of its final report – one has to wonder how the Warren Commission managed to arrive at the conclusions it did. A key edit in the Warren Report may have helped. The reports first draft said: A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly below the shoulder to the right of the spine. Had that stood, the trajectory would have made it impossible for the bullet that struck Kennedy to come out his neck, and then somehow critically wound Connally. Newly released documents show, however, that Warren Commission member Congressman Gerald Ford pressed the panel to change its description of the wound and place it higher in Kennedys body. Ford wanted the wording changed to: A bullet had entered the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine. The panels final version was: A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine. This crucial change only came to light in 1997, when the Assassination Record Review Board released handwritten notes made by Ford that had been kept by J. Lee Rankin, the Warren Commissions chief counsel. Fords change is even at odds with his own declaration in the Oct. 2, 1964 issue of Life: I personally believe that one of these three shots missed entirely – but which of the three may never be known. I believe that another bullet struck the president in the back and emerged from his throat (and went on to strike Connally. ) When the alteration was brought to Fords attention in 1997, he said it had nothing to do with (thwarting) a conspiracy theory and was made only in an attempt to be more precise. Assassination researcher Robert Morningstar, however, called the change the most significant lie in the whole Warren Commission report. He pointed out that if the bullet had hit Kennedy in the back, it could not have gone on to strike Connally the way the commission said it did. Morningstar contended that the effect of Fords editing suggested that a bullet hit the president in the neck – raising the wound two or three inches. Without that alteration, they could never have hoodwinked the public as to the true number of assassins. Fords alteration supports the single-bullet theory by making a specific point that the bullet entered Kennedys body at the back of his neck rather than in his uppermost back, as the commission staff originally wrote. Harold Weisberg, a longtime critic of the Warren Commissions work, said: What Ford is doing is trying to make the single bullet theory more tenable. Cyril Wecht, president of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, is among many pathology experts who find this theory unacceptable: The angles at which these two men [Kennedy and Connally] were hit do not permit a straight-line trajectory (or near straight line trajectory) of commission exhibit 339 (the so-called magic bullet) to be established. Indeed, quite the opposite is true. In order to accept the single-bullet theory, it is necessary to have the bullet move at different vertical and horizontal angles, a path of flight that has never been experienced or suggested for any bullet known to mankind. A member of the House investigating committees forensic pathology panel, Wecht remains a passionate opponent of the Ford theory. He has also been a consultant on a number of other high-profile cases, including the deaths of Elvis Presley, JonBenet Ramsey, Laci Peterson and – most recently – the 20-year-old son of model Anna Nicole Smith. Former Texas First Lady Nellie Connally – who died in 2006 at the age of 87 – rediscovered her assassination diary in 1993. When Newsweek published it in 1998, the magazine said the diary reaffirms the Connallys verdict that the Warren Commission was wrong in concluding that a single bullet passed through JFKs neck and Connallys chest. Noting the commissions finding that one bullet missed the car, the magazine added: Some conspiracy theorists argue that if three (Authors note: the commission said only two bullets hit the two men) bullets hit their targets, and an additional bullet missed, then there must have been a second gunman: nobody could have fired so many rounds so quickly. After a two year probe costing taxpayers $5. 5 million, House investigators concluded in 1978 that President Kennedys murder was probably . . . the result of a conspiracy, and that there was a strong possibility of a shot from the grassy knoll, meaning that two gunmen must have fired at the president within split seconds of each other. In 2001, a peer-reviewed article in Science and Justice determined there was a 96. 3 percent chance a shot was fired from the grassy knoll to the right of the presidents limousine. The author of the new analysis, JFK assassination researcher D. B. Thomas, believes this was the shot that killed the president.

What You Should Know about Stem Cells Essay -- Stem Cells Science Ethi

What You Should Know about Stem Cells A topic of extended scientific and ethical debate in our society as of late has been the question of Stem Cell research. Going down this path could yield unprecedented medical leaps in treatment and prevention that medicine will be able to offer. Before I address the debate of whether or not Stem Cell research should be done, I want to first explain to my readers what stem cells are, how they come to be and what we can use them for. We must first start with the different types of cells, I will explain them as I take you through part of the fetal development process. The first type of cell is the totipotent cell. This cell is created when a sperm fertilizes an egg. This kind of cell can become anything within the human body. After four days the totipotent cell begins to specialize by becoming a blastocyst. The blastocyst contains an outer layer of cells and an inner cell mass. The outer layer of cells will become the placenta and other support tissues for the fetus as it develops. The inner cell mass will go on to become virtually every type of tissue within the human body. The inner cell mass cannot create a placenta. Since it cannot form a placenta, it is no longer totipotent. It now becomes pluripotent, a cell with the ability to become any number of tissues within the human body. This is the cell that scientists are interested in. One part of Stem Cell debate is the question of when is a fetus a fetus? At what point is the potential for human life extinguished? At this stage the pluripotent cells while able to form almost every human tissue, cannot for a placenta. Therefore if you were to place the cells into another woman?s uterus a fetus would not develop. From this point the pluripotent cells further specialize and become the cells that create heat tissue or brain tissue etc. We need to understand the complex events that occur at this stage of development. There are genes referred to as ?decision making? genes. These genes direct how and what the pluripotent cells become. Now I will get into the possible benefits of Stem Cell research. Once we learn how the decision making genes work we can then begin to use the pluripotent cells to create the typed of tissues needed to treat patients with various types of sickness and disease. There is a bonus here as well. Birth defects an... ...t point come we may have already come to an ethical decision on what to do and with the knowledge already gained in research of adult stems cells we should be able to proceed quickly. Stem cell research is incredibly important. We as a civilization are standing on the brink of a major leap for our society and we must take that leap. Who knows that kinds of doors this research could open, who knows that other leads it could unveil for us? This research has the ability to change out culture, like the discovery of fire and the harnessing of electricity. We can?t let it slip away. Works Consulted: Adult Stem Cells May be Redefinable. 24. Oct. 2001. British Medical Journal. 24. Oct. 2001. http://www.Bmj.org/cgi/content/full/318/7179/282/b Stem Cells and the Human Embryo. 24. Oct. 2001. The Center for Bioethics and human Dignity. 29. Oct. 2001. http://www.bioethix.org/resources/overviews/stemcell.html Stem Cells: A Primer. 23. Oct. 2001. National Institute of Health. 29 Oct. 2001. http://www.nih.gov/news/stemcell/primer.htm Testimony of Nigel Cameron, PH. D. 24. Oct. 2001. Do No Harm Coalition. 24. Oct. 2001. http://www.stemcellresearch.org/testimonies/cameron2.htm

Geof is the only genuine caring character in the play Essay

Geof is the only genuine caring character in the play; the others are totally selfish and self centred. Discuss this statement. From the beginning of the play we can see Jo is the main character, she is highly independent and self reliant this is obvious from one of the opening pages were Jo’s mum Helen states ‘children owe their parents these little attentions’ to which Jo replies with ‘I don’t owe you a thing.’ This shows Jo sees her relationship with her mother as strained, she feels she has brought herself up and not really had her mother their to support her. She has learnt to rely on herself and not trust her mother. When Jo becomes pregnant with a black boy form the navy, who leaves her pregnant Jo reacts badly because she is so independent and used to looking after herself. Geof (Jo’s gay friend) offers her a shoulder to turn to and she turns on him ‘I’m not planning big plans for this baby or dreaming big dreams. You Know what happens when you do things like that. The baby will be born dead or daft!’ She feels she has let herself down and been promiscuous, however the sailor boy was offering her marriage and love before he left, she felt in a safe relationship and that was why she slept with him. But Jo just sees that she’s made the same mistakes her mother made when she had her at a young age. Most expectant mothers don’t have this negative attitude towards their unborn child however I feel it’s because she thinks she may let the child down like her mother let her down. Jimmy the black boy from the navy who got Jo pregnant gave the impression of a kind and genuine character who did honestly love Jo until he left. In my opinion he loved her and did intend to return for her but got scared of the prejudice he would face if he did return. He said to Jo about her mother finding out about their engagement ‘She’ll see a coloured boy.’ He obviously felt his race was going to be an issue in their relationship and how it was perceived and was worried about it. Jo however did know Jimmy was in the navy and even said to him on one occasion ‘I might as well be naughty while I’ve got the chance. I’ll probably never see you again I know it.’ So I believe deep down Jo knew there was a chance she wouldn’t be seeing him again. In my opinion Helen did love her daughter she just didn’t know how to treat her, maybe it was because she had her at a young age? She seems to think she should treat her daughter like a friend, she even encourages her underage daughter to drink ‘You don’t smell it, you drink it!’ I think the only way Helen knew to make her daughter love her was the way she made men love her, by getting her drunk. Helen did want her daughter to make something of her life I feel. She encouraged her to draw, saying her drawings were very good ‘Have you ever thought of going to a proper art school and getting proper training?’ But I think the main reason she wanted Jo to make something of herself was so she could sponge of her. Helen says to Jo ‘When you start earning you can start moaning.’ In my opinion she’s saying to Jo you make some money and get us somewhere nicer. She’s not taken the task upon herself to find her and her daughter somewhere nice to live she’s going to wait for her daughter to did it for them. Not a typical loving mother and daughter relationship, Helen is reliant on her daughter Jo. Helen is in my opinion lazy with regard to her relationship with her daughter. She is constantly asking her daughter to do stuff around the house ‘Pass me that bottle’ ‘Have we got any aspirins left Jo?’ Here is another example of Helen being reliant on her daughter. She also becomes strangely jealous of Jo’s gay friend Geof. She is constantly rude to him ‘Oh shut up Geof’ ‘Sling your hook’ I believe she is jealous of his strong bond with Jo. She feels jealous of their close relationship and doesn’t like him around as she feels inadequate compared to him. Jo maintains through out the play that she wants to be rid of her mother ‘as soon as I get a full-time job, I’m leaving Helen and starting up with a room somewhere’ so for Helen to know there’s someone in her life she wants there, that person being Geof it must make her feel less important. Even for Helen who shows no real care for her Jo to know that her own daughter feels like that must be difficult. I think part of her feels she should have a close loving relationship with Jo I just don’t think she knows how to or more importantly can be bothered. Peter, Helens latest fling who becomes her husband comes across as a decent sort of guy at first, however he is sleazy ‘Helen you look utterly fantastic’ ‘Got your blue garters on?’ He does turn nasty towards the end when their marriage isn’t going so well ‘Look at Helen, isn’t she a game old bird? Worn out on the beat but she’s still got a few good strokes left.’ and ‘I dragged you out of the gutter once , If you want to go back there it’s all the same to me.’ The way he speaks down to Helen are reminiscent of his character, he believes himself to be above everyone else, better looking, better dressed, better educated, a real snob. Geof takes a mothering role in Jo’s life, which I don’t think she always appreciates. ‘I’ll buy you one for Christmas. If you ask nice I’ll buy you two.’ ‘I’ll stay here and clear this place up a bit and make you a proper meal.’ I think Jo actually likes having a figure to look after her but I think she finds it difficult sometimes as she’s not used to it, she’s used to fending for herself. ‘Why don’t you leave me alone?’ I think that all this shows that despite Jo’s though exterior she does want looking after and companionship, especially from her mother even though she denies it, as that is what Geof is doing for her, being a substitute mother. Geof , a single gay man was evicted from his flat by his landlady because she caught him with another man. In those days being a sexually active gay man was frowned upon so he was probably quite ashamed about the reason for his eviction and that is why he tries to hide it from Jo. When she asks ‘has your landlady thrown you out?’ Geof replies ‘Don’t be silly,’ but later tells her the truth. Geof also agrees to move in with Jo, taking on the responsibilities of looking after a Jo and her baby. Also when Jo tells him her baby will be black he is extremely accepting and doesn’t seem to care. In my opinion this is due to the prejudice he has faced about being gay. Another time his kind and compassionate character is seen is when he tries to get Jo and Helen talking again despite Jo telling him exactly what her mother is like he still persists and tries to build bridges in their relationship with them and get Helen to help out with the baby. ‘Your mother should know, do you have her address?’ When he meets Helen though he is struck by how rude and uncaring she is and sticks up for Jo telling Helen. ‘If I’d known you were going to bully her like this I’d have never asked you to come!’ Here he shows true loyalty for Jo by sticking up for her. In my opinion Geof is a very lonely young man he didn’t seem to have any other friends besides Jo in the play, other than young man he was found in his flat with but in his own words ‘he didn’t really know the guy’ . We can’t really be sure of his past because the play doesn’t mention it but I feel he’s faced a lot of prejudice about his sexuality and perhaps that is why he so understands Jo. He doesn’t seem to have any family, and I think he was trying to make Jo and the baby into a surrogate family for himself. I feel he was the nicest character in the book but he did become quite irritating as he was too nice all of the time. All the other characters had floors and attributes that made them lovable or unlovable. Geof however, was just quite bland. Helen for instance was an interesting character because she was so unpredictable, she could have a new boyfriend at any moment, or get drunk and do something ridiculous. Goef on the other hand was predictable but provided the rock of the story. He was Mr. Reliable that Jo could turn to he wasn’t an interesting character like Helen but was a vital part of the play.

Natural Phenomena

Veronika Gyurjyan Professor Bachman English 28 4 February 2010 Natural Phenomena Henry David Thoreau was against of survival. Rather than purposefully living, the majority of people’s lives are little more than a series of reactions to everything. Most people survive today, thinking that they will live their actual living tomorrow. He was going to discover the life around him, bringing his life into the harmonious accord with all the movements around him. In 1845, July 4, he decided to move and reside at Walden Pond, which is located in Concord, Massachusetts about 18 miles northwest of Boston. Living in Walden for two years, Henry David Thoreau wrote the book Walden or Life in the Woods, summarizing his experience, his living in Walden, far away from society. Live life rather than let life live you. Certain individuals might think that we are living life just because we are alive. To Henry David Thoreau (philosopher and creative artist), living life was living a natural life that the majority of people are not living. Natural life means reawaking and expanding the human’s awareness, observing and discovering something that exists in science, which is more than unusual and difficult to understand. Discovering and reawaking something hidden is similar to giving a life to something that already exists, adding more imagination and creativeness. Walden by Henry David Thoreau is an American classic. The book is part personal declaration of independence, social experiment, voyage of spiritual discovery. Was Henry a hermit? I think he choose to isolate himself from society to gain more objectiveness about life. The whole project was inspired by transcendentalist philosophy, such as existing above or beyond human knowledge or understanding, a central theme of the American Romantic period. In his first and largest chapter, â€Å"Economy†, he outlines his project, â€Å"A two-year and two-months stay at the cozy tightly shingled cottage in the woods near Walden Pond. † I think that separation from the civilization gives a chance to reanalyze the entire life. Living in Walden was productive for Thoreau. In the chapter â€Å"Where I lived and what I lived for† chapter he describes how he was writing every day. And that time in Walden was his most productive as a writer. Another important purpose of his separation from society was realizing an importance and beneficial effect of solitude. â€Å"I never found the companion that was as companionable as solitude. †(Thoreau 177). Walden emphasizes the importance of solitude and closeness to nature. Walden is not an environmental book. It is about one man’s attempt to find the principles by which the life is a proper life. â€Å"Every morning was a cheerful invitation to make my life of equal simplicity, and I may say innocence, with Nature herself†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Thoreau 132). Henry Thoreau was enjoying every given morning, accepting is as a gift from nature. That was his chance to be closer to innocence. â€Å"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practice resignation, unless it was quite necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swatch and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of it, and publish its meanness to the world†¦.. (Thoreau 135). Thoreau wanted to get the most from his life by determining what was really important, and he did that by removing himself somewhat from the normal life of Concord, MA in the 1840’s. One side of this was economical; he reduced his material needs by living simply, so that he would not have to spend much time supporting a lifestyle that he did not need or care about. The other side was spiritual, not unlike the spiritual retreats of eastern and western religions. He liked it so much that he lived in his cabin for more than two years, and came back with a great story. He worked on this story for several years after leaving the pond, until it became Walden as we know it today. By writing a Walden, Henry Thoreau gave a life to those two years and two months he spent in the woods. He dedicated his life to the exploration of nature, not as a backdrop of human activity, but as living. He was divinely conscious of the enthusiasm of Nature, the emotion of the rhythms and the harmony of her solitude. In Nature Henry found an analogy to the Transcendentalism. He did not study the Nature; otherwise it could make him dogmatic. He loved Nature. â€Å"WHO nearer Nature’s life would truly come Must nearest come to him of whom I speak; He all kinds knew,—the vocal and the dumb; Masterful in genius was he, and unique, Patient, sagacious, tender, frolicsome. This Concord Pan would oft his whistle take, And forth from wood and fen, field, hill, and lake, Trooping around him in their several guise, The shy inhabitants their haunts forsake: Then he, like ? op, man would satirize, Hold up the image wild to clearest view Of undiscerning manhood’s puzzled eyes, And mocking say, â€Å"Lo! mirrors here for you: Be true as these, if ye would be more wise. † Works Cited Book: Henry, Thoreau. Walden. Penguin Classics, 1985. Web Site: Amos Bronson Alcott. American Transcendentalism Web. 21 January. 2010