Religious Conflicts Ancient and Modern

Religion has been a major source of conflict since the beginning of time. People oftentimes define themselves and their values and their beliefs on their religions. Thus, leading to strife when one group disagrees with another group’s religion. I have found many parallels between the struggle that existed during the Crusades between the Christians and the Muslims and the struggles we face today with certain terrorist organizations.

The Crusades were rooted in religious beliefs and people were committed to fighting to the death to defend these beliefs. Both sides believed that their reasons for participating in the Crusades were right and justified. The Muslims believed that they had a right to the Holy Land and that God wanted them to lay claim to it. Their reasons to fight are frequently justified in the Qur’an. For example, It is stated “Say, O ye that reject faith! I worship not that which ye worship… To you be your way, and to me mine” (Sura 109;1,2,6). They believed that all those who did not believe in their customs and beliefs did not belong to reap in their victories, that all unbelievers should be punished. On the other hand, the Christians believed that it was their religious duty to recover these holy grounds and avenge for all the deaths and wrongs caused by the Muslims as stated in the Bible “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth’ (Matthew 5). The Christians believed that they must fight in this Crusade to take back everything that the Muslims took from them including their land and families. Both groups believed they were right in fighting these wars for their own specific reasons. They refused to look past their own individual beliefs and attempt to compromise because they were too focused on achieving absolute power and authority in the region.

Currently, one of America’s main goals is to put an end to terrorist organizations. Many of these extremist organizations that America is fighting have rooted their cause in religion. For example, groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda have both made it their individual goal to control and gain authority over the entire Muslim world. These groups have attempted to erase all traces of western influences and ideas from the region and beyond through the use of extreme measures such as events like the bombing in Brussels and 9/11. Specifically, al-Qaeda believes that religions such as Christianity and Judaism are working to eliminate Islam from the world and have taken this as a personal attack which they believe justifies their decisions and actions. America justifies the actions they take against these extremists groups because their ideals do not align with the ideals held by these groups. They are working to stop the spread of these extremist views in hopes to maintain some peace in the region and throughout the world. America and these groups continue to be at war because both sides believe that their reasons for war are more justified than the others.

Word Count: 506

Matthew 5

Sura 109;1,2,6

Today’s Crusade

The Crusades were wars fought for religious purposes between Christians and Muslims. The two religions fought to obtain control of different cities and sites that were considered divine to both religions. These wars were famously named the crusades because they were fought for a cause that people were passionate about. Although, The Crusades occurred in the middle ages the term crusade remains present in modern day as a way to describe a fight in which a group feels deeply for.

I read an article titled “Young Anti-Abortion Crusaders Find New Tactics to Promote Their Message”. This article outlines the fight to end abortion. Ever since the passing of Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal under the Fourteenth Amendment because it is considered a right to privacy, activists have fought to overturn such legislation. Every year hundreds of thousands of people gather in Washington DC to participate in the March for Life. The March for Life rallies people in protest of the legality of abortion. The crusade to end abortion extends past the March for Life to include protesters at local abortion centers and online in the form of social media and blog posts. Those who gather to march and those who oppose abortion feel very deeply about it and their reasons to oppose it come from very personal places whether it be because of the psychological effect that an abortion can have on a woman, the health risks involved in having an abortion, or religious reasons.

The Pro-life movement is justified in calling their fight to end abortion a crusade because of the similarities that exist between the Crusades and the fight to end abortion. Both were wars on cultural norms with a basis in religion. Many people who attend the March for Life and consider themselves to be Pro-life often times also identify themselves as a sect of Christianity. Whenever religion is involved the disagreement becomes extremely heightened because it challenges a group’s way of life and fundamental ideas and beliefs. Religion is a deeply personal thing that people will defend by all means necessary.

Although, there are many similarities between the actual Crusades and the crusade against abortion there are also a few differences. While the Crusades were fought over actual places and sites, the crusade to end abortion is fought over an ideal. In addition, the Crusades were very physical battles often being described as bloody and ruthless. Whereas, the crusade to end abortion takes the non-violent path using rallies and protests to win their cause. Although the two differ in certain aspects they both involve groups of people fighting for causes that they feel passionately about.

Word Count: 442
Jesko, Jackie, et al. “Young Anti-Abortion Crusaders Find New Tactics to Promote Their Message.” ABC News, ABC News Network, 9 July 2015.

The Art of War vs. USNA

Sun Tzu’s Art of War contains thirteen chapters all discussing different aspects of war and how these aspects pertain to the overall strategy. The Art of War has played a very influential role in warfare in both the East and the West. The big over-arching philosophy of Sun Tzu’s work seems to be the fact that war is very complicated and it is essential that it is studied with very close detail because the outcomes of war can have a huge impact on people and their way of life. He stresses that knowing the nuances of war could be the difference between victory and defeat.

One of these details includes having a plan. Throughout the Art of War, there are many lists revealing how methodical and deliberate war must be. For example, one of the most important lists present includes the fundamental factors of creating a plan. These five factors include: “The way, Heaven, Earth, Command, and Discipline” (Sun-Tzu 3). These factors examine the relationship between a commander and his subordinates, the conditions in which the troops may face, the reputation of the commander, and the organization of the troops in order to maximize the chances of victory. Sun Tzu stresses the importance of situational awareness and the ability to change the plan based on the current conditions. This ability to remain responsive and adaptable allows the commander to predict the chances of victory.

Another essential detail of being victorious in war is the ability to acknowledge the strength in unity. This strength in unity is rooted in the commander knowing both himself and his troops as well as he knows his enemies. In order to gain this knowledge, it is recommended that the commander takes into account the physical, moral, and mental circumstances that surround him.

As mentioned before, the Art of War has played a key role in the development of warfare all over the world. Its influence is evident here at the Naval Academy through the techniques and tactics that we are taught. Ever since plebe summer, we have been taught that we are stronger together. We will get farther in all aspects together rather than individually. This is evident in the use of group punishments plebe year, meaning if one person messed up, everyone messed up because it is everyone’s responsibility to hold each other accountable. The Academy also promotes unity by encouraging us to learn about our peers through signature sheets and having actual conversations. These group tasks are used to stress the importance of working together and how it is essential for mission effectiveness.

In addition, the Academy is constantly testing our ability to adjust to our surroundings. Our daily schedules are packed and it is not uncommon to get an email adding another thing to our to-do lists because of this it is essential to remain flexible. My involvement with the sailing team has emphasized the importance of situational awareness and being able to react to my surroundings. The weather and conditions on the water are constantly changing and if we do not adapt to meet them it could be dangerous for the crew onboard. These experiences at the Academy have taught me the importance of remaining aware of my surroundings and working together.

It is evident that the Naval Academy has taken notes from the Art of War and Sun Tzu’s philosophy on warfare. However, one difference that I have seen here at the Academy is the emphasis placed on the development of the person as a whole rather than just teaching tactical strategy. This difference is what I believe makes the Naval Academy’s approach to the Art of War more effective. The Academy wants its graduates to be able to make these monumental decisions that could impact the lives of every American and the only way to do that is to develop them both personally and professionally.

Word Count: 646

Sun-tzu. The Art of War. Penguin, 2009.

Roman Empire Scared of Change

Similar to today, religion played a major role in everyday life back when the Roman Empire was in the height of its power. However, unlike today where we view most religions in the context of the Judeo- Christian model of monotheism, the Roman Empire had very different beliefs. When new beliefs and ideas, such as the concept of Christianity, started to arise the Romans became very suspicious and fearful as they viewed it as a threat to their political power which in their defense was a valid reaction.

The Romans practiced polytheism in which they would pray and worship multiple major gods and deities, with most originating from the Greek culture. For example, they would worship Jupiter, who was thought to be the most powerful god and Mars who was the god of war. They made regular sacrifices and would contribute some of their livelihood in the form of taxes to support cults that worshipped these gods. They chose to honor these gods in the hope of receiving certain benefits that the gods would grant such as immortality and a closer link to the divine.

During this era, people started to travel around the Mediterranean with greater ease and as they went from place to place they would share their religious practices. When a small group of Jewish people in Judaea started to profess their faith Christianity began to form. It quickly expanded in 313 when Emperor Constantine decided to support this young religion. Christians practiced monotheism where they worshipped a single God and followed the teachings of Jesus. The Christian religion practiced certain traditions that the Romans did not understand. For example, the Eucharist and holy communion were extremely important to Christians as they believed that it was the body and blood of Christ. However, the Romans feared this tradition as they thought it resembled cannibalistic habits.

The Romans started to persecute Christians because they were scared of the Christians differing views. For example, the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate sentenced Jesus to death because he feared that Jesus would lead a revolt against the Roman Empire. The Romans were aggressive in their persecution going so far as to blame Christians for the great fire that occurred in Rome. This persecution was rooted in the fact that religion was closely linked to the government and the Roman political system. When Christianity started to spread Romans were fearful that it would threaten their way of life. Christians refused to comply with the Roman religion which was viewed as a form of disobedience that would undermine the power of the Empire and taint the relationships the Romans had with their many gods. It is understandable that the Romans reacted in this way as Christianity was unfamiliar and the Romans were unsure of how it would impact their ruling and culture.

References

Hansen, Valerie. “Chapter 7: The Roman Empire and the Rise of Christianity.” Voyages in World History, Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2016, pp. 144-148.

Word Count: 468

Representative Democracy: The Right Way

Representation has been a major topic of debate ever since the founding of formal democracy. Governments have strived to attain proper representation in order to protect the essential values of democracy. According to Josiah Ober of Stanford University “leading ancient and modern political theorists, both friends and critics of democracy, have proclaimed democracy’s core values to be liberty and equality” (Ober 1). Two major forms of democracy, direct and representative, have gone about protecting these values in very different ways. The Athenians established the direct democracy in which the people make decisions on policy directly. Whereas, America utilizes the representative democracy in which the people elect representatives who make decisions for a constituency.

After analyzing the effectiveness of both types of democracy I believe that the American model of representative democracy is a better way to govern. In a representative democracy, the people vote on representatives who are more educated on the topics being voted on and therefore are better equipped to make decisions. Since this position as a representative is their livelihood they have more time to research the policies and laws being proposed allowing them to make more informed decisions for their constituency. The presence of representatives allows for a more controlled and reasonable environment when laws are being voted on. There will be fewer people present in the assembly, therefore, making the process more efficient. In addition, checks and balances are established in a representative democracy in order to ensure that not one person or group becomes too powerful.

Some may argue that a representative democracy has a lot of corruption that occurs within the voting process as representatives can be bribed and coerced into voting a way that may not align with their constituents. However, as made evident through the Reacting to the Past activity we performed in class, in which we recreated the direct democracy of Athens, there were many deals being made under the table in order for people to achieve their own secret agendas. Additionally, in order to achieve these agendas, people would interrupt other people’s arguments in attempts to strengthen their own argument and undermine the opposing argument. This caused the assembly to be very hectic and chaotic thus making it difficult to make decisions. It is evident from the Old Oligarch that another major flaw of a direct democracy is the focus on one’s own self-interest. People would only propose and vote on laws and policies that would benefit themselves. Whereas, in a representative democracy the representative focuses on what would be best for the majority of their voters. They want their votes to have a positive impact on the largest group possible.

Overall, I believe that the representative model of democracy is a better way to govern because it is more efficient. Representatives are focused on their voters as a whole rather than as individuals allowing for their actions to have an impact on a larger group of people. A representative democracy is more flexible which allows the government to adapt to the ever-changing opinions of society.

Word Count: 507

OBER, JOSIAH. “Democracy’s Dignity.” The American Political Science Review, vol. 106, no.

4, 2012, pp. 827–846. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23357711.

Old Oligarch, Xenophon

Alexander: Historical Accuracy

The 2004 film, Alexander, outlines the life of Alexander the Great. Alexander was the king of Macedonia and one of the greatest warriors in history, who led his men up against the powerful Persian Empire. Throughout his short life, he conquered much of the then known world and went on to build one of the largest empires in history. Many scholars and historians contemplated the historical accuracy of the film by evaluating how the battles were depicted and how the Persians were portrayed.

One of the most accurate parts of the movie was the producer’s depiction of the Battle of Gaugamela. It is evident that they put a lot of effort into attaining authentic weapons and body armor to recreate the battle which emphasized the importance Alexander the Great’s army placed on the use of pikes and spears. The small details when it came to wardrobe and accessories were also accurately representative of the ancient culture of Macedonia.

However, there are many aspects of the film that were not historically accurate. For example, the movie focused much of its time on the Battle of Gaugamela and missed many other important battles that established Alexander’s legacy as a great leader and military general. In addition, the movie’s illustration of the Persians was not factual. The movie made it seem as though the Persians were an easy group to conquer, they appeared to be chaotic and their approach in fighting seemed to be unmethodical. In fact, the Persians were a reputable force that required planning and great skill to defeat.

When producing a historical drama, it is nearly impossible to include every detail of the actual events that occurred. It is up to the creative mind of the producer to pick and choose what to include and what to omit. Often times, producers alter what actually happened because they believe that it is what their audience wants to see. For example, the producer of Alexander believed that people would be more interested in seeing the large Battle of Gaugamela rather than smaller conflicts so they emphasized that battle by adding gory and dramatic scenes. Despite the attraction, I do not believe that watching historical dramas is a good way of examining history because the viewer is unsure of what is historically true and what is just Hollywood “facts”. However, I do believe it is a good way to spark people’s interest in learning about different time periods. But then it is up to the viewer to further research the accuracy of the events depicted.

Stone, Oliver, director. Alexander. Warner Bros, 2004.