Swift Empires

Empires rise and empires fall, some last for generations and some are gone in a blink of an eye. The Mongolian Empire spread rapidly and its regime was an unprecedented mix of brutality and tolerance. Similarly after WWI, the rise of the Nazi Party was unexpected to the world and the effects of their actions decimated a religious following. The Nazi Party was a ruthless group of people that blamed specific groups of people for their misfortune. The Nazi’s and the Mongols share ruthless characteristics, but the approach to inflict their aggression was different.

The growth of the Nazi Party lies within the result of the Treaty of Versailles. This treaty was signed at the conclusion of WWI and the German’s were imposed with numerous restrictions that lead them to fall in to economic depression. During this time Adolf Hitler rose to power in the German Workers’ Party. An article from the History Channel states, “Hitler soon emerged as a charismatic public speaker and began attracting new members with speeches blaming Jews and Marxists for Germany’s problems and espousing extreme nationalism and the concept of an Aryan “master race.””(History.com). The premise of Hitler’s speeches were based on building German pride and offering solutions for the misfortune that spread through Germany. The Nazi Party began winning elections and forcing their way into being the political power in Germany.

After Hitler and the Nazis rose to power he began to expand the territory of Germany. The first two states he went after were Austria and Czechoslovakia. They were filled with Germans and he used this as motivation to expand. History.com states, “He withdrew Germany from the League of Nations in 1933, rebuilt German armed forces beyond what was permitted by the Treaty of Versailles, reoccupied the German Rhineland in 1936, annexed Austria in 1938 and invaded Czechoslovakia in 1939” (History.com). Hitler reclaimed the states losses in the Treaty of Versailles, but he did not stop there. The Nazis claimed Poland on their quest to take over Europe.

Simultaneously, Hitler and the Nazis committing mass genocide on Jews. History.com states, “Dachau evolved into a death camp where countless thousands of Jews died from malnutrition, disease and overwork or were executed” (History.com). The Dachau concentration camp was the first of many death camps used to exterminate the Jews. Similarly to the Mongolians killing people was a norm for them. The Mongols can be labeled as devilish, bloodthirsty, ravages. Ibn al-Athir states, “For even Antichrist will spare such as follow him, though he destroy those who oppose him; but these spare none, slaying women and men and children, ripping open pregnant women and killing unborn babes” (199-200). These empires killed innocent people but the difference between the two empires was tolerances. The Mongolians were known to accept the lifestyles of the groups of people they conquered. The Nazi’s were looking to be the “perfect race” and if people did not fit they were killed.

-Denzel J. Polk

Word Count: 496 ��

The similarities between The Mongol Regime and Hitler’s Nazi Regime

The Mongol Empire through using methods of brutality through its quick expansion resembles the Hitler Nazi Regime in Europe in the 1900s. The Mongol Empire was known as the largest empire in history expanding its influence by conquering parts of central Asia, China, and attempting to taking Europe. The Mongol empire was able to accomplish vast expansion because of Genghis Khan’s leadership in which he united the steppe people into a cohesive group that became an unstoppable force. For the first time, the steppe peoples identities were broken down, and instead shifted into a new identity of the Mongol people. Through the new Mongolian national identity that was created, there was a sense of pride that coupled with loyalty. Genghis Khan’s strong force of supporters “swore a personal oath of loyalty” or otherwise known as a “blood oath”. Adolf Hitler who led the Nazi Regime, resembles Genghis Khan’s mentality, possessing similar characteristics and aggressive goals. In 1939, in a speech to his armed commanders he says, “Our strength is in our quickness and our brutality. Genghis Khan had millions of women and children killed by his own will and a gay heart”(Brietman), showing that Hitler looked highly upon the tactics of Genghis Khan, adopting the mentality to his own philosophy. Adolf Hitler was successful because he garnered large masses of supporters who were devoted to his ideologies, and willing to do anything he said because of the trust and allegiance to both him as a leader and his party. Similar to Genghis Khan who unified the steppes people into a single identity, one of Hitler’s main goals was to unify the German state and create a “lebensraum” or German living state. He convinced the German people with “appealing ideas of a Utopian world along with frightful images of enemies it deemed threats to those dreams”. Hitler and Genghis Khan both were charismatic leaders who enjoyed loyal support by employing incentives to their people, allowing them to both quickly and efficiently achieve their goals.

They were able to rapidly expand without heavy opposition because of their superior military forces and tactics which they employed on conquering states. Genghis Khan made improvements to Persian and Chinese weapons including new technology such as an array of developed bows and an exceptional calvary, demonstrating both the strength and capabilities of the Mongols as a fighting force. Types of bows included the composite bow, which was twice the range of the prominent English bow. Some bows were methods to not kill but instill fear in their enemies such as one which made a deafening whistling noise and another which was meant to just impel wounds. These mechanisms exhibited the Mongol’s intention to inflict suffering. The Mongol army also used trickery to exaggerate the size of the army, depicting their willingness to use any tactic that would give them an advantage over their enemy. Besides making new technological advancements on dangerous weapons such as toxic gases, the Nazi’s also used trickery as a means of power, as Adolf Hitler used deception within his propaganda. He used treachery to condone his propaganda of war and mass murder to his own people. More significantly, he lied to other European countries about his intentions to expand, hiding both his capabilities and resolve. An example of this was when Britain and France attempted to use the policy of Appeasement as a peace offering, but Hitler saw it as a plug to bolster his power and invaded Rhineland instead.

Both the Mongols and the Nazi’s used methods of torture to achieve their goals, demonstrating their brutality. The Mongols not only conquered lands and looted cities, but slew women and children as well as taking prisoners. Not taking into account of humanity, the Nazi’s also treated their enemies in the same manner, as Jews and inferiors were treated as animals such as in concentration camps. Both regimes depict their ability to assert their dominance and superiority through methods of brutality in the expansion

-Caroline Foley

Word Count:600

https://www.ushmm.org/information/exhibitions/traveling-exhibitions/state-of-deception

Breitman, Richard. “Hitler and Genghis Khan.” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 25, no. 2/3, 1990, pp. 337–351. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/260736.

The Mongols Compared to Indian Removal

The Mongol Empire at its height stretched from Eastern Europe all the way to China’s coast on the Sea of Japan. Starting under Genghis Khan in 1206, the Mongolian Empire began its rapid expansion. At the Empire’s peak, the Empire was one of the largest in history. Even more impressive, the Mongols were able to achieve one of the largest empires in history in less than 100 years. The Mongols were able to achieve such an expansive empire in a short period for two key reasons: swift conquering and brutality. The Mongols would speed of attack was a defining characteristic of the Empire. The Mongols would “[remain] only for so long as their march required”, showing the speed of the campaigning Mongols. The Mongols were also known for their brutality when conquering. When attacking a village or city, the Mongols would “[destroy] them to the full.” The Mongolian destruction entailed plundering the village of any valuable items and killing all residents or the village. The swift speed of the Mongols and destruction of entire villages led to the empire’s success and fear throughout Europe and Asia.

Similar to the Mongols in speed and effectiveness, the American Government’s removal of Native Americans displays similar traits to the Mongols’ conquest of Asia and Europe. America tried to claim Native American land since the time when America was only a British Colony. Often, the disputes and seizing of land by America was only minor and unorganized. The dynamic changed in the early 19^th century when President Andrew Jackson passed the Indian Removal act. Much like the Mongols’ conquest of Asia and Europe, the American Government’s removal of the Native Americans was swift and effective. Under Jackson’s Indian Removal act, the majority of Native Americans were relocated from their native lands in the eastern United States to the Indian Reservation lands in modern day Oklahoma in 15 years. Another similarity to the Mongols was the use of brutality in the relocation of the American Indians. While the American Government did not slaughter entire Indian tribes like the Mongols, the forced removal did use the United States Army as a threatening force, and many Native American died during the journey from the eastern United States to the Indian Reservation lands. Although the American Government did not intend to use brutality to remove the Native Americans from the eastern United States, ultimately the use of brutality allowed for the rapid expansion of Americans into new lands.

The Mongols and United States shared a few key similarities in their rapid conquest of land. Both used speed and brutality in order to strike fear into their enemies and quickly claim land. Overall, the comparison of American and the Mongols shows the Machiavelli principle of the ends justify the means. Although both showed a lack of regard towards human decency, ultimately the territorial expansion was still successful, leading to a successful campaign.

Mark Rogerson

475

The Inevitable Spread of Christianity

The Roman Empire adopted the Hellenistic pagan beliefs of the Greeks, what we call “Greek mythology.” The pagan beliefs that people held in the Roman Empire were varied, with most people favoring a single god, or treating it as a tradition. Roman mythology was not a religion that inspired the people of an empire to stand united, but Christianity was. Although Constantine helped Christianity spread through the empire greatly, the spread of Christianity was inevitable due to its universal appeal.

The polytheistic beliefs that the Romans had were not universal in nature. The Romans all worshiped different gods from their mythology so there was no strong unity in beliefs and values. It also did not have a strong structure or scripture as the stories of Roman mythology were usually passed down orally through generations. Christianity on the other hand, had a holy book which allowed people to adhere to a clear doctrine that people could use to guide their morals. Because of the Bible, people claimed they could interpret the book in a superior way and this led to church officials, such as bishops, popes, etc.

The doctrine of Christianity itself appeals strongly to the poor, as it promotes kindness towards them and charity, the Bible even says, “Do not exploit the poor because they are poor and do not crush the needy in court, for the Lord will take up their case and will exact life for life.” (Proverbs 22:22-23) In addition, Christianity explicitly states in the Bible to “preach the gospel to every creature.” (Mark 16:15) This verse encouraged missionaries to spread the religion to anybody and everybody, a practice that is utilized to this day by Christians and something that Roman mythology lacked.

The Battle of Milvian Bridge was one of the first events that helped spread Christianity in the Roman Empire. As Constantine was preparing for battle with his army he claimed that he saw a “trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and bearing the inscription, Conquer by this,” (Eusebius 28) and this was the first step in the spread of the religion. Furthermore, the Edict of Milan, which made Christianity a legal religion, and the founding of Constantinople, a Christian city, helped cement the religion in the Roman Empire. However, Constantine was not the primary reason that Christianity “won.” Christianity spread like a plague and its growth was unmatched by any religion up to that point in Rome. Julian the Apostate, emperor after Constantine’s son lost in battle to him, tried to bring Hellenistic pagan beliefs to take the place of Christianity by stripping Christian’s rights and reopening pagan temples. Ultimately, the pagan beliefs did not have the compelling universal appeal that Christianity had, which gives evidence that the spread of Christianity was inevitable.

-Kevin Smith

Word Count: 409

Blog #5: Confucian Bureaucracies and the SAT

Throughout many of the ancient Chinese dynasties, Confucianism was the dominant philosophy and positions in the bureaucracies were determined by literacy tests on the Confucian classics. While this practice allowed for continuity of culture and the theoretical possibility for anyone to advance in the bureaucracy, in reality it limited participation in government to the middle and upper classes. In this, we can see ties to the modern use of standardized testing in American college admissions.

Confucian values were very effective as a governing philosophy as they focused on unity, loyalty, and piety. For example, under Confucianism, the principles of li and jen shaped how people lived their lives. These ideas emphasized order and harmony, which supported the organized, efficient nature of the bureaucracy. As well, the obedience emphasized by Confucianism supported the bureaucracy and stability of the dynasty, as it encouraged all subjects to be loyal to their leader. As Confucius said “A man who respects his parents and his elders would hardly be inclined to defy his superiors. A man who is not inclined to defy his superiors will never foment a rebellion” (Confucius 1.2). In this, the principles of Confucianism supported the idea of and efficiency of the bureaucracy.

While Confucian values supported the bureaucracy, the method of requiring people to be educated in Confucian teachings had both positive and negative effects on the success of the bureaucracy. In theory, only requiring knowledge of Confucian teachings opens up the bureaucracy to anyone, which encourages participation in government and opens up the potential talent pool. In reality, it restricted participation in the bureaucracy to the upper classes who were able to get education, as the poorer peasants did not have the time or money to get educated on Confucian ideas in order to take the tests. Therefore, this caused resentment among the lower classes, which destabilized the dynasties with Confucian bureaucracies.

In the alleged social mobility through education, we can see connections to modern life. The SAT—one of the most common college admission tests—is designed to only require basic knowledge and focus on testing thinking and reasoning skills in order to “open doors to college” (College Board). Yet, for students with the financial means available to pay for it, coaching can help improve SAT scores (The Washington Post). In this, upper-class students have an advantage on the SAT and therefore in getting into higher education.

In both the Confucian bureaucracies of early imperial China and in the college admission system of modern America, we can see that using education as a pathway to desired positions in society is fair and inclusive in theory, it gives a distinct advantage to the upper classes in reality.

-Hanna Prince

Word Count: 415

Works Cited

Confucius. The Analects. Translated by Simon Leys; edited by Michael Nylan. Norton Critical Editions. New York: W. W. Norton, 2014.

“The SAT Suit of Assessments: Benefits.” College Board. Accessed 04/01/2019. https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/about/benefits.

Strauss, Valerie. “Can coaching truly boost SAT scores? For years, the College Board said no. Now it says yes.” The Washington Post. 05/09/2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/05/09/can-coaching-truly-boost-sat-scores-for-years-the-college-board-said-no-now-it-says-yes/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.df311b090f96.

The Similarities between America and the Mongols

The Similarities between America and the Mongols

The Mongol Empire is often viewed as an extremely tolerant regime- to their own people- that came up extremely quickly. However, if one was unlucky enough to not be Mongolian, or stand in the way of their expansion, then they would face an almost certain death, as the Mongol regime left no human left alive during their expansion conquests. The way of the Mongolian Empire is rather rare, with the likes of this contradiction between being tolerant or brutal a hard line to rule on. There is one regime, contrary to the popular Western belief, that has followed in a similar manner: the United States of America. At first, the idea of the United States being similar sounds ridiculous as we have always been taught that the United States was founded off of the principles of democracy and freedom, but when taking a deeper look into our history, some correlation can be seen.

The United States has been around for 243 years which sounds like a substantial amount of time, but, compared to other regimes, this is miniscule. In the short time the US has been around, the US surged to becoming a world power as early as 1919 and has held that spot since. Similar to the Mongols, the US spread rapidly and has grown exponentially.

Furthermore, the Mongols, when viewed by other people, are described as the antiChrist for their tolerance and the way in which their brutal fighting ways terrorized different areas of Asia, “ … the various nationalities which dwell in that region, and plundered, slew, and destroyed them to the full” (“The Perfect History” 200). Similarly, the US preaches the freedoms offered within the country, but, to some around the world, these freedoms are viewed as horrific. For example, within radical Islamic organizations, the teachings of the US are spoken down upon and, quite frankly, frighten these people. This is one of the many cases that view the United States’ tolerance poorly as other societies do so as well. However, the brutality of the United States is most paralleled to the Mongols. How can a country that preaches freedom and peace have been involved in slavery, atomic bombings, police brutality, and many more instances of destruction? Let us examine the atomic bombings, for instance.

Although there are mixed views on if the atomic bombs should have been dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the United States often teaches the bombings to have been good, as it forced Japan to surrender, ending World War II. This is similar in the way that the Mongolian people describe their acts of brutality, “Appointed by mighty Heaven and escorted by Mother Earth, we made man’s enemy, the people of the Merkits, empty their breasts and tore their livers in half” (“The Secret History” 198). Both regimes do not hide their brutality but, instead, make it seem acceptable and show their positive views on the situation. But, in reality, both regimes caused mass destruction. When the atomic bombings are taught around the world, they are viewed down upon. Many countries do not see any good in what the bombs brought, as they only caused more casualties than needed. Just like the Mongols, who other countries viewed poorly for their lack of care of human life.

The idea that the United States shares similarities to the Mongols may sound absurd, but, after further analysis, the mix of brutality and tolerance between the two are closer than previously believed.

https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1-ssu0bY4aiZdSevCi3nfAj7mYlCKuPly

Pablo Loza

Word Count: 522

Genghis Khan: One of a Kind or Alexander Copycat?

One of the first things I learned about Genghis Khan is that approximately 0.5% of men on the entire planet are his descendents. Considering how big the world is, this speaks bounds to how prolific the Mongol Empire grew in both power and area under his leadership. On the surface, the Mongols and their rise to power are merely a freak historical anomaly. However, history tends to repeat itself in one form or another. The Mongolian expansion across Asia and into Europe is not so different from Alexander the Great’s conquests nearly a millennium prior in the 4th Century, CE.

Both great empires rose from similar political situations with the unification of warring tribes and city states to form large, unified forces. The Macedonian phalanx was an extremely lethal and innovative fighting strategy initiated by Alexander’s father Philip. The Mongols also fought with the technological breakthroughs of the composite bow and siege weapons. Having the most advanced military capabilities of their time made each military a lethal force which could conquer massive swaths of land in relatively little time. In Ibn al-Athir’s The Perfect History, he compares the Mongolian invasions to Alexander when he “conquered the world”(al-Athir). Both Alexander and the Mongols were also viewed as possessing supernatural characteristics. Alexander was considered a demi-god and was frequently depicted with horns in his head, relating him to Zeus. Those who were victims of the Mongolian conquest feared that even God could not stop the merciless horde which descended upon them (al-Athir). These divine interpretations gave both conquerors a sort of supernatural aura to their campaigns.

Unlike many other massive conquests throughout history, neither one specifically intended to spread their culture onto their conquered people. The Mongols were known for their tolerance, however not only was Alexander tolerant of the culture of those he conquered, he even adopted many aspects of Persian culture. After Alexander conquered the Persian Empire, he proceeded to adopt the traditional clothing and customs of a Persian ruler, while still maintaining some of his own cultural practices. His adoption of Persian customs went so far that his fellow Macedonians began to oppose “his vision of a bicultural future” (Demand).

These striking similarities of military innovations, revolutionary regional unifications, and transcontinental conquests coupled with cultural tolerance prove that the Mongolian Invasion was not an isolated phenomenon. These similarities are just another example of the idea that history tends to repeat itself in one way or another. This leads you to question: is any great leader or conquest truly original?

-Ben Stanish

Word Count: 422

Sources:

Demand Ch. 15

Ibn al-Athir, The Perfect History

Confucius says “Literates Wanted”

Confucianism was created as a means of understanding one’s inherent limitations impressed upon them by nature. As viewed by those who practice Confucianism, a wife may live her best life if she submits to her husband, and the husband, the culturally dominate figure, may live his if he reciprocates respect to his inferior. Through this interaction we may see how it is in the benefit of the inferior to humble themselves and obey those who are deemed naturally stronger individuals, and the duty of the strong to protect and mentor the weak. It is from this perspective that civil service exams to enter the Chinese bureaucracy was born, as they are a definitive test of the intellectual strength of an individual. Thus, by limiting the amount of people who may participate in the bureaucracy, adherents to Confucianism create more educated answers from a narrower point of view.

Tu Fu states in one of his poems “I recall her complaints of the taxation that has made her poor to the bone/ The burden of war on such persons! It makes me shed bitter tears” (Tu Fu). In this excerpt the quintessential balance of jen is revealed. The goodness of man is shown to want to aid in alleviating the sorrows of others to the point of bringing the man to tears over the woman’s pain. Therefore, jen may be characterized as a love that puts the needs of others before oneself. The literacy tests would take time out of people’s occupation in order to serve those around them, which is demonstrative of balanced jen. The balance of goodness with philosophical thought is an advantage of this system as it creates a bureaucracy devoted to the welfare of the people, rather than solely gaining power and status.

Furthermore, the dominant intellectual ability of those who were deemed qualified to serve within the bureaucracy over the common citizen allows for more rational decisions to be made. One of the pitfalls of having low barriers to entry within a government or bureaucracy is that the loudest voice may not have the smartest decision. By limiting who may enter the bureaucracy based on intellect, the Chinese bureaucracy, in theory, will average smarter decisions than if there were no literacy tests at all. Although not formalized, America’s wealthy dominating the political sphere is similar to this institution, for wealth being the barrier to entry denotes connotations of education. Due to the correlation between higher education and wealth, there is an assumption that politicians are educated beyond the common man, and therefore will make more wise decisions.

However, wisdom in decisions by a few neglects the majority viewpoint. The literacy tests, although establishing the intellectual ability of those placed in power, deny the common man from expressing his perspective via legislation. In this way, a majority party’s voice is being silenced under the guise of a more powerful group being more capable of creating decisions. To believe that you are superior enough to know what is best for another person’s life is an arrogant assertion, and the literacy tests boast this ideology. The suppression of the minority power’s voice is a suppression of ideas. But evidently, the Chinese valued the order of the few rather than the chaos of the many.

-Jackson Garber

Words: 544

Tu Fu, China’s Greatest Poet, translation and commentary by William Hung (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952).

Continuity of Confucianism

Confucius was a philosopher and political adviser who believed that peace and new Chinese political and ethical thought could be introduced by refining society’s elite. He recorded his teachings in the The Analects, which emphasized junzi (“gentlemen”) as well as the five relationships: ruler-subject, father-son, elder-younger brother, husband-wife, and friend-friend. As Confucianism began to have a greater role in government and more, specifically many ruling dynasties in China, clear advantages and disadvantages began to emerge.

Confucius believed good government should be filled with men who have jen; this means people who were benevolent, and full of virtue and culture. These men didn’t have to be born with these traits but could learn them through proper education. One major benefit of staffing government with Confucian scholars is that they are all competent and trained in this virtue. The Analects says “The Master said: “He preaches only what he practices.” (The Analects, 2.13) This means that those who excel on Confucian exams were people who weren’t hypocrites but did what they said they were going to. This is advantageous in government because it is much easier to hold leaders accountable and ensure that you know exactly how officials will act.“The Master” in The Analects also discusses that the best way to win people over is to approach them with dignity and respect. If leaders treat their people this way, there is more room for selfless decision making and cohesion.

By choosing solely educated, specifically trained men who adhere to Confucianism, to make up government, a clear divide between the elite bureaucracy and the common people could quickly emerge. This divide also means less cohesion between different groups and could easily lead to rebellion.Confucianism preaches peace and harmony but this is not possible if there are two very different and unequal groups. There was even a clear divide between men and women. Despite having female Confucian scholars, women were still instructed to be subservient to men in all of their relationships (this included their sons). The Analects 2.5 includes, “The Master said: “Never disobey.”, and goes on to repeat the phrase “according to the ritual” This indicates there is little room to disobey the ritual. Because of this things will remain the same even if circumstances change. Also, ‘never disobey’ means never being able to offer an opposing opinion, which can be very harmful for a government.

One similar institution we have today is the court systems in which judges are appointed. In the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Judges who sit on the Court of Appeals are appointed by the President and confirmed by Congress. This institution is similar to Confucian bureaucracies because it is staffed with people who have excelled on a particular exam (the bar exam) and are trained in attempting to maintain peace, and treating others with respect.

-Carina Richardson

Word Count: 461

(The Analects, 2.5 and 2.13)

What’s good about it?

The Confucian doctrine teaches that there is a natural harmony between man and the universe. This Confucian harmony when applied to a government emphasizes the five relationships of, ruler and subject, father and son, elder brother and younger brother, husband and wife, and friend and friend. The advantages of this application to the Chinese government is that there is now a parallel between the family and the state. A good leader under the Confucian doctrine exemplifies this harmony and leads the nation in a manner consistent with the five relationships. In the Analects of Confucius, it is written that a good leader in government will “Guide them by edicts, keep them in line with punishments, and the common people will stay out of trouble but will have no sense of shame. Guide them by virtue, keep them in line with the rites, and they will, besides having a sense of shame, reform themselves.” By staffing government positions with Confucian scholars, the government will be united behind a single doctrine, which is to promote harmony and lead by example.

As much as the Confucian teachings are about peace and being a good person there are disadvantages to having a government solely comprised of Confucian Scholars. First, there is no diversity of thought amongst the leadership. While common values and goals do ensure a unified, smooth running government, only an elite portion of the population are involved with legislation and representation of all people and all beliefs is not ensure or valued. Next, by employing only government officials who are literate and who performed well on a test, the country misses out on the wisdom and ideas of those who may not have the resources to study for or opportunity to take the exam. In addition, Confucianism builds a pyramid of rule with one leader and a trickle-down delegation of power. In this pyramid built of the five relationships, the roles are set and there is never an opportunity to change in roles. For example, the ruler and the subject will never switch or, the wife never switches roles with her husband. This limits future possibilities for individuals and leaves them stuck in whatever life circumstance into which they were born. Are the subject and the wife supposed to accept their place as a subordinate of their counterpart? Clearly, history has shown that those previously without a voice will eventually demand one.

Academic performance and merit-based assessments also play a role in modern day America just as they did in Confucian governed Chinese dynasties. A college degree, in general, does create more opportunities for economic success. Most universities and colleges require an admissions exam like the SAT or ACT to gain entry, and just as in ancient China a person needed to score well to be considered for acceptance. However, for the most part, a person in modern day America can hold many government positions without anything more than a high school degree. In fact, there is no degree requirement for a Congressman or President, two of the highest, most influential positions in modern day American government, to have a degree or credential. This allows for a more representative government than one comprised entirely of academic scholars. America in its 243-year history has never wavered from the Constitution dictated requirements of age and citizenship to hold office. This commitment to the tenets of the constitution is similar to ancient China’s commitment to Confucianism. Both doctrines promote the three basic human rights of life, liberty, and property, but enforce opposing leadership models for their obtainment.

–Danny Vela

Word Count: 544 Words