Gerst Post on Participation Possibility

Chicago Council on Global Affairs programs in February

On Tuesday, Feb. 4th, we'll hear a discussion on "My Enemy's Enemy:  The US and Iran in the Era of ISIS" at the Union League Club, 6:00-7:15 p.m., and

On February 24th, Ambassador Christopher Hill (former Asst. Secy of State for Asian and Pacific Affairs) will speak on "The North Korea Conundrum" at the Chicago Club, 6:00-7:15 p.m.

Video on Congress of Vienna

VIDEO ON CONGRESS OF

Art History: Romanticism slides

Please click here for the Romanticism lecture (from 1/26/2015). The prompt appears as the last slide in the lecture.

What

Art History pre-class assignment for Romanticism

Please look at the AT Euro Art History flickr page before the next Art History lecture on Monday, 1/26, and complete the usual pre-class assignment.

Click here for the flickr page.

As a reminder: you are to look at each image carefully and select one image, briefly research it, and turn in a few sentences to me on the day of class describing one thing you learned about the artwork. Google and wikipedia are fine, though I encourage you to use other sources as well, and be sure to cite the source and use your own words. Imagine you're standing in front of the painting in a museum and telling someone this cool fact.

Script-writing begins!

Writer's block?  Start with Charlie Newell's suggestions for scene-craft:  http://ateurohistory.blogspot.com/2014/10/charles-newells-insights-into-staging_2.html

A variety of perspectives on events in France

Jeffery Goldberg on Charlie Rose http://www.charlierose.com/watch/60499584 (minute 22:31-46:09) discussing events in France, the impact on free speech by journalists and on the lives of Jews living in France, as well as the radicalization process of individuals via the Internet.

Three writer-fellow-scholar types discuss "Islam and Freedom of Speech," on Charlie Rose (12 minutes), available at http://www.bloomberg.com/video/islam-and-freedom-of-speech-charlie-rose-01-16-YEM022nNQSC_sRkUQY9vWg.html

NY Times: There is no duty to blaspheme, a society’s liberty is not proportional to the quantity of blasphemy it produces, and under many circumstances the choice to give offense (religious and otherwise) can be reasonably criticized as pointlessly antagonizing, needlessly cruel, or simply stupid.  http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/07/the-blasphemy-we-need/?ref=opinion

The Economist: The magazine was targeted because it cherished and promoted its right to offend: specifically to offend Muslims. That motive invokes two big themes. One is free speech, and whether it should have limits, self-imposed or otherwise. The answer to that is an emphatic no. The second is Muslim Europe—and whether episodes such as this are part of a civilizational struggle between Western democracies and extreme Islam, on a battlefield stretching continuously from Peshawar to Raqqa to the centre of Paris. Again, the answer is no. See http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21638118-islamists-are-assailing-freedom-speech-vilifying-all-islam-wrong-way-counter 

The Atlantic: The Charlie Hebdo massacre seems to be the most direct attack on Western ideals by jihadists yet. I’ve seen arguments advancing the idea that 9/11 represents the purest expression of Islamist rage at a specific Western idea— capitalism, in that case—but satire and the right to blaspheme are directly responsible for modernity. In the words of Simon Schama, “Irreverence is the lifeblood of freedom.”  See http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/europe-is-under-siege/384305/

Reuters: What follows the slaughter of the senior staff of the Parisian satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo will be a test of the depth of Europe’s liberal instincts. The weekly paper, run by journalists with the real courage of their convictions, has done more than its duty for freedom of the press. It falls to Europeans to display their attachment to other pillars of a free society: the rule of law, the observance of democratic norms, the display of tolerance and nondiscrimination.
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/01/09/charlie-hebdo-killings-are-a-test-for-france-and-all-western-europe/

USA Guest Editorial: Why did France allow the tabloid to provoke Muslims? It is time that the sanctity of a Prophet revered by up to one-quarter of the world's population was protected. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/ 

The WSJ: First, our freedoms are not merely our “traditions,” our “ways,” “reflective of Enlightenment assumptions” or “very pleasant.” In America especially, they are everything to us. Here freedom of expression is called free speech, and it is protected in the first of the Constitution’s amendments because it is the most important of our rights.  http://www.wsj.com/articles/salman-rushdie-meet-charlie-hebdo-1420763547

ROBESPIERRE STANDS CORRECTED

Robespierre did much to stain the ideals of the Enlightenment and liberalism  by co-mingling them with terror. The recent events in France have done much to remove that stain  by the solidarity shown by European leaders with the vast majority of the French people in support of freedom of expression and religious toleration and in opposition to Islamic terrorism. Je suis Charlie, je suis Juif! 

Gerst Post: Participation Credit Possibility

Professor Eric Posner (U. of Chicago Law School) will speak on “The Twilight of Human Rights Law” at the Chicago Club at 81 E. Van Buren Street on Tuesday, January 20, 2015 from 6:00-7:15 p.m.  He is skeptical of the effectiveness of our current international law regime.  Please sign-up with Ms. Gerst, who is helping chaperone the trip downtown. 

SUMMARY: A massive international legal effort to force countries to protect human rights has failed. It is time to think of new ways of advancing the well being of people around the world.  The international human rights project goes back more than half a century. It began with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a vague and aspirational document, and then incorporated itself in a series of formal treaties. These treaties—about a dozen in total—set out an extraordinary array of rights. Not just classical civil and political rights—rights to freedom of expression and religious worship, to a trial before an independent judge, to protection against unreasonable searches, not to be tortured, and not to be discriminated against on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity. The treaties also guarantee rights to work, pensions, education, housing, and medical care. They protect the right of children to have access to the media and require accommodation for disabled people. The vast majority of countries have ratified nearly all these treaties, and also set up numerous international courts, commissions, councils, and committees to monitor the compliance of states. For a long time, optimism that these treaties could improve the lives of people coexisted with cynicism about the willingness of countries to comply with them. In recent years, political scientists have looked at the data. They have found little evidence that countries that ratify human rights treaties improve their human rights performance. Excerpt from Eric Posner's The Twilight of Human Rights Law.  https://www.opendemocracy.net/openglobalrights/eric-posner/twilight-of-human-rights-law

How Do I Conquer the French Revolution?!

If you are confused by Palmer's parade of events during the French Revolution, you may need to focus on some organizing concepts in your head, so that you can evaluate and make judgments about the Revolution.

Think about social classes: are the aims for the future of France the same or different for the (1) idealistic revolutionary; (2) the sans-culottes (poor city dwellers); and (3) the rural peasantry? With what future would each be satisfied?

Think about stages of the revolution.  It begins with the first revolution (1789-1792), which began with the revolt of the Third Estate at the Estates General, saw the formation of a constitutional monarchy by the National Assembly with the establishment of the Legislative Assembly using a constitutional monarchy, and ended with threats from abroad to intervene and the September massacres.  These massacres, the suspension of the 1791 Constitution by the Legislative Assembly,  and the call for elections to establish a republican form of government based on universal male suffrage (vote), signal the beginning of a second revolution (1792-1794). The revolutionaries established the National Convention which featured the rule by revolutionaries, with factionalism developing between the Mountain and the Girondins. This period saw continued war on the continent, the execution of Louis XVI in 1793, continued difficulties in solving France's economic troubles, and the Terror.  By 1795, the more conservative revolutionaries who had led liberal Revolution in 1789 reasserted their authority, ending the Terror for good, and wrote a new republican constitution featuring a five-member executive: the Directory, which ruled until 1799.  What happens then?  Napoleon.

Think about the test questions.  The first asks you how "well the ideals of the Enlightenment were implemented in the revolution."  Make yourself 2-3 t-charts (yes/no) organized by ideal (for example, liberty, which you should define) and chart the events and policies that were aimed at achieving (or destroying) liberty from 1789-1799, then pick another Enlightenment ideal and continue with another t-chart.  When you are done, you will have reorganized the Palmer reading by events anchored to Enlightenment ideals.  Make sure you not only have a thesis, but a solid plan for how you will handle the supporting body paragraphs, all responsive to the question.

The second question asks you "who had the better understanding of society and how it should be reformed, Edmund Burke or Maximilian Robespierre?"  First, how would you define society and its fundamental nature?  What does it have to do with culture?  Does your idea correspond more to Burke or Robespierre? Second, any society is still made up of individual people, so maybe you should also consider the fundamental nature of man and whether it is societal institutions are corrupting or useful in term of educating, governing, etc.  Third, consider the definition of "reform." Finally, address the claim and supporting evidence of Burke and Robespierre in the primary sources discussed in class.  Your thesis should respond directly to the question and your supporting paragraphs should provide analysis of the arguments used by B and R.

We encourage you to look back at the film we watched on the French Revolution, available here:

If you do not have time, here is a short video recapping events from Crash Course: