- 最后登录
- 2011-12-5
- 在线时间
- 122 小时
- 寄托币
- 525
- 声望
- 18
- 注册时间
- 2010-3-16
- 阅读权限
- 25
- 帖子
- 3
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 435
- UID
- 2781482

- 声望
- 18
- 寄托币
- 525
- 注册时间
- 2010-3-16
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 3
|
TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 511 TIME: 01:39:03 DATE: 2010-6-2 22:19:32
I fundamentally agree with the speaker's broad assertion that the study of history places too less attention to the group of people who maybe made the most significant events and trends in history. However, considering the responsibilities placed on individuals who impersonate the chief and important leaders in significant events, I do be favor of more emphasis being placed to them, which is essential, as the following discussed.
Admittedly, so few study of history focusing on group of people who are evolved in the historical significant affairs, is quiet partial. Any informed person knows that one event or trend which can push the development of history mostly depends on the power coming from people. Just like the army. Even though one country has an extremely preeminent captain, having got win in a lot of vital battles, it will still be beaten if it fails to gain a solider, which means to lose the huge and substantial support coming from soldiers. Hereby, when a campaign achieves a great and outstanding result, such as the Nomandie Battle 诺曼底登陆 没查到词, speaking highly with the group of people who take an inignore affect in the process is doubtlessly necessary.
Yet, I have two points of contention with the speakers involving the difficult responsibilities taken by the leaders, as individuals. Firstly, it is always filled with the unimaginable hardship that exists in most historical crucial events and trends. The fellow group of people are eager to possess a admire individual, as their leader, giving their mental support and the bright prospects, especially at the time when they just suffer vast pains. An apt illustration is the Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi, who giving the fellow people vast mental support to overcome countless predicaments. In other words, the spoken highly individual is chosen by the group of people from their inner needs.
Moreover, the individual, taking the role as the leader in a significant campaign, are doubtless placed important and vital duties, such as leading his or her fellow to come over the difficulties, establishing the right, effective plans and methods of innovation, or maintain their rights. One of such famous person is ??想不起来人名了, who struggle for the rights of homosexual. In the process of running for representative, he suffers a huge amount of condemns from society, and after he gained the position, as the representative of homosexual, he should ask for the rights from the government, and argued with those anti-homosexual politics. Meanwhile, he sustained the pressure from the government and society, and the requirement from his fellow. Besides, he took the high risk of being murdered to lead the significant campaign.
In sum, the huge process of history is both based on individuals and group of people. If lacking any one of them, the history would be likely still in the last century. Hereby, in my observation, I quiet agree with the speaker's opinion that study of history should place more emphasis on the group of people. But paying emphasis on individuals is also necessary for the study of history considering the vital and crucial roles they acted. |
|