Perfect Paper 1

Paper 1 “Why Fight For Russia”

The following extract that I have received is a leaflet, or one could see it as a brochure. This is decided due to the structure of the extract as well as the heading of the extract, which seems to be advertising the author’s point of view. On the bottom of the page, certain information was given to us about the extract received indicating that the following extract is a leaflet made by a British pacifist in 1914. Since the extract talks about fighting and due to the date given to us, we can now understand that this leaflet revolves around the First World War. This essay is an attempt to analyze this extract identifying the author’s purpose and intended audience as well as different persuasive language and also differ literary features that the author has used in the leaflet provided to us.

As we already understand from reading the text, the extract is a leaflet given to British soldiers as well as the British general public, persuading them to not fight with Russia and not fight the war in the first place. It also attempts to persuade the people to protest against thee war. From this we can then go to understand the purpose of this leaflet is to inform the general public as well as the soldiers about the author’s true opinions on Russia, as well as to persuade the people that fighting in this war would be against British morals. The leaflet talks about Russia’s unethical values so this then helps us understand the purpose of the extract. We can also learn who the authors intended audience are, which from what we already know, are the British general public as well as British soldiers. We can see this from the authors attempt to inform and educate the public and the British army as well as the general public, and the due to the author explaining to the army to not fight with Russia and to not fight the war if they can, and to protest against the war.

As we have learnt from the previous paragraph as well as from the information given to us on from the extract, we come to understand the extract is a leaflet or a brochure which acts as an advertisement used to advertise the authors ideas and point of views about Russia and why he believes that fighting with Russia and fighting in this war is unethical and goes against British morals. He also talks about how the Russians go against all of the British ideologies about liberty and justice, due to the fact that he talks about how the Russians treat their soldiers and how they don’t match the British ideologies of the western world. The leaflet goes on to explain how the country they should side with if they are forced to fight , are the Germans due to their similarities  and how the Russians are different to the Germans and they they are slaves of a corrupt autocracy and they are just violent people in genera and they again go against British ideologies of liberty and justice. The author goes on to explain how he is against the what and actually persuading the general public to take part in protests against England taking part in the war.

As we can see from reading the extract that the author uses a persuasive as well as an informative tone. This is a sort of tone that a teacher would use with their students. The author uses a type of vocabulary that most people would understand and doesn’t use any complicated words, thus we can understand that he is attempting to communicate with everyone in the general public from all different educational levels. The author also uses a large, bold font to catch the readers eye and to grab their attention as he uses sentences such as “A WAR for Russia is a War Against Civilization”, as well as “British Stand Clear”. These types of phrases draw the reader into reading the leaflet and make the leaflet seem more interesting that it actually is. It also shows and acts as if the leaflet is trying to inform the people of a really important situation and a crucial piece of information. The author uses a interesting title that say simply “Why fight for Russia?”, Which then makes the audience curious as to find out what the answer of this rhetorical question is as it has been on peoples minds as thy observe the leaflet to read the authors point of views. It also makes then curious as they want to see if the authors point of view might change their opinion about the war or not.  This then sets an educational mood and it seems as if the audience are learning something and gaining information about Russia’s true colors. It also sets an opinionated tone, which then causes the audience to change their point of view on the war itself.

The author uses many literary devices as well as persuasive language to aid in his persuasion of the British public and the soldiers in not fighting the war as well as not fighting with Russia. The author uses logos as he explains and talks about the amount of money they spent. They also use logos later on as the author explains the amount of Germans compared to the amount of Russians to show they if they ere to fight the war, they had to fight with Germany as they are outnumbered. The author also uses pathos as he explains the audience about the similarities between them and the Germans and how that the Germans are outnumbered thus persuading them to , if they had to fight the war, to side with Germany. The author uses Rhetorical questions to keep the audience thinking and interested to find the answer. The author uses rhetorical questions such as “ What is Russia”, and “Why fight for Russia”. The author uses persuasive language to help in shaping the audience’s opinion about Russia. The author also uses persuasive language as he explains how Russia are cruel not only to others, but also to their own people and how that goes against the British ideologies of justice and liberty. The author then uses ethos as he identifies how the Russians are unethical thus instigating an ethical appeal.

Is It Acceptable for a Government to try to Shape Public Opinion through Information Campaigns?

Control Room. Media bias in the Iraq-American War.

Chosen Prompt : Deception is the same as telling an outright lie.

Although under some circumstances I do agree with this prompt, as sometimes deception can be for a good cause, or at least a better cause than the lie. I do not however agree with the deception in the documentary about the Iraq - American war. The Arab-based news station "Al Jajeera" seemed to have shown a very non-biased approach to reporting on the war, however left out quite a lot of detail to the Sadaam Hussein situation. Sadaam Hussein has reportedly killed more Muslim people than any other person in history, and that includes the american military. The deception here is not acceptable and is in this case just as bad as an outright lie. This is because as the countries' leading news reporter, Al Jazeera should be honest about the true enemies of the public of Iraq.

Although it may be true that Sadaam Hussein is also quite the enemy, but the source of this information in the documentary is the American official that stars throughout, as quite the protagonist. This makes you re-think the validity of the information but nevertheless the previous statements about the deception in the Al Jazeera news reports are true. Although to look at the situation from the side of the Iraqi public, the reasoning for deception of the Iraqi public was probably for morale reasons. Although Sadaam Hussein was not a fit leader, being in the middle of a war I'm sure it would be a better strategy to turn the public against the opposing nation was probably seen to be a better idea than against the countries leader.

Racism in America, A thing of the past?

From the days of slavery, to the Civil War, through Jim Crow to the Civil Rights Movement, the United States has contended with racism. What is the state of race relations in the U.S. today—and what does your Bible say about racism?

Racism in America is most definitely not a thing of the past. Although history was made last November when the first black president was elected, that does not hide the fact that there is still a huge problem in America with black racism. Things like police brutality against young black men in many cities around the country in the last few years. People seem to think that the election of a mix-raced man has resulted in racism significantly disappearing and that is however not the case.

This graph shows the discrimination against blacks in America in 2015. This clearly shows that racism is infact a huge problem in the US still. The one thing that cannot be denied is that the minority (the black people) are gaining political and slight economic power. Should there be different standards in measuring white racism and non-white racism? In classrooms around the U.S., students are often taught that racism is "prejudice plus power"—that unless one has the power to enforce one's prejudice, one cannot be said to practice racism. Ironically, this common idea can perpetuate a racist double standard, in which by labeling an entire race of people powerless, their moral and spiritual agency is devalued.