The Assassination of President Garfield (Document Analysis Assignment) Research Paper

The Assassination of President Garfield (Document Analysis Assignment) - Research Paper Example The document under analysis was written in the context of Guiteau assassinating the president, an act he asserted was of political necessity. On the fateful day, July 2, 1881, Guiteau tracked the President to the then Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Station where he shot him. Guiteau immediately surrendered to authorities, saying he was the â€Å"The Stalwart of the Stalwarts.†2 Although he said that he was â€Å"Stalwart of the Stalwarts†, it is evident that he was merely disgruntled as he states in his letter that â€Å"the President proved a traitor to those who made him president.† 3 Stalwarts were a late 19th century group of Republicans under the leadership of one Roscoe Conkling who supported President Ulysses S. Grant (1869–1877) for a third term in office. This clique opposed the moderate Republicans who wanted civil reforms and often fought for the control of the Republican Party. Later, the opposing groups would settle on James A. Garfield for the Republican ticket at the Republican national convention in 1880. Guiteau arrived at his decision to assassinate President Garfield arguing that the latter was ungrateful to the Stalwarts after allowing himself to be manipulated by the Secretary of State to plot to murder Senator Conkling and General Arthur Grant. It is widely believed that Guiteau’s plot to assassinate the Pr esident originated from his belief that he was principally responsible for Garfields victory and should have been rewarded with an ambassadorship for his vital help to the President. 4 The two postings he wanted for himself but were constantly rejected by the President and the Cabinet were Paris and Vienna. Without family, friends, and almost penniless, Guiteau grew increasingly isolated and depressed and decided that the President Garfield had to be removed. That Guiteau was the only one obsessed with President Garfield and disgruntled with the latter’s government to the point of

Identify the defining features of Realist perspective and assess their Essay

Identify the defining features of Realist perspective and assess their relevance to the analysis of contemporary world politics - Essay Example This easy explores the defining features of realist perspective such as state actors, egoism, anarchy, power, security, and morality with the aim of presenting an assessment of their relevance to the analysis of contemporary world politics. In their analysis of international politics, realists assert the central role played by the state in dictating international relations as opposed to other theories of international relations like liberalism that accepts international institutions as being part of the actors day (Kegley, 2013). Realists saw the state as triumphant over other forms of political authority like feudal principalities, city-states, and empires such as the Soviet Union. According to the views of realists such as Hobbes, the state enjoys a distinctive monopoly of legitimate violence given that in the global arena, all the people regardless of nationality, language, culture, ethnic background or religion have accepted or have a state that force them to resolve their confli cts. Such a people also look for the state to protect their interests against aggressions from other states and international actors (Kolodziej, 2005). The assertion of the state as the main player in international relations means that actors in the international politics will put the importance of state interest the centre of any interactions with other players in the global area. Realist conception of the state as the central actor in international relations through its exercise of power in certain ways has far-reaching significances on the relationship between states and other actors on the international arena (Kaarbo & Ray, 2011). Such assumptions are essential in the contemporary world politics where such bodies as multinational corporations have no legal or political right to act as independent or autonomous actors in the international economy since they are only part of state power or instrument of foreign policy. Multinational corporations are not in themselves, substantial economic and political force, in their exercise of power and influence, they are only an extension and reflection of the power and might of specific states under which they act (Steans, Pettiford, & El-Anis, 2013). The main concern for realist is the state of anarchy, which stands for a situation where there is no international government to intercede on interstate conflicts. Realist believes that the main concern in international relations is the condition of anarchy, which is based on their view that the world lacks a central sovereign power to regulate relations between states. The absence of international body with the authority to create and enforce regulatory measures on interstate relationships, realists argue, means the states as main players put in place their own scheme for survival and are free to define their own interests and pursuit of power day (Kegley, 2013). Anarchy in the international politics therefore, leads to a circumstance where power has the superseding role of dictating interstate relations (Steans, Pettiford, Diez & El-Anis, 2013). Realists point out the failure of international institutions like the Permanent Court of International Justice and the League of Nation is because such international organizations exert minimal pressure on behaviour of states. This realist assumption is clear in the way contemporary states peruse their interests by choosing to overlook international