The twentieth century American novel
The year 1900 produced little significant American fiction, if compared with 1899 or 1901.1900 writings by:
v Charles Chestnutt
v Stephen Crane
v Mark Twain
v Theodore Dreiser

Realism
v It emphasized the representative rather than the exotic or exceptional matters previously considered too unpleasant or controversial to figure in the novels are now given an airing such as :
v Divorce, in William Deam Howells's “A Modern Instance”(1882)
v A child awareness of adult sexuality, in James's “What Maisie Knew” (1887)
Naturalism
It shares with realism some commitment to an objective account of external reality and a tendency toward impersonal technique; a penchant for third person rather than first person.
Sordid subjects:
v Dire Poverty in Hamlin Garland's “Main -Traveled Roads”
v Prostitution in Craine's” Maggie:A Girls of the Streets.”
v Capitalist greed in Norris's “The Octopus” - Dreiser's “The Financier”
v Alcoholism in George's “Mother”
The movement from innocence to experience can be seen in :

v Mark Twain's “Huckleberry Finn”
v Fitzgerald's “The Great Gatsby”
v Salinger's “The Catcher in The Rye”

Three Major Novelists
v ERNEST HEMINGWAY

v FITZGERALD

v WILLIAM FAULKNER

ERNEST HEMINGWAY
v Hemingway's career began in the 1920s and extended to the beginning of the 1960s.His greatest work both as a novelist and as a short story writer , came in the inter-war year :
Novels:
v The Sun Also Rises (Fiesta) 1926
v A Farewell to arms 1929
v For Whom The Bell Tolls 1940
Short story collections:
v In our time 1925
v Men Without Women 1927
v Winner Take Nothing 1933
The Lost Generation :
v Those writers and critics who turned their backs on the values of the pre-war world and finding no artistic stimulus in the post-war American society. His style is inseparable from his world-view.

FITZGERALD
He borrows heavily from literary antecedents, the structure of Gatsby ,looks back to both “Moby-Dick” and Conrad's “Heart of Darkness”, and everywhere one finds echoes of Fitzgerald 's favorites poet, John Keats. The Keats Ian technique which the impression gained is described in an unexpected mixing of senses and the other aspects makes Fitzgerald a romantic writer where Hemingway was emphatically not. Fitzgerald was also a more committed American writer. “The Great Gatsby” is generally regarded as one of the most brilliant and complex attempts to delineate the American Dream. Although “Tender is the Night” deals with expatriates Americans in Europe would show, how many references there are to American culture.

WILLIAM FAULKNER
He probably the greatest of the three in the quality of his fictional output ,was a southern writer. This implies a strong interest in cultural memory ,for southern society is ruled by the twin fixations of the Civil War and Slavery.
v Faulkner used an array of modernist techniques in order to brings his characters into Byzantine relationships with the history ,class structure , racial divides , economics and myths of his very own community. Some of his techniques:

v Complex Time-schemes
v Multiple Narrators
v Stream of Consciousness

OTHER WRITERS

v Sherwood Anderson
v Sinclair Lewis
v John Doss Passos
v John Steinbeck
v Nathanael West
Sherwood Anderson:

He seemed to embody much of the artistic spirit of his time. He influenced in various ways both Hemingway and Faulkner and produced the first major work of American literature after the first World War.
Works that are indebted to him for this techniques:
v Faulkner's The Unvanquished (1938) and Go Down,Moses(1942)
v Hemingway's In Our Time(1925)
v William March's Company K (1933)
v John Steinbeck's The Long Valley(1938)
v Eudora Welty's The Golden Apples(1949)
Sinclair Lewis
He became in 1930,the first American author to received the Noble Prize in literature.
v Main Street (1920)
v Arrowsmith(1925)
v Elmer Gantry (1927)
John Doss Passos
He made significant contributions to the modernist impulse in early 20th-century American fiction with his great trilogy:
v 1.U.S.A:The 42nd Parallel (1930)
v 2.1919 (1932)
v 3.The Big Money (1936)
v In these writing he sought to encompass the life of the American nation between 1900 and 1929.
v 4.John Steinbeck
The Grapes of Wrath(1939)
5.Nathanael West

His short novels are :
v The Dream Life of Balso Snell(1931)
v A cool Million (1934)
v Miss Lonlyhearts(1933)
v The Day of the Locust(1939
New Voices and Social Developments

THE WORLD WARS
The war novels :
v Three soldiers by Doss Passos
v The Enormous Room by e .e. Cummings
v Company K by March
v A Farewell To Arms by Hemingway

JEWISH NOVELS
The Jewish novelists were also the city novelists par excellence and came into prominence with a knowledge of the Holocaust and ,therefore, great feelings of anger ,guilt and fear.
novelists of Jewish fiction:
v Bernard Malamud
v Edward Lewis Wallant
v Philip Roth
v Saul Bellow
In these novels , particularly Malamud's “The Assistant”(1957), suffering becomes a key condition for understanding the meaning of existence and the necessity of becoming fully human.
YOUTH MOVEMENT
The 1950s in American was also the decade of 'Youth Culture' when teenagers separated themselves from the culture of their parents to asserts their own identity and stress the importance of peer-group politics, and that their culture was a subculture rather than a counterculture.

AFRICAN AMERICAN LITERATURE
Early progenitors of this were :
v James weldon Johnson's Autobiography of an Ex-Colored Man (1912)
v Jean Toomer's Cane(1923)
v Nella Larson's Quicksand (1928) and Passing(1929)

WOMAN WRITERS
It took the development of civil rights in the1950s and 1960s to rediscover the work of women writers ,such as: Kate Chopin and Mary Austin .Some of significant works of women :
v Mary McCarthy's The Group (1963)
v Alison Lurie's The Nowhere City (1965)3)
v Joyce Carol Oates's Expensive People (1968) and Theme(1969)

NEW VOICES, NEW STYLES
v After 1950, there was an argument that the chronicle of society had had its day and needed to be replaced by a new kind of journalism that would perform the task of showing the interplay between people and forces around them.
v Norman mailer's The Armies of the Night(1968)
v At this time, novels began to mix history and fiction to great effect even if the history is itself fantastic.
v E. L.Doctrow'sTHe Book of Daniel(1971) and Ragtime(1975)
THE MELTING POT
“The Melting Pot" of American society is now producing a truly multicultural range of fictions an experimental and epic variety of writing that seeks to find new voices and capture the immense potential and frustration of holding together such a vast complex and contradictory culture.

Jewish identity, American Citizenship



America is a country which has always faced a lot of immigrants who were looking for a good life. These people from different nationalities, languages, ethnicities, identities shaped the new America; both effecting and affected.

Jews, after Hitler Europe, immigrated in large numbers to America, and tried to reconstruct their identity, different from their previous suppressed one, in Europe. This identity is important since it is viewed in two levels both subjectively and by other Americans.

As, according to their religious lessons, a chosen nation by God they have always tried to have interactions among themselves. This is termed in this article under “Jewish exceptionalism”.

On the other hand, however, they continued their effort to have a strong appeal to Americans’ mind through a strong adjustment into the American “melting pot”.

Now after some decades they are not only the weak minority in U.S but they are seen as a beloved people who are deserved to be considered respectful citizens. Minority in population, they did not consider themselves as minors in rights.

Iranian Jewish Identity


Identities according to Barker" are wholly social constructions and can not exist outside of cultural representation."

Iran is a country of several ethnicities, languages, local cultures, religions which have lived peacefully during a long period. Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and Zoroastrianism, are the main religions in Iran.

Despite the fact that the majority in Iran are Muslims, Jews as a religious minority, are considered as "people of Book", who have been legally benefited by the Constitution. Iran has the largest population of Jews of all the Muslim countries.

Although after the revolution in Iran some of them immigrated to U.S and Israel, those Jews who remained have the full citizenship. They exercise freely their religious practices and festivals. They can participate in political elections and have a seat in Parliament.

With an anti Zionism approach among Iranian administration and people, Jews community in Iran has not been mixed with Zionists or Israelis, only they have been considered as Jewish Iranians.

It seems that Jewish identity in Iran, formed by their nationality and their religion, is very different from the Jewish identity in other parts of the world. They do not consider themselves, as the only chosen nation by God, but as the followers of Moses.

Iranian culture has influenced Iranian Jews and shaped the most part of their identity. The Jewish culture has been adjusted to the Iranian culture so that, apart from the religious attitudes, they don’t separate themselves from other Iranian citizens. But at the same time they represent themselves as a different community and try to pass Jewish values through generations in family unit and educational system.

Types of Primaries


Primary elections, as means for for political parties to nominate candidates for general election, are held on behalf of the parties.The electoral college is a particular American institution.When Americans vote for Presidents and vice_presidents, they do not acctually vote fore those people , but for electors.These electors meet in their state capitals after the general election and cast votes for President and vice_President.Though electors are pledged to the candidates of their party, there is nothing in the Constitution requiring them to so vote.
There are four main types of primaries:
*Closed
*Open
*Blanket
*Run_off

Closed:
In this direct primary, those voters who are registered members of a party, may vote in that party's primary.So the important case, here is declaring party affiliation and independents can not vote.It may strengthen party unity and doesn't let other party's members to vote to nominate weak candidate for their own party's benefit.
In Semi_closed primary, even unaffiliated voters can participate in voting.Here, independents , based on the states , can privatelychoose party primary inside the voting booth or publicaly by registering withany party on Election Day.

Open:
Here, registered's party affiliation is not so important.Voters can vote in any party primary.They enter the voting booth and choose the party ballot on which they will vote in secret.This system, sometimes, let voters of opposing party, to participate and vote for the weakest candidate of the other side to increase their own party the chance of having more votes for it's candidates.This practice is known as "raiding".Each person can vote in only one primary.
Semi_open primary, is different with open primary in public announcement which the voters must declare their primary before the entering the voting booth.They request a ballot and electional officials record their choice and provid them parties access to information.

Blanket:
Voters can vote, according to this system, for one candidate.Their membership in a special party is not important.Through this syste, political party candidates can be selected.The candidates who have taken the majority of votes by party can continue to the general election.Although in open primary voters may vote for candidates, regardless of their own party registration, they must stick to one party's candidate.
In comparison with the other primaries, this system makes the voters less limited, because it doesn't limit them to select from just one party's candidates.There are some critics, however,that say it is aweakness for the system, because it reduces party loyalty.

Run_off
The ballots in this primary are not limited to one party and the top two candidates advance to general election, regardless of party affiliation.If no candidate gain the majority of votes, all candidates, except the the two with the most votes, are eliminated and a second round of voting happens.

Climate Stewardship and Innovative Act of 2007
Democrats on the Issue


IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has released an assessment that holds human actions responsible for the up growing air pollution and warming of climate. This has led the democrats to feel the emergency of legislations on the issue. The republicans, however, except for senator McCain, the candidate of 2008 elections, have rejected the importance of the issue and the mandating condition.

Any provision for the issue requires the coping of the legal frameworks in US with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. In introducing one of the issues in the Congress, that is the climate change and the necessary legal provisions for it, this paper would also look very briefly at the ideas of major democrats in senate, who have also been candidates for 2008 presidential election. The reason of not including the republicans is that they have generally ignored the issue, except for senator McCain.

The legal setting that is waiting to be passed by the House of Representatives is the most recent bill of Climate Stewardship and Innovative Act of 2007.

More than any other democrat candidate, Senator Joseph Biden has been active in promoting the issue of legislation in the area of climate change. The Clean Power Act of 2005, was a bill introduced by him in that year that never became a law.

Senator Hillary Clinton, the 2008 election major delegate, is a strong proponent of the legislation on the issue of climate change. She is also a member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Pubic Works. She has sponsored the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2007. This act would have cut the amount of green gases by 30% by 2050 having passed. The other act she is the sponsor of is the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act.

Senator Chris Dodd was another democrat candidate who sponsored the Clean Power Act of 2005 along with Biden.

Senator John Edwards is the first to announce that for the bilateral purpose of reducing green house gases and the economic provision regarding fuel, the completely carbon neutral fuel should be utilized.

And the last but not the least, Senator Barak Obama, the other 2008 election delegate, has sponsored the Climate Stewardship and Innovative Act of 2007, along with Hillary Clinton. This is a bill that has not been passed yet, but alive.

ON THE SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES


One of the important issues in the history of the United states is SLAVERY, that even resulted to the American Civil War(1861_1865).It has a long and considereable history in the America till it can be said that even after the Civil War it remained still one of the crucial issues.

The speed of the spreading slavery through the colonies was so fast that it can be said that just during about a century all of the colonies became slaveholders and their economic was based on it.

First the European indentured servents were the labor force in the agricultural colonies.But there was a problem there. After their time was over, they became free. So the colonists needed to a kind of labor forcewith little wage and everlasting period of time to serve on the farms.

Labor system became more important on southern agricultural regions.On other parts it was mostly for serving at homes or something like this.So it was not vital as the fundumental base of economy.

The slave population of the United States increased after that the law put an end to slaveryand it was mostly because of natural increase.

Different locations and size to crops grown and methods of slaveholding made different anteballums.Living on larg cotton plantations in south withlarg numbers of slaves needed more watchful eyes of overseers than northern parts where the masters themseleves supervised their servents.

Slaves were both human property for their masters and individuals with their own lives.Slavery in south was not just the reltionship between masters and the slaves but it made a new way of life that represented the new civilization.

Although, masters tried to have a complete control over the slaves they were not successful. Slaves lived as they could with their own traditional values, customs and family relationships.They were slaves but they tried to resist against their masters.So they were not just controlleable objects, and this resistance shaped their in dividual and social behavior.

Slavery shaped a different society in south in which the life of the whites was something different from the other Americans in other parts of the country, because their society was a slave one and based on slavery. Southern economy was based on slavery so that it's growth rate between 1840 and 1860 was even more than of the North. This difference was so huge that ended to the Civil War between South and the North.

The Northerner believed that western territories should be setteled just by the fre whites, while the Southerners didn't accept any expantions on the slavery issue.

Abraham Lincoln with Northern idea was elected in 1860, when the controvertial issue on the slavery had increased. So that some states in the south were separated and foremed the Confederate State of America.Civil War between slavery south and free north led to the end of slavery. Here, the important matter was not slaves but the UNION.

Slavery was over but the problems for the slaves remained in other ways. Civil War was necessary for the United States, otherwise it can be named "separated states" .

White House Facts
For two hundred years, the White House has stood as a symbol of the Presidency, the United States government, and the American people. Its history, and the history of the nation’s capital, began when President George Washington signed an Act of Congress in December of 1790 declaring that the federal government would reside in a district "not exceeding ten miles square…on the river Potomac." President Washington, together with city planner Pierre L’Enfant, chose the site for the new residence, which is now 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. As preparations began for the new federal city, a competition was held to find a builder of the "President’s House." Nine proposals were submitted, and Irish-born architect James Hoban won a gold medal for his practical and handsome design.
Construction began when the first cornerstone was laid in October of 1792. Although President Washington oversaw the construction of the house, he never lived in it. It was not until 1800, when the White House was nearly completed, that its first residents, President John Adams and his wife, Abigail, moved in. Since that time, each President has made his own changes and additions. The White House is, after all, the President’s private home. It is also the only private residence of a head of state that is open to the public, free of charge.
The White House has a unique and fascinating history. It survived a fire at the hands of the British in 1814 (during the war of 1812) and another fire in the West Wing in 1929, while Herbert Hoover was President. Throughout much of Harry S. Truman’s presidency, the interior of the house, with the exception of the third floor, was completely gutted and renovated while the Trumans lived at Blair House, right across Pennsylvania Avenue. Nonetheless, the exterior stone walls are those first put in place when the White House was constructed two centuries ago.
Presidents can express their individual style in how they decorate some parts of the house and in how they receive the public during their stay. Thomas Jefferson held the first Inaugural open house in 1805. Many of those who attended the swearing-in ceremony at the U.S. Capitol simply followed him home, where he greeted them in the Blue Room. President Jefferson also opened the house for public tours, and it has remained open, except during wartime, ever since. In addition, he welcomed visitors to annual receptions on New Year’s Day and on the Fourth of July. In 1829, a horde of 20,000 Inaugural callers forced President Andrew Jackson to flee to the safety of a hotel while, on the lawn, aides filled washtubs with orange juice and whiskey to lure the mob out of the mud-tracked White House.
After Abraham Lincoln’s presidency, Inaugural crowds became far too large for the White House to accommodate them comfortably. However, not until Grover Cleveland’s first presidency did this unsafe practice change. He held a presidential review of the troops from a flag-draped grandstand built in front of the White House. This procession evolved into the official Inaugural parade we know today. Receptions on New Year’s Day and the Fourth of July continued to be held until the early 1930s.
There are 132 rooms, 35 bathrooms, and 6 levels in the Residence. There are also 412 doors, 147 windows, 28 fireplaces, 8 staircases, and 3 elevators.
At various times in history, the White House has been known as the "President's Palace," the "President's House," and the "Executive Mansion." President Theodore Roosevelt officially gave the White House its current name in 1901.
Presidential Firsts while in office... President James Polk (1845-49) was the first President to have his photograph taken... President Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09) was not only the first President to ride in an automobile, but also the first President to travel outside the country when he visited Panama... President Franklin Roosevelt (1933-45) was the first President to ride in an airplane.
With five full-time chefs, the White House kitchen is able to serve dinner to as many as 140 guests and hors d'oeuvres to more than 1,000.
The White House requires 570 gallons of paint to cover its outside surface.
For recreation, the White House has a variety of facilities available to its residents, including a tennis court, jogging track, swimming pool, movie theater, and bowling lane.

BIPARTISAN SYSTEM IN THE US

The government in the United States consists of different parts and it is a very complicated system, as the result. Looking at the political-philosophical background of the American government may be helpful in explaining this novel and unique complexity. the philosophical bases, minded by the Founding Fathers when shaping the government in 1787 after the Revolution and composing the Constitution has been multifold, but mainly focusing on theories of Montesquieu (divided government), Thomas Hobbes (democracy), and John Lock (liberal democracy). These three weave tightly together to shape what we see now in the government of the United States. what this paper is going to search back in the historical philosophy, however, is analyzing not why the American government is ruled and maintained by the two party system, but to find out why it is divided almost always between the two parties (that is, why at least two main parties take control of parts of government, such that they make a balance in the control of power. As the word "divided" may suggest, the situation takes its roots from Montesquieu. That is, as Montesquieu argues, the control of power should be spread in different parts of an entity, i.e. government, so that the possibility of abuse of power is reduced to the least. Of course this is in line with other American basic political philosophies, democracy and liberal democracy, because it conforms to the principles of democracy that is against the power of the minority, or oligarchy. The divided government is now known in the American political terminology as the total system of "checks and balances". The system maintains the embodiment of the division of government in the form of binaries and/or vertical-horizontal divisions of power. It can be seen in federal, states and municipal governments. The other division of power is done vertically by cutting the federal government into three branches: executive (the President), legislative (Congress), and judicial (the courts). This way, each branch of power has a certain authority over the others.
going back to the main question "why does the government always consist of the two parties and not just one?", first it should be noted that two branches of executive and legislative are included in this regard _the judicial branch is excluded, because it is the President that chooses and appoints the judges for life, not the people. On the other hand, the President and members of the Congress are elected somehow directly by the people (not perfectly, due to the liberal democratic tradition in avoiding the minority dictatorship).
There are two main ideas for explaining this popular behavior in having the two branches each is in the hand of one party. The first says it is the Constitution-consciousness of the people that leads them to choose consciously to have two branches under the control of two parties. That is to say, it is an American mind to fear the oligarchy. In fact, if the affiliates of a party is powerful and multiple in number that it can decide to force one party into the White House, then the same amount of members exist for forcing the same party into the Congress. What makes voters not to do that is the mentioned fear of oligarchy, in spite of the fact that they may have accepted the principles of that party.
On the other hand, the second idea speaks of the situation as an accidental one. It proposes that the historical devotion of power of each branch to each of the two parties isn't something to be done consciously, but accidentally. For example, the affiliates of the party chosen for the executive branch are not so many to provide force to fill the Congress vocations as well.
The historical fact that during several elections of each branch held in the nation's history, the strange and interesting division has survived, although it has not been set as a rule in the Constitution, suggests the first idea as logical and acceptable.

HUMAN RIGHTS IN US

Among the industrial nations the United States is unique in many ways. The capitalist economics of the United States that promotes free trade, private ownership, laissez faire, consumerism, individualism and claims for welfare is the source of paradoxes. It is long that commentators are criticizing the condition on the health care. The last of them is the American documentary director, Michael Moore with his fabulous "Sicko". In it he analyzes like a physician the ill health care of his country.
Pharmaceutical products are a large part of a nation's health care. Health Care, respectively, is a major component in promoting the justice, as a Human Rights credo in a society. One of the realms in which the US should manage to make reformation, thus, is the health care provisions and policies.
Health Care in US
The present feather on the US cap regarding health care are the two programs of Medicare and Medicaid which are in their own turns under criticism.
The public health care debates began somewhere around the beginning of the 20th century. During the century of efforts that would ultimately determine the fate of the condition, all American presidents were assumed to be advocates of national health care. But, as the present conditions reveal, each time there was an obstacle in the way. FDR, for example, left it high and dry lest the Social Security plan be blocked and doomed. The advent of the cold war disreputated it as the "socialized medicine". However 40s and 50s were the summits of the movement of the public health care as a more serious program. A system then, unique among industrial nations, America, in the 1950s had a health care system that was tied with employment. Of course, there were inefficiencies in such a system to those suffering low income, women, and the agrarians and workers in the remote areas.
Kennedy and Johnson, also, were advocates of the program but they were limited by the votes of the republican congress. Finally, when the congress turned to democrats, the Medicare and Medicaid programs were passed. And most disastrous was the Watergate which abandoned the promised national health care by President Nixon for another run. Then, "instead of producing medical care and related services itself, the government chose- as it usually did in America- to rely on the market. ... Government production of medical care diminished as government funding increased and health care was outsourced to private providers."(ibid: 261) Thus began the story of the private American health care.
"From 1972, to 1994, the Medical population increased from 18 to 35 million. In the same years, the costs of the program soared from $8 billion to &144 billion... and by 1980s, Medicaid often was the largest program in state budgets, and by the 1990s it cost governors six times as much as AFDC."(ibid: 262) naturally, from this point cost cutting began. Under President Reagan, the Prospective payment system decreased the radius of the umbrella. "As in the familiar master narrative of policy reform, policy makers judged their success by the lower numbers and paid little attention to the consequences for patients or clients."(ibid: 264) this led to the 20 percent decrease of Medicare during 80s. At this very historical point, the business interests began exploiting the profitable health care as a new industry. Katz says that in the 80s, the number of investors in health services was one forth of the totals.
The New Deal of President Clinton, The President Health Security Plan, was a final attempt to rescue the health care, but it failed. He observed that almost 37 employers worked without the usual employer's coverage, because they worked for small employers who didn't carry insurance. Those with insurance worried about their situation in the case of losing their jobs. The policy of the Clinton committee on the reform was not to follow the excellent model of other industrialized nations, but to create a distinguished one for the sake of uniqueness. This is known as the managing competition which is considered as the reason for the defeat of the reform.
Intellectual Property
IP, Intellectual Property, is a kind of patent regulated as the legal protection of the technological products for the companies or individuals that are the investors and inventors of it.
The issue that is the concern of this paper is the influence of such laws, and specifically, this law on the welfare consumers, people, in the United States. Data released in 2004 by the Census Bureau show that "the number of uninsured Americans stood at 45.8 million in 2004, an increase of 800,000 people over the number uninsured in 2003 (45.0 million). The percentage of people without health insurance has been 15.7 percent in 2004.
The current stated United States policy on intellectual property, whose main focus is on preserving its unparalleled strength in economic, political and military affairs, therefore raises particular concerns. That is "the United States policy, by focusing exclusively on the rights of its export industries, may lead to very restrictive interpretations of the flexibilities contained in the international agreements, to the detriment of public health needs."(Musungu & Oh: 83) On the other hand, the domestic implications of the acts and the policy should not be ignored.
Conclusion
Pharmaceutical products, is the component of the broader concern, i.e. health care system, that is vulnerable to the implementations of IP. Obviously, those poor within the range of the aforementioned middle class are the victims of such financial patents which restrict the volume, availability and therefore the price of the products. Obviously, suffering the absence of insurance, public and private, on the other hand confronting a killing expensive drug market, is afflicting the members of the middle class. Specially when regarding adding the exertion of mafia and black markets of drug appreciated by high prices and low availability. Moore show the dramatic side of the story by presenting different cases of suffering deprivation, especially the deprivation of the 9/11 fire fighters from any kind of health care coverage.

SOCIAL STRATIFICATION IN US

In all societies, people differ in terms of social and biological characteristics such as age, sex, physical strength, size, race, ethnicity and skill. When these characteristics are differentially valued and ranked within the society, we have social inequality and a system of social stratification. In effect, the individual differences are ranked and evaluated according to social values; the resulting hierarchy is based on the degrees of prestige, honor, importance, material possessions, and other rewards that accrue from these characteristics.
Although social stratification systems exist in all societies, except perhaps very small and primitive societies, the criteria that are used to rank people and the nature of the stratification system vary with the society.
In fact in a complex society several social stratification structures are present. For example, people may be ranked on age, race, sex, and ethnic affiliation.
Other rankings are based on economic factors (usually defined as social class), prestige, and power. Although these characteristics are closely related, it should be noted that a person might have wealth but not be accorded prestige, and one may have power but lack honor.
One of the outbursts of stratification in the modern societies is called class. Such stratification is made conscious by the German philosopher and theoretician, Karl Marx. This is a stratification of the society based on the economic criteria. The important point about the theory of Marx is that he has concluded from the basic discussion of his theory that, the differences of individuals economically, may lead in their superiority in other areas of politics and culture.
Although this part of the theory has been strongly rejected by later theoreticians, and accused of being reductionist in view, the reality acknowledges it partially.
As far as the United States of America is concerned, social class is not that colorful that has been and is in Europe. in Europe, in spite of the great socialist movements, the development of the left wing mentality and partisan ship, the extension of an academic trend that rejects the stratification of culture as high versus low and authenticates the culture of low income, etc (cultural studies of Frankfort and Birmingham), what has emerged is not the disappearance of the class concept, but only the shift of the stress from the two extremes of high and low classes to the middle class. The concept, however, is there yet.
The United States has not experienced the "class" in its deep European form. That is why the communist red scare never succeeded to tread its way to America. One explanation of this history is that the American society, from its first days of appearance, has been founded and developed by and for those who have been the middle or low class of the European stratification. So it developed economic and cultural norms that do not provide a good subject for the Marxist movements and theories. The little movements that were run during the first and second red scares (1917- 1920 and 1940s o1950s), were hardly declined by the US government.

AMERICAN IDENTITY
The American identity is as much a complex and multilateral phenomenon that it can not be simplified easily and packaged for introduction to the world. Historically speaking, United States has been and is the youngest nation -state who has managed to conduct a universal super power. This relatively short history, combined with its vast geography has contained as many religions, ethnicities, races, types, fashions, life styles and... That it deserves the medal of "meting pot", reminding us of the oriental Indian nation well known as "the land of 72 nations". But how much are these two comparable in delivering a compact idea of their mind/identities in a package of cultural or else production?
One of the ways to globalize the identity for Americans is through the powerful industry of cinema. Hollywood is the emperor of this industry in the world. The bests of the world in movies are produced and spread by this artistic and trade center. Not only films, but fantastic cartoons are produced in this center to help embody the very purpose inclined by the films. Walt Disney is the queen of the Hollywood for the production of cartoon bests of the world.
The case for this simple study is not one from the Walt Disney neither Hollywood, but a TV serial cartoon called "lucky luck". It lacks nothing fundamental from the typical productions of Walt Disney. It has helped promote one essential part of the American identity, the western cowboy. yes, the guy with the typical stick stuck to his lip (instead of cigar to avoid malinstruction to children), blue jeans and the shapo of that era used by the wandering bachelors of the west, a horse who is not the only living partner of him, the lazy, stupid dug also attends wherever he goes, along with his riffle over which he has a great mastery.
Other things that are well reflected to the American youth and non-American audience include the specificity of the time and place, its characters, its economic condition, and its total sphere. gangsters hunt new comers; uncivilized Yankee brothers go after whatever chance they find in their lives; and they are the doomed losers in every chapter (again not to show a successful feature out of the thieves, in the tradition of police fiction films. do not go astray by assuming it as the manipulating of history to represent a healthy American society); the towns have trembling sheriffs and cafe holders. They pave the way for the American ever lasting appetite to promote the self ruled person to manage the affairs and well being of the individuals as well as the society; the gold hunters are the immigrants who come to the US to search for their opportunity in the newfound land.
It worth to go and search in the Indian bally wood to find out the answer to the question of whether the two countries are able to promote their culture and identity at the same rate, or even they have the same motivation to do so!

A bookreview by Parshang khakpour on:

Jewish American and Political Participation
BY:RAFAEL MEDOFF



Dr.Medoff, director of the David S.Wyman Institute and an expert on jewish history, in his work, "Jewish Americans and Political Participation" mostly focuces on jews role in political branches-specially on Congress-and that how they have orgnized the process by "lobbying".But at first , the author gives some overal view about jewish in the United States.

In the first chapter, the book argues about different aspects related to American jewish community like demographic portrait , their first settlement in New Amesterdam , their rudiments of communal existance and their commercial and political situation in colonies.This chapter also goes on two important immigrations;German jewish immigration during the mid-1800s mostly for economic causes, and the Russian immigration, because of oppression besides the other factors, as the author argues.
Turning to the early eruptions of Anti-semitism ,Medoff takes the issue with a historical view and comes to the conclusion that the anti-semitism came from the jealousy toward economic sucsses of jwes .But, as he mentions, they could remain together by obeying their traditions, their customs and religion and also by fallowing Judaism as a philanthropy.
Medoff argues that how American jews could response to Zionism by American sense and how anti-semitism , effected jewish communities to believe in Zionism.He also mentions some differences between Zionism in America-urging on practical developments-and Europe ,insisting on international diplomacy.
Again ,Medoff talks about philanthrophy as something that united American jews toward Holocaust ,and brings some evidences that show how they could do so.He also describes how 'Joint' and 'UPA' (the United Palestine Appeal), created the United jewish Appeal to increase "coordination of fundraising activities between the council of jewish communities through the U.S."(page 48)

The author , in the next chapter , argues about 'Protest Politics' both domestic and international ones.Looking historically at jewish participation in domestic protest
, Medoff describes that how the first jewish colonist ,supported by political and economic power, could orgnized a petition of protest for reversal of the deportation decree, a diplomacy that would be followed by American jews during the next centuries.He brings some examples that show how and in what cases ,American jews who were little in number and worry about their situation in the United States,could protest against the majority of non-jews settlers.As an evidence the author describes the jews protest against 'JEW BILL", the law that didn't let non-christians serve as states officer.
The book also encounter to the role of Reform Rabbis as an important supporter of American Jews in social and political protests who denounced child labor and issued a social justice platform for an eight-hour work, the elimination of child labor, and union rights.
Along with Reform rabbis' activities for socisl justice , the author also believes that jewish feminist fought for woman suffrage and without their support as it has been quoted from Kuzmack"middle-class women alone couldn't have gatherd the grassroot political base that secured their victory."(page 84)
Jewish protests about foreign issues on which this book focuses, include ,very detailed and well-described,jews response to the Dauscus blood libel of 1840 and their attempts to establish the 'Board of Delegates of American Israelites', as the first national American jewish defence organization.
The other important subject that the book describes extensively, is about the activities done by jewish radicals on foreign affairs during World War I and their dillema to choose patriotism or radicalism and their final decision to support the U.S. war effort.With bringing another examples of jews participaton in foreign politics like their strategy toward anti-zionism and toward Hitler'spower,the writer has shown in this book the fact that American jews had been always sensetive toward the situation of their own and the other jews around the world.

'The Jewish Vote' was so significant for the author that he specialized a divided chapter on it. He believes that the concept of jewish vote has surely effected on American politic.Medoff describes , in spite of jews deniel fearing anti-semitism sense,the assumption of 'jewish vote'has persisted among both anti-semites and aspiring politicians.
The writer supports his assumption by different examples of presidential contest of 1868 and of the early 1900s.He also defines the relationship between jews and two important parties in the U.S.,Democrats and Republics and the presidents who came out of them.

In the next chapter, Medoff demonstrates how lobbyists have had an influence on U.S. governnent's policy ,their failurs and successes and also their effort to oppose to restrict immigration that included, as Medoff says , Russian and German jews which had done significantly by Louis Marshal who directed a lobbying effort in washington.
The other important issue mentioned in this book in which jewish lobbying played a first-place role was convincing Americans presidents to endores building a jewish national home in Palestine that followed to attracting american policy makers for helping militarily and supporting Europian jewish immigration to Palestine.
Discussing about different american presidents' policy like Wilson, Truman, Eisenhower ,toward Israel, the writer shows Israelies lobbies , have been always secured by american assistance significantly by financial and military aids.

Again historically detailed , the auther in the last chapter focuses on participation of jews in office from the first years of their settlement,as a minority, in the new world, and their problems like anti-semitism aura,to hold office.The books looks at jews' attempts to win elections as a way to prove their existance in American society.
Medoff describes different aspects of jews office holding ;their participation in the Supreme Court and the fact that how Louis Brandeis could be known as the first jewish justice of the Supreme Court by president wilson and 15 years later Benjamin Cardozo the second one by Herbert Hoover.The writer believes that political office for the American jews ,meant finding a better place in American society and culture.It became more obvious , as the book mentions ,when their population increased because of immigration and they could be elected in large numbers.
In almost all parts of the book one can see the jews concern toward important issues related to their stability­-socially, culturally and politically-first in the United States and then in the world.

The book also includes some documents related to jews and American administrators after the revelution that can be authentic evidences to prove the author's claimesn for many cases e.g 'jew bill', 'zionism' and 'immigration'.

Israel Lobby and Congress
By:Parshang Khakpour

INTRODUCTION

The United States, as an important country which influence the other parts of the world, deserve to be studied and analyzed from different aspects.The first and the most important step is to be familiar with the basic and fundumental organizations, systems and ideologies which the United states is built upon them.Searching through political aspects-that can be resulted in economical, cultural, social …aspects-one can find that the U.S. includes three main branches.
1.The Executive Branch
2.The Legislative Branch
3.The Judicial Branch
Each of these main parts has special and to some extance complicated responsibilities and powers.
Althought he Constitution considers a kind of checks and balance system to prevent disorganizations and describes special and systematic principles for each of these branches, the Congress as a law-making center has had a very considerable location.Congress and law-making process in the U.S.- maybe as the other countries' legislative organization-is not a simple and clear one.But this article is not going to focus on the complicated procedure of Congress election and the very detailed process of making laws and passing Acts.
But the main point that the article is trying to focus on is that:Who is actually running the Congress?
The article,throught documentory method,is going to discuss about the claim that the Congress is not so much ruled by American Congressmen as the elected ones but by Lobbying, and the focus is on ISRAEL LOBBY.

THE IMPORTANCE OF CONGRESS
Directly organized by the Constitution in Article 1,Section 1,Congress is vested all legislative powers.
There are a lot of powers that according to Article 1,Section 8, of Constitution are upon the Congress, that some of them comes bellow:
*To promote progress of science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to authors and inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
*The Congress shall have power to lay and collect Taxes,Duties,Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the Common Defence and general welfare of the United States, but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
*To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,… .
*To Declare war, grant Lettersof Marque and Reprisal and make rules Concerning Captures on Land and Water.
*To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces.(1)
The power of Congress has been increased even more than that by additional powers granted by 16th Constitutional amendment which mentiones:"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes and incomes, from whatever source derived , without apportionment among the several states , and without regard to any censusor enumeration."(2)
As it's clear Congress is an office to make essencial and proper laws for internal and external matters.It's necessary to add that, this bicameral legislature of the federal government of the United States ,is consisted of two houses; The Senate and the House of Representative. The 435 members of the House and 100 Senators go to the Congress through direct elections.

LOBBYING
Lobbying is very common and important in American policy and has a key role in vital domestic and foreign procedures in U.S.
But how much lobbying can influence the Congress?and how much Israel Lobby take the control of the Congress?
Lobbying means activities and procedures that request the political authorities to show special positions in special cases of policy or to eager others to do that.
Donald E.dekieffer in his book,( The Citizen's Guide to Lobbying Congress,page1)mentions that"Our Constitution gaurantees all citizens the unqualified right to petition their government for redress of grievances and the freedom to state their views without governmental interference…But where one does draw the line between merely exercising a constitutionally gauranteed right and lobbying professionally?"(3)

ISRAEL LOBBY

The Israel lobby in the United States can be described as an unconditional relationship of individuals and groups who effect on U.S foreign policy at the benefit of Israel.As Mearsheimer and Walt define in the book,The Israel Lobby and U.S Foreign Policy, "The core of the lobby is comprised of American Jews who make a significant effort in their daily lives to bend U.S foreign policy so that it advances Israel's intrest."(4)
There are a lot of citizens and big wigs in this lobby who can disturb a lot of clout that makes individuals' opinions about policy very different from what they belive in reality and with their own understanding.To be against Israel lobby and it's intrests directly means their political and social death.Israel lobby is so powerful that it can make critics of Israel be silenced by smearing the character of their opponents.
Poul Findley as a Congressman from Illinois for some 22 years can be a good example to support the idea.He belives that many politicians have lost elections due to the influence of this group.As Glenn Frankle mensions in his Article,A Beautiful Friendship, Poul Findely,Pete Mc Closkey of California and Sen.Charles Percy of Illinois were defeated because they were regarded "too sympathetic to Arabs causes and too critical of Israel."(5)Findley thinks Israel lobby played a role in his own defeat in the early 1980s.According to Clenn Frankel he was blamed because he had meeted Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and had appriciated him as"A great champion of human rights".As he argues in his book,They Dare to speak out,"A non-jewish strategist told Stephen D.Isaac , the author of Jews and American Politics, you can't hope to go anywhere in national politics if you're a Democrat,without jewish money".(6)
Such states brings to mind some important questions:Is it true that there are polititions, or in other word, authorities and organizations from one Stat(Israel) who are working ,making decisions and control the other State (United States)?
Are there some Israelis who wear the clothe of Congressmen but serve Israel?or they are just the other lobbyies in America, with the same influence and effect?
First, it is important to be familiar with the basic and fundumental shape of Israel Lobby.
It seems that Israel lobby includes two kinds of lobby;formal and informal.The main cause to have an informal lobbying is that "American jews recognize the importance of support for Israel because of the dire consequences that could follow from the alternative."(7)
According to Mitchell Bard Israel as one of the most powerful countries is not just faced to military defeat , but the most fundumental threat for them is, Bard argues,"annihiliation" and american jews try to have political power in the Unitad States to prevent this threat.
So one can find that Jews participation in policy and focusing on lobbying in the United States is very vital and essencial for them, because their existance is in danger and the case becomes more and more important when the location is the Middle East.Informal lobbying which can influence "Jewish voting behavior and American public opinion"(The Water's Edge and Beyond,page 6)(8)try to strengthen their power.
But informal lobbying is not sufficient to have a great influence on policy makers.Thus they use the systematic organizations that can help them to receive their goals.The process is not just political.They get profited by cultural, social and religious organizations and faces which accelerate the mechanism e.g think thanks,media,political action committees and other lobby groups.By inviting some specialists from think thanks from Washington and Tel Aviv they try to convince ideologically the Congressmen to follow their goals.
Two considerable formal lobbying groups are:
*The American Israel Public Affair Commeettee(AIPAC)
*The Confrence of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.(The Water's Edge and Beyond,page 13)

THE AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIR COMMITTEE(AIPAC)

Steven Spiegel argues in his book,The Other Arab-Israeli Conflict Making American's Middle East policy,page 52,that "The tention between Eisenhower administration and Israeli supporters, was so acute that there were rumors that the administration would investigate the American Zionist council.Therefore an independent lobbying committee was formed which years later was renamed…AIPAC."
But what is it (AIPAC)in nature?How powerful is it in Congress?
Some politicians and writers like Stephen Zunes belive it's just as other lobbies and committees in the United States with pre-described powers and influence in domestic and foreign policy.They argue that there are a lot of pro-Israel organizations known as left-leaning groups like American for Peace Now, The Israel policy forum, and the Jewish Alliance For Justice and Peace, who are opposed the activites done by Israel in Palestine like occupance and settlement and also U.S copmlete support in favor of Israel policies.
But there are a lot of claims which state the Israel lobby has become a supper lobby and AIPAC has an unimaginable power in U.S policy.
As Mearsheimer and Walt describe:"AIPAC's success is due to it's ability to reward legislators and Congressional candidates who supports it's agenda, and to punish those who challenge it."(9)It can suggest for drafting legislation on external matters, as well as the annual foreign bill.
AIPAC is so powerful that it's advocates can be sure to get any financial help or electional supports to enter in Congress.The opposite can be happen for the opponents,and it's not the matter of being a congressman.The same story may happen during the period when the lawmakers serve in Congress.Lewis Roth of Americans for Peace Now says"AIPAC has atrifecta of Power on the Hill—direct lobbying, tremendoue grass-roots support and money from contributers who look to them for guidance."(10)
Hedrick Smith brings some examples that show the strong effects of AIPAC in U.S related to President Reagan's administration.He notes that:"By 1986,the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with Saudi Arabia ,and Secratory of States,George Shultz had to sit down with AIPAC's executive director-not Congressional leaders- to find out what level of arms sales to Saudi AIPAC would tolerated."(11)
AIPAC's most important reason to lobby the Congress is described and focused mostly in the Middle East,where they have been making a new State-in Palestine-during fewer than a century.There, they are under the most political and military pressures from Palestinian groups and the other countries ,specially the Islamic ones.
The other fact that makes the Middle East very controvertial for Israel lobby and consequently Israel is Iran.
Iran,because of it's opposite position against the nature of Israel and it's existance in the Middle East and also because of it's anti-Zionism policies that has taken during the three decades, has always been a dark and a real enemy for Israel.Iran, is not only a military threat but an ideologic one,that challenges the ideologic bases of Israel.It is making the atmosphere of other countries,like Syria and Lebenan and even pro-Israel Arab countries-the anti-Zionism, too.
So, as time passes the Middle East is becoming a big and uncontrolable region.Being a nuclear Iran in the Middle East can add more problems for Israel.So it's clear why they are trying to take the control of the Congress and put more pressure on Iran,as the main point,and on the Middle East as a whole.
By lobbying the Congress AIPAC tries to encounter the danger.The U.S policy has mostly considered the Israel interests even if it damage it's own diplomacy.
One of the methods used by AIPAC to influence the Congress is to meet with Congressmen and spend money on issues related to Israel intrests and for those U.S representatives and senators who vote for pro-Israeli Acts.The Washington post noted that "AIPAC's web site which details how members of Congress voted on AIPAC's key issues ,and the AIPAC Insider, a glossy periodical that handicaps close political races are scrutinized by thousands of potential donors. …Between the 2000 and 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated on average of $72,000 each to compaigns and political actions committees."(12)
These are some of AIPAC's successes:
*Reiterating standards for Palestinians government.
*Prohibiting U.S aid and contracts with the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority
*Condemning Iran for holding Confrence casting doubt on whether the Holocaust happened
*Passing the Iran Libya Sanction Acts
*Passing the Syrian Accountability Act,for it's support of Lebenan.
*Incresing military aid to Israel
They mostly focused on Iran Freedom Support Act and The Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act.The first one follows Israel's goal to put pressure on Iran not to be a nuclear power and also provides some helps to those groups who are against the government.The next is aimed to put a rigid restrictions against the Palestinians Authority,Hamas.
They do whatever they can and nothing can stop them.It is intresting to note that about the last measure(The Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act)AIPAC gathered a lot of activists to lobby for it.Some opposed it.One of the opponents of the bill was Betty McCollum who has a positive position about Israel.but she"took offence after an AIPAC representative from Minneapolis confronted Bill Harper, her chief of staff, over her vote.Harper said that the AIPAC rep told him:McCollum's support for terrorists would not be tolerated."(13)
Not only, Israel and AIPAC support politically and economically pro-Israeli candidates to enter the Congress during the election, they has mostly been profited by their advocates of both the democrats and Republicans in Congress.
Specially after September 11th that the United States had been aimed by terrorists , the U.S-relationship increased,and this raised when the United States physically entered the Middle East during Iraq war.So they found their ally(Israel)more desereved to help.Now they had the same enemies in the same location:TERRORIST,in the Middle East.
But who are the terrorists?They defined some descriptions but it can be summerized as whoever against U.S-Israel alliance.They shared their goals and procedures in peace and war, in the Middle East.Israel needed to have a supporter in the region to convince the world to accept it’s existance.The United States could be the best choice ,because Israel and AIPAC had the support of american authorities.The United States, as a superpower in the world, was appropriate enough to help them.It had been entered to a big and controvercial war with Iraq and had spent a lot of budget on it.With the new atmosphere among the american people and political leaders against terrorism and Islamic extremism , Israel would be benefited to strengthen it's relationship with U.S and tried to play the role of the real victim in the Middle East to have more supports from U.S.As Glenn Frankel mentions in A Beautiful Friendship according to the report by Gallup Poll 68 american people are pro-Israel and just 23 percent of them have unfavorable opinion about it. Israel lobby and AIPAC as the most important committee for pro-Israeli activities considerably effects on political matters, but it's not the end of the story.They also try to open the scientific, economic, social,and cultural ways to influence on Congrss, although most of them ended to political goals.AIPAC becomes vital to help those Congessmen who are not professional in it's(AIPAC's) field.So it lobbies and hold confrences on issues like" terrorism,Islamic militarism, and nuclear prolification."(14)
It's not the whole story.Israel lobby influeces the Congress for Scientifical,economical, social and other important aspects.This example can be fine to notice:
Based on the American jewish Congress web site that reported in December 18,2007 "The American jewish Congress applauded House adoption of the U.S-Israel Energy cooperation Act(USIECA)"(15)
Neil B.Goldstein, American Jewish Congress Executive Direcror mentioned that"In an era when some groups are trying to isolate Israel's academic community, this measure (USIECA)will help build bridges between Israeli academicians and the U.S."(16)
AJCongress national policy Director Mathew Mark Horn "thanked the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and Jewish Council for Public Affairs for their help in galvanizing Congresstional support." (17)

CONCLUSION:
United States, became very significant and considerable country, in many aspects.Specially after World war II it improved economically , scientifically and politically.So it could be a good target for jewish people who were looking for a quiet place, far from the Hitler's Europe, to find a new identity and understanding from themseleves.It was necessary to show a new community of jewish to the world.So They had to be powerful enough.They began to immigrant to the United states in large groups.Begining with economical activities they searched for political power.By systematic activities and supporting each other in different vital offices they has now taken the control of one of the most important countries,United States.The American people are some how,tax payers for the benefit of Israel,and the most miserable part is that they are so convinced by Israel lobby and other pro-Israeli groups that help to Israel is necessary that they rarely ask themseleves,who are actually controlling the main parts of our country?It's not just the common people.This unconditional supports actually has been done by political intelectuals.This relationship is kept from the both sides.Israel lobby supports the political authorities,includes congressmen,and they vote for Israel intrest as an answer.

The new American Militarism

Parshang Khakpour

The New American militarism:How Americans Are Secured By War provies a vital guide on how to avoid the kind of post_vietnam reaction that saw the military hit its drug_ridden nadir in the seventies, and shows how narrative of the joys of "power projection" was woven by decades of persuasion in churches, on televisions, in scholarely journals.

The writer descriebes in his book, how Andrew Marshall and not millitary leaders, transformed a strategy of naked aggression and the fact that the greatest threat to the U.S. is not terrorists but the neoconservative beliefe that American security and well_being depend on U.S. global hegemony.The problem is not how to deal with terrorism but the catastrophe, that America is God's instrument for bringing history to it's exalted role ceates the delusion that America's virtue is unquestioneable delusion that led to the "cakewalk war".

The author breaks apart the components that he asserts are feeding the new national militarism_ a changing Presidency whose emphesis in international affairs is focusing too heavily on the use of military force; a military prifession which in it's struggle to adupt to post_war vietnam realities " made militarism possible , and has "ended up paying much of the price;" the emergence, ruthlessness , and eventual foreign policy dominance of a small group of neoconservative intellectuals; the societal impact of Hollywood; the hardening of the conservative Christian community, which provides a "presumptive moral palatability" to American militarism: The transmission of American strategic development following World War II, away from the military and into the hands of scientists who regularly fail to comprehend war's human dimentions; and an oversized emphesis on the Middle East, coupled with relentless efforts at the second tier of government, wich has dangerously "converted the Persian Gulf into the epicenter of American grand strategy."

There is also the first overt articulation of a confrontation that has slowly been gathering steam for more than ten years.One side is represented by those with a classical training in America's past wars , who would send American forces into harm's way only if the nation is directly threatened.The other side is domonated by a group of theorists, most of whom have never seen the inside of a military uniform , and adhere the notion that American should export it's ideology around the world at the point of a gun.

The books makes it clear that the American reflex to using the military force overseas is not the sole domain of the current President .According to the book there is a "New Wilsonisn moment" under George Bush, where he channels American quixotic World War I President and fancies himself as remarking the Middle East in the image of America.The writer also suggests that America's Middle East problem began, not with 9/11 , but with Jimmy Carter's unhappy 1979_80 encounter with the Iranian Islamic revolution. With the Carter Doctrine, the Persian Gulf and it's oil reserves were enshrined as vital American intreststo be protected by military force.

The writer's argument on the neoconservative movement is considerable for it's lack of rancor and for it's analysis of the slash and burn poilitical tactics this small group of influential intellectuals has brought to the national forum.

The writer outlines both the power of the Christian Right and it's ability to provide moral cover for the continuouse use of force,and lok at the history and motivations of the Christian Right by charactrizing them in religious rather than ethnic terms, and lables the movement as having been anti_military in the past.

Regarding the takeover of military strategy by academic theorists following World War II will help thinking Americans comprehend an area of national policy that is rarely discussed or debated.

Althought the author respects to American military, he charactrizes the Cold War from an Army_centeric perspective and focuses on the ground threat in central Europe and blames the military's loss of credibility with it's civilian counterparts as being derived heavily from the actions of Colin Powell and Wesley Clark.

However, the military's difficulties with it's civilian counterparts has a far more complex history and in many cases running directly to the takeover of American strategic formulation following World War II.

9/11 Is Over

Parshang Khakpour

Thomas Friedman, brings a statement of former New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani saying" I will usher in a bold new 9/11 for all" and that he had aimed to run the President of 9/11.

But this statement made the writer to laugh. He believes such statements shows the nature of the U.s after 9/11 as "Fighting Terrorism". According to the writer, The United States need to another president who passed 9/11 and does not run for it.

Respecting to the people killed on that day he argues that American policy to 9/11 was not suitable, and they didn't recognize the enemey as well as themselves.American's opennes is gone away and has becomes a society full of fear and isolation.

Looking at Guantanamo Bay different from what U.S. represent it for people of the world, as somewhere just for visitors who don't give the right answers at immigration.Guantanamo, as he believes, is" the anti_Statue of Liberty".

When he speaks of openness is lost after 9/11, he means in someway , the lose of millions of overseas visitors after 9/11.Total business arrivals to the U.S. have decreased by 10% during 2004_5 period alone.

By bringing some examples of economical weakness in the United States after 9/11, the writer led to the fact that 9/11 should be over in U.S., Because it's destructing U.S. policy , economy and making the U.s isolated and suppressed.

According to the writer of the article, uniting around a common enemy is not the solution for ending the problem. 9/11 and Al Qaeda should be over in American policy makers and Americans' mind.

They should recognize they real enemy "their stupidity". Looking for Mass Destructive Weapon, they made another war, now in Iraq, and paid a lot of cost on it. It seems that the are continuing their wrong path.