euroclass

forum collège
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 EVERYTHING about lea

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:30 am

Yes, don't worry for that ! Laughing lol! XD
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: A copy-paste about the scores after session 2   Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:55 pm

Hi my friends!

Thank you! Yesterday we had a great session!

So... Here are the teams' scores after session 2 (Wedenesday, December the 5th): Team A
homework and discussion about it: p. 3,000
behaviour: p. 1,000
Boards questions in 3D world: p. 400
Treasure Hunt in 3D world: p. 5,00
Discussion in 2D world: p. 2,700
Forum: 500
PARTIAL SCORE: 8,100
Team B
homework and discussion about it: p. 3,000
behaviour: p. 1,000
Boards questions in 3D world: p. 200
Treasure Hunt in 3D world: p. 1,500
Discussion in 2D world: p. 2,800
Forum: 700
PARTIAL SCORE: 9,200
Previous score from session 1:
TEAM A: 4,700
TEAM B: 4,800
Total score:
TEAM A: 12,800
TEAM B: 14,000
Very good, team B! But team A is not far...be careful!!!

Enjoy your experience!
Roberta



I'm sab but we have done our best ...
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:50 pm

I made the test !
here is the results : lol!

Vos résultats du test verbal

  • Nombre de questions fausses
  • 2/6 soit 33%



  • Nombre de questions non répondues
  • 0/6 soit 0%



  • Total de bonnes réponses
  • 4/6 soit 67%




Vos résultats du test logique

  • Nombre de questions fausses
  • 7/11 soit 64%



  • Nombre de questions non répondues
  • 0/11 soit 0%



  • Total de bonnes réponses
  • 4/11 soit 36%




Vos résultats du test mémoire - attention

  • Nombre de questions fausses
  • 2/3 soit 67%



  • Nombre de questions non répondues
  • 0/3 soit 0%



  • Total de bonnes réponses
  • 1/3 soit 33%




Vos résultats du test spatial

  • Nombre de questions fausses
  • 4/6 soit 67%



  • Nombre de questions non répondues
  • 0/6 soit 0%



  • Total de bonnes réponses
  • 2/6 soit 33%




Vos résultats du test numérique

  • Nombre de questions fausses
  • 2/4 soit 50%



  • Nombre de questions non répondues
  • 0/4 soit 0%



  • Total de bonnes réponses
  • 2/4 soit 50%




Vos résultats globaux

  • Nombre de questions fausses
  • 17/30 soit 57%



  • Nombre de questions non répondues
  • 0/30 soit 0%



  • Total de bonnes réponses
  • 13/30 soit 43%



  • Estimation du QI
  • 104



It's not good !!!! lol What about you ?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: are you sure these are our scores ???   Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:19 am

Already ?
Well , it does not seem too bad , after all ,
I will analyse it all more calmly in a while , but it is not the end yet !!! Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: Would you believe ....   Fri Dec 07, 2007 7:50 pm

That this applies to ME ?... Well , I'm just boasting , but it is a copy paste of what I got
I am surprised , and you must be too , as those who know me know that I have always told you I hate numbers ...
Surprised Surprised Surprised Surprised Surprised

Vous savez très bien résoudre des problèmes mathématiques-logiques. Vous décomposez les rapports les plus compliqués pour en faire des petits morceaux facilement compréhensibles. Seules vos idées dépassent votre rapidité.

Vous apprenez de façon empirique et vous disposez d'une intelligence très forte. Bref, vous maîtrisez l'art et la science de la précision. Ceci fait de vous une Machine à calculer.

lol!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: boys will be boys   Fri Dec 07, 2007 7:52 pm

I do
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
phil

avatar

Number of posts : 102
Localisation : In my bed
Registration date : 2007-03-29

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Fri Dec 07, 2007 8:29 pm

mmm 128
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: well ..   Fri Dec 07, 2007 8:40 pm

That's because I am tired ... It is Friday , y:sleep: ou know ...
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: Preparing session 3   Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:49 pm

study study study

Here is one of the interviews that you have to study !!!
There's some more to come !!!
7.2 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION AND ITS HERITAGE IN EUROPEYves MényPresident of the European University Institute, Florence, Italy


Abstract. The interview discusses some basic concepts of the French Revolution, their
origin and development: from the Humanistic idea of man as centre of the universe to the
Enlightenment’s concept of “citizen”, from the “absolute sovereignty” of the king to the
absolute sovereignty of the nation, leading to nationalism. It also deals with the causes of the
French Revolution and following events, with their legacies that still influence Europe today.
1) Why was the Revolution’s idea of “citizen” born in France? Where did it come from?

The Enlightenment was not only a French movement, but a European movement; it was developed mostly in France and therefore French thinkers of the XVIII century had the major influence in it. The XVIII century, however, was exploiting and radicalizing something which had happened before, mainly in Italy, that is the birth and the development of Humanism, of putting man as a central figure, instead of God. I think that Enlightenment in many ways was a development and a refinement of what started with the Renaissance: putting man as the central figure.
At that time (XVI century), the Renaissance was in a way slowed down, in this development,
because of religion. The Catholic Church in particular was able to take over; Protestant Churches, however, already kept the idea that there was no need of mediation between man and God; there was no need for a pope; there was no need for clerical hierarchy.
2) Did the concept of “citizen” develop from this Protestant view of man?

In a way, Protestants kept that spirit of individualism, which was mainly transliterated in economic terms. It was not really applied to politics, and it was much more applied, in particular in Britain and in particular in Scotland, by the Scottish philosophers, to economy. So Adam Smith, for instance, puts the “homo oeconomicus” at the centre of his thinking: an individual is considered mainly as an economic actor.
On the contrary in the French Enlightenment, which was very influential in Europe, an individual was mainly analyzed as political man, as a citizen – a sort of “homo politicus”. Certainly, putting the citizen at the centre of the political system was indeed a revolution, but even in the French Revolution it was not fully applied. For instance, women were not considered a part of the political body. Initially the French Revolution was considering the universality of citizens, while in many other countries, even when some political rights were
recognized to people, they were limited to few categories, identified for instance by education or by wealth.
3) What was wrong with the Ancient Regime in France – and in Europe?
Why was there the
need of something different?
What was wrong with the Ancient Regime was the incapacity to adjust, the incapacity to make reforms.
The Ancient Regime in most continental Europe became acquainted with a tremendous social injustice, tremendous conservatism, inefficiency: at the time of the French Revolution, when you had nearly one million inhabitants, there were probably three or four hundred thousands privileged people who were controlling everything. Church and aristocracy were controlling everything, were controlling the wealth of the country and were refusing any concession. For instance, one of the reasons why the Revolution exploded in France was that all the reformers at the time of Louis XV or Louis XVI were unable to implement even the smallest reform in order to impose taxes on the clergy or on the aristocracy.
4) Could the monarchy have been able to modernize, without the need of a revolution?

From this point of view it is interesting to compare the British case and the continental cases.
In a way, Britain is a case of more or less successful progressive, incremental transformation. Even if they also cut off the head of a King, Charles I, this Revolution was not as radical as the French Revolution: in fact it became very quickly a conservative Revolution (and a revolution against the people, for instance against the farmers). Great Britain is the typical case of an Ancient Regime which has transformed itself step by step, and has been able to modernize. Many concepts that we consider initially as antagonistic are in fact mixed up. For instance the French Revolution was a revolution very antagonistic to monarchy. There was a complete opposition between monarchy and republic, and the French were strong believers in the fact that there was total contradiction between monarchy and democracy.
Today we can observe that most of the democratic regimes in Europe are, for instance, monarchies.
We have, on one hand, pure concepts (such as Democracy, Republic, Monarchy) and on the other hand mixed realities, where you can combine elements of the Ancient Regime and of modernity.

Yves Mény – The French Revolution and its Heritage In Europe
3/6
5) How did the idea of “freedom for everybody” quickly turn into “nationalism”?

Revolutions are not as revolutionary as they pretend to be. If you analyze carefully the French Revolution, it did use some central concepts already applied by the monarchy.For instance, one key concept of monarchy is the sovereignty of the king: a sovereign isabsolute in his sphere. You might also remember that there were, for instance, frictionsbetween the French sovereigns and the Pope. And the Revolution used this idea ofsovereignty, transferring it from the king to the nation.The possibility (and the debate) was about transferring sovereignty either to the people or tothe nation. But “the people” in itself is also a very abstract notion; in order to make it concrete you need something like an electoral body, the parliament, the government… which were not there. Step by step, the idea of absolute sovereignty has been transferred from the king to this imagined creation that we call “nation”: a symbolic value, a sacred value, something stronger
than the simple notion of political system. This idea generated nationalism, with all its dark consequences.
6) How did the French Revolution end up with an Empire?

The revolutions period started with the French Revolution, but also with the American Revolution. During this period there have been big battles about “legitimacy”: who has the legitimacy to exert power?
It was known that, in the past, the “legitimate sovereign” was legitimate because he was supposed to receive his legitimacy from God. With the French Revolution, legitimacy stands from the people, and in a way, the genius of Napoleon (even if it was perhaps a bad genius) was to combine the popular legitimacy with all the symbols of the old legitimacy. So, on one hand, he was being crowned as an Emperor in a church with the Pope, but on the other hand he was organizing a referendum in order to make people vote. Napoleon III (the nephew of Napoleon I), who took over in 1851 up to 1870, used extensively the electoral suffrage, the universal suffrage, which had been reintroduced in France by the French popular revolution of 1848. Universal suffrage was being manipulated in order to express not to so much the will of the people, but to support the strong man in power.
7) How was it possible that Napoleon III, who was not so successful a general as Napoleon I, became emperor?
Napoleon III did a coup, after being first elected President of the Republic, and was elected President of the Republic for several reasons. First of all, because clearly his name was
popular; he had the same name of his uncle, and there was some nostalgia in France among part of the population. The population, at the time, was mainly consisting of farmers living in the countryside; these people were still Catholic, still traditional-oriented; they and the bourgeoisie were extremely frustrated and frightened by the social revolution of 1848. So, there was a reaction in favour of an authoritarian regime, and Napoleon III was the first to be elected President by people through universal suffrage.
Cool How was the “Restoration” in France possible?

The French king was able to come back in 1814-15 for several reasons. The first reason was that France had tried more or less all kinds of possible regimes (the consulate, the directorate, the imperial system with Napoleon, between 1800 and 1814-15), which had failed one after the others. So, 25 years after the Revolution, the idea that theonly legitimate system was the king’s sovereignty was still alive in the French population, and also the Church - which had remained influential - was convinced of that at the time. Secondly, the collapse of Napoleon looked like the victory of the Ancient Regime: the Wien Congress of 1815 was a kind of Restoration not only of the regimes, but also of the values of the past. So the Napoleonic period or the French Revolution period were perceived by parts of the French society as a parenthesis, as very bad times to be forgotten. So the King of France came back in the carriage of the coalition: the armies of the continent
and Great Britain. I don’t think he could have taken over with his own forces, and he was accused to have been brought back by the French enemies.
9) What happened in France when the king came back?

Fortunately the first king who came back to power, Louis XVIII, was a moderate, very much influenced by the English experience. He had been exiled to Great Britain and had seen that the monarchy was a moderate monarchy, that the King was not an absolute sovereign, but there was also a representative system. So his attempt to create a representative system became influential at that time in France.
Unfortunately for the French monarchy, his successor was much less clever; in addition, he was brother of Louis XVI, who had been decapitated during the French Revolution. He wanted to bring back to the old Monarchy: he did not understand that it was too late for it. Somebody said about the aristocracy who emigrated to various countries in Europe, and in particular to Germany, at the time, that “they had not forgotten anything, but had not learnt abything ; and this King was a typical example of a person who had a lot of memories of the past, and who had not learnt lessons from what had happened during the previous 25 years.
[size=12]
10) What are the political ideas that France was able to export in the end?

The attempt to export French political ideas was a mix of successes and failures: either because Napoleon (or the French Revolution) were able to impose some reforms, or because some countries had to make reforms in order to adjust to the French challenge.
I would like just to quote a number of examples. First of all, the idea that the king, in the various political systems, was not an absolute sovereign, gained ground.
Also the idea that people were at the origin of power, the legitimate source of power, gained ground. And even when it was not immediately successful, it was such a powerful idea that it blew up again and again during the XIX century. For instance there were European revolutions everywhere, in the 1830s, in the 1848, and also at the end of the XIX century.
So, this idea was so powerful that nobody could resist it.
German nationalism or the Spanish nationalism are both products of the Napoleonic wars, clearly another example of indirect French influence. You can also see the same in some Northern countries, where, even if the State was a really old State as Denmark or Sweden, still the French impact, the Napoleonic impact was very strong.
11) Is it known in France that the Bonaparte family got a lot of private properties in Italy that
were taken away from the Church?

I suppose the French are not very much informed about the wealth of the Bonaparte family. What is well known is that the Bonaparte family took over or stole a lot of properties in Europe, in particular in Italy. There, as you know, there is a said: “Non tutti i francesi sono ladri, ma Bonaparte sì”. It’s difficult to translate. “Not every French is a thief, but most of them are” [there is a pun: “Bonaparte” is the last name of Napoleon, and in Italian it also means “most of them”
].
And what is also funny is that Napoleon’s family was of Italian origin, from a small village in Tuscany, and when Napoleon went to state-school, to join the army in order not to pay the fee to that school, he had to demonstrate that he was an aristocrat, of low level, but still an aristocrat: Napoleon’s parents asked the Italian local authorities to testify that he was indeed of aristocratic origin.
12) Are there other consequences of the Napoleonic Empire that still influence us nowadays?

Yves Mény – The French Revolution and its Heritage In Europe
6/6
There were more practical reforms which have left strong influence, for instance the administrative reform imposing Councils of State everywhere on the continent.
Or local reforms: for instance the idea that the territory should be divided into provinces is proper of the Napoleonic reforms. Today boundaries of provinces are a legacy of Napoleon, not only in Italy, but also in Spain, in the Netherlands, in Belgium, and in part of Germany.
This idea that there should be provinces, and not regions, has been also extremely powerful up to twenty years ago, when the Napoleonic influence was reversed by the creation of regions even in France.
Another example is the idea that you have an elected council and a mayor, whom at that time was not elected. This idea has been extremely influential.
Another powerful idea was the creation of the Civil Code, which was followed in many ways by many other countries.
13) Which were the symbols of being French at the time right after Waterloo and which are
they today?

One was the flag, which was much contested: the white flag of the Monarchy or the Three
Colours Flag of the Revolution? Language was certainly also a very strong element of
identity, and the third one could have been the separation between the Church and the laic
society, between the Church and the non-Church-affiliated. So: flag, language and laicism.
For what concerns today, I would quote Montesquieu, who wrote in a letter a beautiful
phrase; he said: “If I had to do something good for my country, but bad for Europe, I would
choose Europe. And if I had to do something good for Europe, but bad for humanity, I would
opt for humanity”. That’s the way I feel French.



Good work !!!

Yves Mény – The French Revolution and its Heritage In Europe
6/6[/size]


Last edited by on Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: After the second session   Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:27 pm

Well , you saw the scores posted by Aurélien , well it is not too bad , we can still make it !
Special congratulations to Ahmed who knew his text PERFECTLY , and who was quick to react , you all did your best , so go on !!!
study study study study study
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:35 pm

it"s well ! Now, I hope that, since we have the text more sooner, we wil study all the text to perfection and that we will more better when the session 3 will arrive !!!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:35 pm

it"s well ! Now, I hope that, since we have the text more sooner, we wil study all the text to perfection and that we will more better when the session 3 will arrive !!!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:38 pm

You're right !!! I would have been lost if he was not here !!! lol!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: The interviews   Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:55 pm

There are 2 more interviews , but you'll get them this week
I am preparing another little test ... So , prepare the texts whan you get them Idea
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: Preparing session 3 , another interview   Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:16 pm


1.5 THE BIRTH OF NATION STATES Heinz Gerhard Haupt
Department of History and Civilization, European University Institute, Florence, Italy Abstract. The interview oncerns the main aspects of the birth of nation states in Europe. The analysis underlines the specificity of the three processes that brought to the formation of national states: revolution, unification, break-up of multinational empires. The interview also explains the difference between national identity and the process of national identification.
1) What characterises a nation state?

The nation state is always a state which is limited to a certain territory and has got clear boundaries. Nation states already existed before the 18
th century in France and in England, for instance. Here the political form and the territory completely corresponded. On the contrary, in Germany or in Italy the period up to the 18th century is characterized by a multitude of very small towns, regions or countries which were directed by members of the aristocracy, on the territory of what after 1871 would be the German or the Italian nation state.
The nation state is to be seen in continuity with the territorial state, where politics and territory form one unity. Moreover, the nation state has to be seen inside a long evolution, in which the central political authority gets more and more rights.
2) What are the processes that led to the achievement of the nation state in Europe?

There’s a process that is going on beginning from the 12
th and 13th centuries in Europe: the central power centralizes the use of “legitimate violence”. The army becomes a central army at the king’s disposal. In France, after 1789, the army becomes the national army: soldiers are no more mercenaries, they are not paid to be soldiers, but they are volunteers, they struggle for the nation. This situation produces the concentration of violence and military
power inside one central authority at first and then in the nation state. The nation state centralizes financial means, too. At the beginning, every count tried, in his county, to get most of the money from the peasants and from the burgesses of cities. Afterwards, the state progressively tries to centralize the tax system so that, at the end of the
19
th century, there are territorial states in which armies are already centralized, the territory is clear and the tax system exists. This happens in France, in England, in the Netherlands, in Sweden, for instance. Meanwhile there are other countries in which this structure doesn’t exist and it’s difficult to create a nation state.
Heinz Gerhard Haupt - The Birth of Nation States 2
/4
3
) What effects did the creation of the nation state provoke in the European states?

With the creation of the nation state is linked, at first, the promise of equality: every member of the nation should have the same legal rights, among which the liberty of expression and meeting are as important as the liberty of property. In this way, the nation comes in with the promise of emancipation. At the beginning, this promise concerns mainly the middle classes.
Other classes, such as the peasants, are considered not ready for liberty neither for voting. The emancipation of those who have no political rights is thus a huge promise that lays inside this idea of nation, that has to be seen in continuity with the territorial state existing until the 18th century. A French author, l’abbé Siéyès, wrote in 1788 that the Third estate, i.e. the middle classes, was nothing in France but it should become all, it would be the nation
and inside the nation all the decisions would be taken by it. Therefore one of the new effects of the nation states in comparison to the traditional absolutistic territorial state is equality, legal equality, political liberty and participation in the political affairs.
A second effect of this process links state aggressiveness to the nation. A nation state always constituted itself against the other ones.
4) Was the aggressiveness of nation states offensive or defensive?

It might be defensive but also offensive. The French nation state that came up in the French revolution was claiming: “we are defending our territory against the troupes of European monarchies, which are coming and will destroy us”. They thought that they were defending themselves and because of that they didn’t stop at the natural borders. They meant, in some way, that they were bringing liberty, equality, universal rights to the people with the certainty they had the right to export those ideals. Nations always claimed to be on the defensive even if they were using offensive aggressiveness. That’s why, during the whole 19th and 20th century, there was no nation
state saying: “we are conquering”, even if they were aggressive. Another fact is very important: all the nation states of the 19th century were born out of wars (Italy and Germany are good examples of that) with only one exception, Norway, whose birth was determined by the separation in the two states of Sweden and Norway.
I would say, the nation state is the accomplishment of the territorial state with the new reference to the notion of the nation and the nation is the community of citizens in which certain rights and identity are also to be defended against enemies.
5) What historical facts led to the birth of nation states in Europe?

In Europe, it is important to notice that there are different types of nation and looking at their origins it’s possible to distinguish different types of nation states. The first one came out of a revolution: the English nation state came out of the English revolution in 1688 and developed in the following period; the French nation state came out of the French revolution of 1789.
This means that nation states which already existed as political boundaries and political entities had inside themselves (inside the political entity they represented) groups like the middle class who came in and developed the idea of nation and of nation state. The second typology concerns nation states originated by unification of former separated
territories: on their territory there were several divided small states and towns which converged to form one nation state. That is the case of Germany and Italy. Here the nation state was made thanks to one dynasty: the Savoia in Italy, the Hohenzollern in Germany. Then, there is the third typology that is numerically most important in Europe and concerns the origin of the nation state by the break-up or dissociation of multinational empires. The end of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire is a good example of that. It finished in the 1918-1919 and from it several states like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Austria as a republic originated. Also with the Ottoman Empire’s end, which also happened around 1919, the national movements that were already present in the country resulted in the creation of
national states. The dislocation of Tsarist Russia is another example.
6) What are the differences between the concept of nation state and the concept of national identity?

It is important to distinguish between the formation of the nation state and the nation building process. The first tends towards the political power and political structures, the second is a social process by which the members of a given territory identify themselves with the nation state. Considering the case of Italy, for example, D’Azeglio [1798-1866, Piedmont statesman] said “Italy exists, now Italians should be created”. He thus points to the necessity of developing the identification with the new nation state. The nation state promoted national identification by developing national schools, a national army, national heroes and symbols; it also financed better communication by roads, railways and newspapers and favored the development of a market-economy. For example, the formation of a national identity in Germany began in reaction to the Napoleonic wars. Napoleon was invading Germany at the beginning of the 19th century. In the famous speech “Addresses to the German nation”, the German philosopher Fichte [1762-1814] addresses the German, encouraging them to defend the nation against France. What is interesting in this work is the question on national identity, even if I am not sure if we should use the expression “national identity” because “national identity” is something objective, it implies the thought of being a whole and does not take into account the
interests, classes and goals existing inside a national society. It excludes that there are struggles about the definition of the “national identity” and that this definition may be controversial in itself. This is why I prefer the more dynamic and open term of national identification, including a plurality of things and identities.
7) What are the fundamental processes that led to the creation of the national identities?

To retrace the moment of the formation of a national identity, one has to look at the processes of national identification, in which different identities are brought together. It’s really historically interesting to see how states and social groups managed to create national identifications, how they were trying, at the beginning of the 19
th century, to push together people who had almost no relationship with each other at a national level and referred themselves more often to their town or the local context in which they lived. And it’s interesting to see how these elements succeeded in making people identify themselves with the entire nation. In this context, it makes sense to speak of the nation – as B. Anderson suggests – as an “imagined community”. The promoters of the “national identity” are imagining a history, a specificity, a character, a goal of the nation and are trying to win the population for their definition of the nation against others who tried also to define the nation corresponding to their interests. During the 19th century and after, political struggles about the legitimate, generally accepted nation took place and governments as well as parties tried
to impose their “imagined community” as the only valuable. There are liberal, conservative and socialist versions of nation.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: Preparing session 3 , third interview   Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:22 pm

3.2 THE ROLE OF REFORMATION IN THE U.K.’S HISTORY Margaret Archer


Professor of Contemporary Social theory, Department of Sociology,University of Warwick, U.K.

Abstract.
The interview begins by underlining the differences within the United Kingdom territories. It continues by describing the most important event in the U.K.’s history, the turn to Anglicanism. The historical consequences of this event are analyzed at a social and political level and the implications on membership of the clergy and the different reactions to this change.
1) Which are the differences in geographical, historical and political terms between England, Great Britain and the United Kingdom?
England is a country and England, Wales and Scotland form Great Britain. The U.K. includes Northern Ireland, i.e. the six counties in the north with Belfast as their capital, except for the Republic of Ireland. There is even a fourth term which may be used when referring to the British Isles which include the islands off the coast of Britain, islands of Man, Isle of Wight and Jersey and so forth. These territories are part of the U.K. i.e., the country’s legislation is directly applicable there too. In terms of local autonomy, some of them have always been tax havens but in many cases they do not enjoy a high degree of independence. For example in Jersey taxation is autonomously collected at a much lower level than thorough England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. All the three mentioned factors concur. There are historical and political patterns too: the most contentious historical pattern is obviously Northern Ireland. Infact, it was part of the U.K. during the Commonwealth of Oliver Cromwell when an attempt was made to have a part of Ireland with Protestant faith rather than Catholic, which resulted in a perfectly deliberate immigration movement of Scots to farms in Northern Ireland; today’s troubles between Protestants and Catholics, who are still killing each other, date back to 400 years ago.
2) When did England become Anglican and what did this change produce?

Henry VIII wanted to divorce; he was not allow by the Catholic Church and, as a result, England became Protestant; not following any religious conviction nor baptism or any of the protestant movements as Calvinism, Lutheranism and so forth (Catholics are still only 10% of the population today). Historical evidence points to the fact that England, in terms of religious practice, abbeys, monasteries, churches, was just as Catholic as the rest of Europe. A popular anti-Catholicism movement did not exist. Since that period Catholics were persecuted in Britain. The persecution was fierce under Henry VIII. Famous martyrs died, like the Lord Chancellor who was not assassinated; he was, actually, executed in prison. Elizabeth I used to have measures against any kind of catholic practise as well.
To celebrate mass was illegal. If one visits the English old country houses today, one may find very often, climbing the big open chimney in the main sitting rooms, a very little room, a cell, behind the chimney, with a locked door: these were the priests’ homes and when someone knew that mass was celebrated in a country house by people with catholic faith, they would send people to check them and if they found something, the Queen sent her troops and the priest would be sent up into the chimney into his room. Many of them, of course, died there and many became English martyrs. Marquette, for instance, martyred by being crushed, when still alive, with large paving stones on her body. She was squashed to death because she had been found arranging mass for a priest in her house in the north of England. And, in contrast to what happened in most European countries, there was no mass reaction against this suppression.
3) Did the Clergy change immediately?

Most of its members did. They were forced to sign the 39 articles of the Church of England dictated by Elizabeth I to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the head of the Church of England. These 39 articles theologically separate Anglican belief. However, it resulted in a politically chaotic situation, since it was lacking coherence. This decision was more political than theological. Theology was a pretext, while economic factors were indeed important. Henry VIII committed crimes for financial reasons after the reformation: he seized all the land belonging to the religious orders like the Benedictines. The monks moved back to Continental Europe.
The extent of the financial interests in this period may be judged by one anecdote famous in this country. The roofs of the churches and of monasteries were traditionally made of lead; Henry VIII had the roofs removed so that he could recycle the lead for purely financial purposes. There were other symbolic acts of complete vandalism which may still be seen in beautiful churches near Cambridge there is a wonderful Lady Chapel which has a row of saints’ statues around three sides of it and every single head was smashed off.
4) How was the dividing line between Protestants and Catholics: social, regional, cultural?

In the first period they were divided by cultural reasons. There were people throughout Great Britain who did not want to swear an oath of loyalty to Queen Elizabeth I as both head of state and head of church.Most of them were in Lancashire while a smaller concentration could be found in East Anglia, facing Europe; interestingly, this phenomenon became more and more social in nature. In the mid-1840s, after famine spread in Ireland, many people
migrated to the States. And at the same time many people migrated to England in search of work. This flow may be noticed today as well. They migrated to the ports (Liverpool and Glasgow, for instance) and started working in road construction sites, a hard job. They were catholic, which meant that the catholic population was poorer and it was often looked down upon because they were Irish and they spoke with an Irish accent. Accents were very important factors in Great Britain in class discrimination and distinction. The school system maintained the different accents in contrast to what happened in other countries, where the
objective was to create a standard language.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: ABOUT LEA   Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:43 pm

URGENT
I need a group of volunteers who will stay a moment , maybe on Tuesday at 5 after the class to talk about the homework for lea ... We can't do everything in class , I am sorry ... It would be interesting to have people from different classes , because you will have to ask your history teachers for information ....
Remember , I will give extra points to those who do extra work , and I am on the point of giving you your 1st participation mark for the second term ... Smile So , maybe you would like to have the best mark possible for this second term ????? -something like 20 ???
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Aurélien B.

avatar

Number of posts : 164
Age : 25
Localisation : Toulon
Registration date : 2007-09-11

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:25 pm

I agree ... I will stay with you at 5, on Tuesday. I will be avaliable on Monday at 4 if you want too ...
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.lechtigarsdu83.skyrock.com
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: Thanks , Aurélien   Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:38 pm

You are the first to answer , and I hope you won't be the only one , I need 5 or 6 people ... Cool
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
phil

avatar

Number of posts : 102
Localisation : In my bed
Registration date : 2007-03-29

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:06 pm

Arrow Arrow I can't, sorry
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: Sorry you can't   Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:29 pm

But I like the medallion sunny
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
phil

avatar

Number of posts : 102
Localisation : In my bed
Registration date : 2007-03-29

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:01 pm

Yes I created it saturday (I don't remember very well), you can see my others creations here
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: My favourite is still the medallion   Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:27 pm

... What does TIW mean ?????
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
phil

avatar

Number of posts : 102
Localisation : In my bed
Registration date : 2007-03-29

PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:28 am

TIW mean "Tourristes Intermittents de Wolf"

Wolf is the game (wolfenstein enemy territory)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 247
Registration date : 2007-02-21

PostSubject: TIW   Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:04 am

learning all the time ....Smile
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://euroclass.alldiscussion.net
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: EVERYTHING about lea   

Back to top Go down
 
EVERYTHING about lea
Back to top 
Page 3 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
euroclass :: Euro :: 2007/2008 :: 3e Euro-
Jump to: