How did Jim Crow laws contribute to social unrest in the United States and what role did the Supreme Court play?

The term Jim Crow refers to the systematic segregation of the black and white races, primarily in the South. Segregation was deemed legal by the Supreme Court in the 1896 Plessy vs. Ferguson Case. The case ruled that segregation was legal and established the "separate but equal" clause. This meant that segregation was legal as long as equal treatment was given to black people in the separate institutions. The fact that this equality rarely existed caused political and social unrest in the 1950's and 1960's.

It was during these two decades that protest and unrest were at its height in the area of race relations. Many highly publicized acts of rebellion were centered around the injustice of segregation. From the Montgomery Bus Boycott, that was sparked by the arrest of Rosa Parks, to the sit-ins at local diners, segregation was at the center of social unrest. Hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan were there with violence at every step of the way to stop any hint at ending segregation.

It was the federal government, through the courts, that would be the catalyst for ending segregation. A number of challenges to segregation would make their way to the Supreme Court in the period that followed World War II. Morgan vs. Virginia (1946) and Shelly vs. Kraemer (1948) outlawed discrimination in busing and housing respectively.   The greatest victory in the courts was the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education case that outlawed segregation in public schools and effectively overturned the Plessy vs. Ferguson case. Despite these victories in court, social unrest did not come to a halt as some whites still challenged the authority of the courts. This time, though, the federal government could use the law, court decisions, and the National Guard to enforce integration.

In the play Macbeth, how did Lady Macbeth persuade her husband to carry out his evil plan?

Lady Macbeth comes across as more unscrupulous and ruthless than her husband, but since he had decided been connived by the witches into believing that he would become king by greeting him with the title 'thane of Cawdor' and saying that he shall be 'king hereafter,' it did not take too much for her to persuade him to commit the most grievous of crimes - the ultimate betrayal.

Macbeth expressed doubt about murdering his king and cousin since, as he reasoned, he was too close to him - Duncan was his kin. Added to that was the fact that Duncan was a guest in his castle and needed his protection, not his rancor. He had been such a good and noble king, that there would be a terrible outcry if he should be found murdered. Macbeth then told his wife: 'We will proceed no further in this business.' She however, was insistent.  

At first she asked what had happened to the hope that Macbeth expressed when he first decided to perform his evil. She rhetorically ask whether it was borne out of inebriation. Was he not at full composure when he declared that he would kill Duncan? She stated that she would henceforth adjudge his love on that basis. She thus placed him in a very uncomfortable situation: in order to prove his love for her, he had to carry through what he had promised.

She then questioned his courage by asking him if he had more nerve to speak about murdering Duncan than in actually performing the act? She asked whether he would rather obtain the crown than live thinking about his cowardice. She compared him, in this sense, to the cat in the adage who desired to have fish but was too afraid to wet its feet. Macbeth, in his defense said that he would do everything that a man is supposed to do, and even more. There was none who would do more than he.

Lady Macbeth was unrelenting and asked him what 'beast' had possessed him to break his promise. She stated that when he had made the promise, he was more of a man than he was at that point, and for him daring to be more than what he had been, would make him more of a man. She mentioned that when he made the vow to kill Duncan, neither the time nor the place had been an issue, but now that the conditions were ideal, he suddenly relented. She said that his fear had made him a coward and, using a horrific metaphor to illustrate how strongly she felt about making a promise, she said that she would pluck a suckling babe from her nipple to bash out its brains if that is what she had promised to do. 

Macbeth still expressed doubt and she guaranteed that they would not fail. Lady Macbeth showed just how wicked and scheming she actually was by describing a carefully constructed plan for the king's murder. She told Macbeth that she would get Duncan's personal bodyguards drunk by plying them with wine and ale. They would then be indisposed and the king would be fast asleep after a long journey. This would give them the ideal opportunity to commit their treacherous deed.

Macbeth expressed pride in his wife's 'undaunted mettle' (bold resolve) and was finally convinced. He suggested that they smear Duncan's blood on the daggers of the sleeping guards to implicate them. His wife added that they would make a loud clamor at the discovery of Duncan's death so as to avoid suspicion falling on them. Macbeth then expressed his determination to proceed and asked her to put on an appearance of goodness and conviviality, for: 'False face must hide what the false heart doth know.' 

What is parallelism in a poem?

Parallelism is a literary technique where parts of a sentence are grammatically or structurally the same.  It could also include similarities in sound and rhythm.  Using parallelism is using repetition and balance in your writing to get across an idea.  A popular use of parallelism is called, antithesis, where opposite ideas are joined by the use of parallel structure.  For example, Alexander Pope uses antithesis when he writes, “To err is human; to forgive divine.” ...

Parallelism is a literary technique where parts of a sentence are grammatically or structurally the same.  It could also include similarities in sound and rhythm.  Using parallelism is using repetition and balance in your writing to get across an idea.  A popular use of parallelism is called, antithesis, where opposite ideas are joined by the use of parallel structure.  For example, Alexander Pope uses antithesis when he writes, “To err is human; to forgive divine.”  Both sides of the sentence separated by a semi-colon are very similar in structure, sound, and rhythm.  Their meanings are also opposites.

You see the use of parallelism in speeches, especially.  The use of this technique emphasizes an idea or supports a structure that the speaker uses to make his point.  It balances the flow of ideas and is often used as a way to persuade the audience.  This example in I Have a Dream by Martin Luther King uses parallelism very effectively.

“With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.”

Using parallelism in poetry has the same effect that it does in other types of literature.  The purpose is to establish ideas (sometimes conflicting), to create a rhythm and structure in the lines of poetry, and to use repetition to make a point.  (Hey!  That last sentence uses parallel structure!)

Is Arnold Friend actually Bob Dylan?

Although Arnold Friend is modeled after Bob Dylan, he is not Dylan; instead, Arnold, represents the pop culture, the edgy persona, and the disturbing quality of music that can seduce its unthinking listeners into dangerous areas.

The title question--"Where Are You Going"--of Joyce Carol Oates's story comes from a line of a song by Dylan: "It's All Over Now Baby"; further, she dedicated her story to him. Oates described this story as "very beautiful, very...

Although Arnold Friend is modeled after Bob Dylan, he is not Dylan; instead, Arnold, represents the pop culture, the edgy persona, and the disturbing quality of music that can seduce its unthinking listeners into dangerous areas.

The title question--"Where Are You Going"--of Joyce Carol Oates's story comes from a line of a song by Dylan: "It's All Over Now Baby"; further, she dedicated her story to him. Oates described this story as "very beautiful, very disturbing" because it reminded her of the legend of . With the disturbing seduction of music that fills Connie's head, the narrative of Oates's story transforms that which is real to a surrealistic state. 

Arnold Friend is a personification of Dylan's singing that Oates and others felt was both unsettling and an attraction. She wrote of Dylan that his voice sounded "as if sandpaper could sing"; its effect was "dramatic and electrifying." Like Dylan's voice, Arnold Friend [without the r's, his name reads An old Fiend] is unsettling and devilishly electrifying and frightening both.

When Connie sees Friend's car pulling up, she only worries about how she looks. Then, when she comes to the door, she speaks in a sulky manner, careful to not seem too interested. Then, when she hears the music, she recognizes it as the same that she is playing inside. In her naiveté Connie does not apprehend the underlying nature of this sexual predator who comes to her door, and she talks with him.

However, she begins to notice that his casualness is imitated, he looks much older than the eighteen that he says he is, and there is something very strange and disturbing about him. His car resembles Dylan's "Mr. Tambourine Man's" magic whirling ship, and Connie begins to feel dizzy as Arnold begins to sound like the man on the radio. She asks him to leave, but he refuses, laughing at her. More and more, things change, and the music on the radio underpins Connie's sense of terror. Her naiveté and the inauthenticity of the little world she has created around herself leaves her defenseless against the threats against her family and the mind control that Arnold, masked in the familiar to her, exhibits. He, thus, forces Connie out the door to drive away with him and never return.

What is the theme of Little House on the Prairie by Laura Ingalls Wilder?

Little House on the Prairie follows author Laura Ingalls Wilder and her family as they move to the Kansas prairie. Family is the predominant theme of both this book and all others in the Little Houseseries. Throughout the story, the Ingalls struggle to survive as they cross the country in a covered wagon, build a house, fear the threat of local Native Americans, combat a prairie fire, and contract malaria, or “fever ’n’ ague" as...

Little House on the Prairie follows author Laura Ingalls Wilder and her family as they move to the Kansas prairie. Family is the predominant theme of both this book and all others in the Little House series. Throughout the story, the Ingalls struggle to survive as they cross the country in a covered wagon, build a house, fear the threat of local Native Americans, combat a prairie fire, and contract malaria, or “fever ’n’ ague" as it was known in the story.

These hardships would have been enough to drive many a family to despair, but the Ingalls family relied on and supported one another through each trial and tribulation. Neighbors and side characters appear in the story from time to time, and they often help the Ingalls when possible, but the primary theme remains the Ingalls family.

What is an example of passive transport?

Diffusion and facilitated diffusion are two examples of passive transport.Passive transport is transport through a cell membrane that does not require energy. In either diffusion or facilitated diffusion, particles move down a concentration gradient. In other words, the particles move from areas of higher concentration to areas of lower concentration. The difference between diffusion and facilitated diffusion is that particles travel directly through the cell membrane in diffusion, whereas particles undergoing facilitated diffusion require...

Diffusion and facilitated diffusion are two examples of passive transport. Passive transport is transport through a cell membrane that does not require energy. In either diffusion or facilitated diffusion, particles move down a concentration gradient. In other words, the particles move from areas of higher concentration to areas of lower concentration. The difference between diffusion and facilitated diffusion is that particles travel directly through the cell membrane in diffusion, whereas particles undergoing facilitated diffusion require specific transmembrane integral proteins.   

On the other hand, active transport does require energy in the form of adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Energy is required during active transport because particles are pushed against their concentration gradient. In other words, particles that under active transport move from areas of lower concentration to areas of higher concentration. As in facilitated diffusion, particles undergoing active transport also travel through a carrier protein.  

What happens to Boxer in Animal Farm? How are these events ironic?

Boxer is sent to the knackers to be slaughtered.  It is ironic because it was one of the abuses Old Major accused humans of perpetrating against animals.

Old Major sells the animals on a dream of equality and opportunity.  In his vision, no animals will ever be held hostage to humans.  Animals will work together to create an atmosphere of cooperation and comfort.

It does not take long for the dream to sour.  As soon...

Boxer is sent to the knackers to be slaughtered.  It is ironic because it was one of the abuses Old Major accused humans of perpetrating against animals.

Old Major sells the animals on a dream of equality and opportunity.  In his vision, no animals will ever be held hostage to humans.  Animals will work together to create an atmosphere of cooperation and comfort.

It does not take long for the dream to sour.  As soon as the animals kick the humans off the farm, the pigs take charge.  From that point on, they slowly gain more and more power at the expense of the other animals.

One of the promises made to the animals is that once they were too old to work, they would be able to retire.  Humans would have killed them, but in Animal Farm they would be blessed with a peaceful existence.

As yet no animal had actually retired on pension, but of late the subject had been discussed more and more. Now that the small field beyond the orchard had been set aside for barley, it was rumoured that a corner of the large pasture was to be fenced off and turned into a grazing−ground for superannuated animals. (Ch. 9)

Boxer very much wanted to finish the windmill before he retired.  He was one of the hardest working animals on the farm, and very loyal to Napoleon.  His two favorite expressions were “Napoleon is always right” and “I will work harder.”  He had no doubts about his leader.  Unfortunately, when Boxer injured himself on the job and was no longer useful, he was not sent into retirement.  He was sold for a profit.  Benjamin was able to read the words on the side of the truck.

" 'Alfred Simmonds, Horse Slaughterer and Glue Boiler, Willingdon. Dealer in Hides and Bone−Meal. Kennels Supplied.' Do you not understand what that means? They are taking Boxer to the knacker's! " (Ch. 9)

The fact that Napoleon sold Boxer to the slaughterhouse for profit is ironic because Boxer was his strongest supporter and because Old Major promised the animals a better life.  He told them that humans exploited them, and that they would be protected from this exploitation on Animal Farm.  This dream might have been real for Old Major, but it never was real for Napoleon.  He used the entire rebellion as an opportunity to gain power for himself.  He did not actually care about the animals.