The Book By Daron Acemoglu And James A. Robinson Why Nations Fail

A revolution, by definition, is the overthrow of one government followed by replacement with another. The American Revolution against the British during 1775 to 1783 and the French Revolution pitting the French people against their own government during 1789 to 1799 were both very important political and social turnovers. This movement towards the establishment of a constitutional government influenced political thought throughout the world. By closely examining three of the main causes of these revolutions, it is clear that although the two revolutions have their differences, the basis of cause for the revolutions have, overall, much stronger similarities.

The French and American Revolutions share many similarities while also having some stark differences. Both revolutions were based on Enlightenment ideals of liberty, freedom, natural rights and equality. Both wanted to rid themselves of what they viewed as a tyrannical monarchy. Dr Farless’s module stated “if man could understand the world around him, then he certainly was capable of making decisions that shaped his life (i.e., government).”tricia Farless, “Napoleonic Ageural allies of the rejudicesthat the French people were "trbe questioned. the scene. From this idea, both France and America shared goals of changing the way government worked. The government changed from a top down arrangement, where the Monarch was in control of his subjects, to a bottom up idea where the government derives from below. It becomes a government by the people, from the people.

The eighteenth century revolutions predate the Marxist framework which would ultimately changed the way in which revolutions are understood; as highly participatory mass-moments which sought to change some kind of social order. Gordon Wood acknowledges this as he states; “The social distinctions and economic deprivations that we today think of as the consequences of class divisions…were in the eighteenth century usually thought to be caused by abuses in government.” Skocpol also acknowledges the difference between modern and what the “liberal revolutions” of the eighteenth century. She writes that all revolutions that occur within the modern capitalist systems accomplish nothing but a more concentrated and centralized state bureaucracy. However Skocpol’s analysis takes a retrospective structuralist approach to understanding these eighteenth century social revolutions. Her analysis does not rely on the deprivation hypothesis nor any kind of ideology, but instead highlights the importance of the “revolutionary moment” where elites and peasants unite (through an “equal powers” negotiation) against the state (Stevens 10/16/17). By applying Skocpol’s model to the French, Haitian, and American Revolutions, we can see how well it holds up when applied to these various intertwined 18th century revolutions despite their drastically different outcomes.

The author is able to draw his audience in emotionally by speaking of such countries, and how it eventually ties in to the United States, stating that “(if) a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich,” (3) concluding the connection between the U.S. and those countries who have a lower living standard.

Revolution have been a key part of both history and social change, but each one is unique in its beginnings and endings. In the American and Haitian Revolution both of the social societies were ruled by powerful nations who suppressed any form of independence. Both revolutions started with the growing tensions between the colonies and the nation that controlled the colonies. The ending of both revolutions caused the world to reanalyze the structure of governments and slavery. Although, similar in the aspect that both revolutions were based around gaining independence from dominant nations, the revolutions differed due to the colonies treatment by the controlling nations and the effects of their endings.

“If people destroy something replaceable by mankind their called vandals; if they destroy something irreplaceable by God, they are called developers.” – Joseph Wood Krutch

It is human nature to search for patterns. In the stars, lines of a poem, or in Crane Brinton’s case, in history. To fight for what we believe in is natural, but history has proven that while seeking an improved quality of life, a reform stage is implemented. Once it is found that the current system cannot help the cause, radical measures are taken to overthrow one structure in favor of a more effectively organized mode of leadership. Finally, the reactionary stage addresses any unexpected consequences by stepping back and evaluating what may have gotten out of hand and prioritizing, because consequential rebellions tend to take on a force of their own. France and Russia are a couple of countries who have carried out these steps, but to really analyze the model we head to the new world. The American Revolution serves as a prime example of Crane Brinton 's Anatomy of a Revolution because it consisted of reform stage of rising expectations, revolutionary ideologies and the accompanying coalitions were crucial during the radical stage, and unexpected consequences were seen during the reactionary stage, though the revolutionaries did not shy away from their cause. It is country with rich and involved history, but it has not always been so well structured.

In most cases U.S. citizens who are in poverty are in relative poverty in relation to the rest of the U.S. population; whereas in the world as a whole a greater number of people are in absolute poverty and are barely able to survive on their income, or wages and earnings, and they have very little to no wealth since it is impossible to save any of their money. Ethnocentrism makes it difficult to obtain a clear picture of the conditions of poverty and inequality in other nations and cultures. There are many theories concerning the causes and solution for poverty in the global economy. The two major theories are the modernization theory which explains inequality in terms of technological and cultural difference between nations, and the dependency theory which explains poverty in terms of the historical exploitation of poor, or low-income, nations by rich, or high-income, nations. This theory has manifest itself in a new way in today’s world in the form of neocolonialism; economic exploitation by multinational corporations.

In today’s world people, places, societies and environments are constantly changing. Both natural and human created events, shape the world and create strong relationships between the environment and society. Human geography and development studies are two fields seeking to analyse these interrelationships and answer key questions about major issues in the world such as poverty, inequality and conflict. Human geography is largely about studying the spatial aspects of relationships between people and society whereas development studies focusses more on the way societies function, focussing on issues such as poverty and inequality as well as the way in which ‘developing’ nations function compared to ‘developed’ nations. Through examples of poverty and inequality this essay will explain the ways in which development studies and human geography overlap and the ways in which they are different in their analyses.

Those nations have failed because they fall into a cycle that has been repeated over and over, yet man refused to take heed. In the book The Fourth Turning,William Strauss and Niel Howe discovered that nations go through four cycles the first one compromising of an era of strengthening institutions and weakening individualism, a second one of spiritual upheaval, the third era is one of strengthening

All through the historical backdrop of the Atlantic World, revolution was a typical approach to achieve reforms in government and society. With various revolutions, including the American and Haitian Revolution, the French Revolution was a political and social upheaval in France that endure from 1789 until 1815. The French Revolution brought about long-lasting consequences for France because of the new Enlightenment thoughts that denoted a move from the Ancien Regime (old empire). These Enlightenment ideas were common through the span of numerous Atlantic upheavals, most like the Haitian Revolution, as the events that occurred during the French Revolution compare to the events that took place during the Haitian Revolution in similar, but different aspects. This raises the inquiry; What were the circumstances and end results of the French Revolution and what does the French and Haitian Revolution uncover about upheavals all through history?

The questions are raised as what and how the wealth is distributed or allocated among societies. Countries with similar average incomes can differ substantially when it comes to people’s quality of life such as social justice, access to education and health care, job opportunities, availability of clean air and safe drinking water, the threat of crime, freedom of speech, life expectancy, birth-death control, identity, culture, conservation, equal opportunities, environmental change. Development is important as it covers a wide range process involving cultural, economic, environmental, political, social and technological change of a country. Regarding goals and means of development, recent United Nations documents emphasize on human development measured by life expectancy, adult literacy, access to all three levels of education as well as people‘s average income which is a necessary condition of their freedom of choice. In other words, human development incorporates all aspects of individuals’ well -being from their health status to their economic and political freedom. The Human Development Report 1996 of UNDP focuses on development as the end and economic growth a

The countries that have experienced high and rising levels of poverty are more often than not, the developing countries that have been marginalised from the process of globalization. Think of North Korea or many countries in Africa. Such countries have insufficient levels of international trade and investment -- not too much. Whether poor countries are poor because they do not trade enough or because poverty stricken countries are prevented from engaging in the global economy, less globalization is generally associated with less development. Ernesto Zedillo, the former president of Mexico seems to have understood the power of globalization when he said, "In every case where a poor nation has significantly overcome its poverty, this has been achieved while engaging in production for export markets and opening itself to the influx of foreign goods, investment and technology -- that is, by participating in globalization."

Lack of development in countries in the so-called `Third World' has many political and economical reasons. Historians explain the inadequacy of developing countries with the early imperialism and the resulting colonization of the South. Exploitation of mineral resources, deforestation, slavery, and the adaptation of foreign policies shaped the picture of today's suffering and struggling civilizations and natural rich continents. The omission of concessions and equal negotiations between dependency and supremacy give rise to the contrast of enormous resources and immense poverty in developing countries is. In the last years the outcry of justice and the emancipation of the Third World became louder throughout developing and industrialized

The essence of institutional drift is a key factor of the 6th chapter. Countries such as Venice and Ancient Rome are used to describe why so many nations fail, due of the extractiveness of their governments. There was a short time when these countries had an inclusive system that was working and helping them grow. But the elite became greedy and power hungry, which set them on a downward hill to failure. Whereas, in England the opposite was happening where there was a demand for property rights and change. The elite were too afraid of losing their power to not agree and it is precisely why England is still one of the most powerful countries in the world.