Themes and Issues in American History †1919-1945 - Free Essay Example

Themes and Issues in American History/4 October 13, 2006 1919-1945 President Wilson’s friend, George L. Record wrote him in early 1919 â€Å"that something would have to be done about economic democracy to meet this menace of Socialism. † This era became one of increasing paranoia about the effects of Socialism on society. Even as the Courts and Congress enforced suppression of certain ideas and acts, the class war in a supposedly class-less society was beginning to take shape. Strikes continued to plague the country and even with the jailing and suppression of union leadership, the Socialist support of the unions continued to attract more members and sympathy. The Seattle Strike of 1919 was seen as an attempt at revolution. It was defeated after five days by Federal troops who proceeded to trample on constitutional rights, by arresting and persecuting the Socialist and union leadership. In addition, printing plants were shut down and anti government propaganda destroyed. As revolutionary forces and sentiments gathered overseas, there was more and more pressure on the government to control the people or as James Madison stated in Federalist #10, the â€Å"violence of faction†. The government used various means of subversion in their attempts to break the morale and purpose of the strikers and Socialist. Conditions were put in place that resulted in many of the workers, and members of the party, to be deported back to their home countries as illegal or undesirable aliens. This petrified and demoralized many of the workers and membership, as the majority of the members were first generation immigrants. Racial hatreds were encouraged by promising jobs and positions to other non-union and politically unaffiliated newly arrived immigrants. Blacks were used as strikebreakers as they were denied union memberships and thus had no loyalties. By the mid-twenties, The IWW was destroyed and the Socialist party falling apart. The economy was doing better and more people were able to benefit. The Congress passed immigration quotas in an effort to control the influx of Marxist and the revolutionary passions that were sweeping the world. Quotas were based on color, creed, and politics. Countries that were predominantly Socialist had their quotas decreased. The â€Å"Roaring Twenties† promised prosperity and fun. Unemployment was down and wages were up. Forty percent of the people were consumed with consumerism and the stock market. They turned a blind selfish eye to the plight of the tenant farmer and immigrant families trapped in the tenements of the big cities. Prosperity was concentrated at the top of the economic scale with 42 % of the people making less than $1,000. 0 per year. Every year in the twenties, 25,000 workers were killed and 100,000 permanently disabled. There were a few triumphs of the 1920’s, such as the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment affirming the rights of the long suffering women to vote, but few politicians spoke out for the poor. In 1923, the â€Å"Mellon Plan† was passed that further eroded the people’s faith in unbiased government, by reducing the rates of tax ation for the rich. Communist Party members were continuing to stir up labor unrest whenever and wherever possible. The stock market crash of 1929 was attributed to unhealthy banking and corporate structures, unsound foreign trade, economic speculation and misinformation, and bad distribution of income. This plunged the country into the Great Depression and a period of unpredictability and instability. Thousands of banks and businesses closed as millions of people were unemployed, homeless, and helpless. These people were becoming dangerous as they became more desperate, and the spirit of rebellion was growing. Thousands of the unemployed and disillusioned WWI veterans converged on Washington in protest. They were crushed by Federal troops led by Patton, MacArthur, and Eisenhower. The government’s inaction in the economy, and the swift and brutal repression of the protesters, helped lead to the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933. His support and the passage of much needed reform legislation became known as the New Deal. It promised stability of markets, relief, and the creation of jobs. Its main goal was to give enough hope to the lower classes to curb their tendency to revolution and the taking of property for survival. Legislative action was also necessary to control the strikes that were crippling the economies ability to repair it self. The passage of the Wagner Act of 1935 was enacted to try and stabilize labor unrest. Congress responded to strikes and organization of unions by enacting more legislation aimed at control. One of the forgotten aspects of the New Deal is that for most blacks and poor tenant farmers the system remained unchanged, as they did not qualify for many of the benefits created for them. Discrimination and repression still flourished in the South. The armed forces were segregated and the Federal government did little to change the status quo. The Communist Party radicals attempted to organize the workers to break the racial barriers. The fear of the Communist threat would soon be replaced by the march of Fascism to the east, and Japanese Imperialism and attacks to the west. The â€Å"peoples war† had begun and with it the organization of all people, races and political parties against the evil and totalitarian aggression of the Axis Party. However, as the Allied governments espoused patriotism and purpose, the world’s western powers were preparing to redistribute global wealth and fashion public opinion on politics (the Atlantic Charter) based on fear and uncertainty. The League of Nations or the United Nations was created during the war to act as an international buffer to the conflicts of the future. It was however, directed and controlled by the Western Governments through the Security Council memberships and simple majority of vote. This assured that the western democracies maintained the â€Å"bully pulpit† for the world. American business flourished during the war and profits hit record numbers as programs such as â€Å"lend-lease†, and foreign aid added to the coffers of capitalism. The loss of liberty was most pronounced during this time as immigrants were rounded up and detained based on race (Executive order 9066), subversive political elements held in check by legislation (1940 Smith Act and 1917 Espionage Act), and wartime freedom of the press controlled by the government through censorship. American workers were further put down by the no strike pledges of the AFL-CIO, and the Negros discrimination in the armed forces put into perspective by such practices as blood segregation and other acts of racism. The American worker continued to strike without the union’s approval, and more strikes were organized during the war than at any other time in American history. It became necessary in order to prove to the world and the seducing call of the new imperial power to the east, that America was strong in both military power and influence. On August 6, 1945, the world’s first atomic bomb was used in war. As true history shows, it was not necessary to drop the bomb in order to defeat Japan, but it was necessary to show to the world that the United States had post war prominence. It was the first major operation against Russia, in what would become known as the â€Å"Cold War†. It would show to the world the power of democracy and split the world politically between the Imperialist Democracies of the west and the Communist Totalitarian rule of the east. The Truman Doctrine would help formulate the political post war strategy of the United States. By warning of the dangers of Communism in the post war atomic world, the United States would embark on a mission of providing economic and military assistance abroad, and create thousands of postwar jobs in the defense industries at home. The â€Å"Iron Curtain† had fallen on the world. The war had rejuvenated American capitalism and stifled rebellion at home. The old lesson, of war solving problems of control, had been taught once again.

Stages of Group Development Essay - 3300 Words

Stages of Group Development (Essay Sample) Content: Tuckman's Stages of Group DevelopmentNameInstitutionContents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc421292576 \h 3Theories of Small Group Development PAGEREF _Toc421292577 \h 3Tuckman's Stages of Group Development PAGEREF _Toc421292578 \h 5Forming PAGEREF _Toc421292579 \h 6Storming PAGEREF _Toc421292580 \h 6Norming PAGEREF _Toc421292581 \h 7Performing PAGEREF _Toc421292582 \h 7Adjourning PAGEREF _Toc421292583 \h 7Techniques and Application to Specific Populations PAGEREF _Toc421292584 \h 8Life cycle model PAGEREF _Toc421292585 \h 8Leadership PAGEREF _Toc421292586 \h 9Members PAGEREF _Toc421292587 \h 9Objectives PAGEREF _Toc421292588 \h 10Time-Frame PAGEREF _Toc421292589 \h 10Resources PAGEREF _Toc421292590 \h 10Group Leader Roles and Responsibilities PAGEREF _Toc421292591 \h 11Forming PAGEREF _Toc421292592 \h 11Storming PAGEREF _Toc421292593 \h 11Norming PAGEREF _Toc421292594 \h 11Performing PAGEREF _Toc421292595 \h 12Adjourning PAGEREF _Toc421292596 \h 12Summ ary PAGEREF _Toc421292597 \h 12References PAGEREF _Toc421292598 \h 14IntroductionSmall groups change over time under the influence of varying internal and external factors. These changes have been an area of major concern from many scholars because of the considerable roles of such groups in societal settings. Many theories have been proposed to define the evolution that small groups undergo. Much of the work has been theoretical because the nature of the topic, but this has allowed for the exposition of various views that have advanced the field considerably. Some of the most well established theories on small group development are a combination of many concepts that have been proposed by various scholars (Chang, 2006).This work is intended at highlighting the Tuckman's stages of group development from a view of other theories. To have an informed stand on the theories that explain the developments of small groups, an overview of all these theories will be introduced. Tuckman's sta ges of group development will be derived from this cluster and its individual components will be discussed in detail. Personal views will be expressed throughout the text based on the understanding from the various theories that have been proposed to explain similar concepts. The techniques and application to specific demographics will be included. Another inclusion will be the roles and responsibilities of group leaders.Theories of Small Group DevelopmentThe theories that have been proposed on group development have focused on why and how such groups change over time. Most of society is structured into small groups and this makes it even more imperative to understand the changes that such groups experience over time. Researchers have focused on the patterns of change and consistency within groups over time to acquire an informed stance on these changes. There are key aspects to a group that reveal major changes within a group. Some of these aspects include the variance in output, t ype and frequency of activities, prominence of group conflict, and cohesiveness within the group (Chang, 2006).Scholars have merged ideas to come up with theoretical models that can best explain the changes experienced within groups over time. This work will focus Tuckman's theory on the stages of group development. However, there are many theories that take distinctive stands on the same. The different theories are existent because most take differing perspectives to the factors influencing the change. Some theories view small groups as changing consistently through "stagesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ , while other concepts view change as occurring through "phases" that a group may or may not undergo (Chang, 2006). These differences in views and basis through which change in small group is perceived is the key contributor to the existence of various theories on a common phenomenon (Hackman, 2003).More than a hundred theories have been proposed to explain the changes within a group. However, most can fall into similar categories on the basis of their assumptions about the study groups. The wide-spread classification is made on the basis of whether the theory perceives change within groups to occur in a linear, in cycles, processes that combine both, or through non-phasic processes. There are other classifications such as the source of forces influencing change; either internal or external (Chang, 2006).Another technique of classifying theories defining the change within groups differentiates concepts based on four distinct models for generating change; life cycle, dialectical, teleological, and evolutionary models. Life cycle models describe the process of change as the unfolding arranged sequence of stages adhering to a program preset before the commencement of the cycle. Dialectical models define change as a consequence of conflicting entities that later merge to another cycle of conflict. Teleological models view change as a result of the need to achieve a goal with adju stments being made based on the feedback acquired from the environment. Evolutionary models describe change within a population as a result of repeated cycles of variation, selection and retention (Dennis, 2013).It is possible for some theories to consist of all these models particularly because many have been compressed from previous models. A consideration that is made in this context is that the different models might explain separate aspects of the history of a group. For instance, Kurt Lewinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s change model has three stage; unfreeze, change, freezing. There is lack of a specific starting point or history of the group undergoing the changes. Another consideration is that some of the models view the groups as having eternal existence in which case they should be independent of the specific details of the task is undertaking. Conversely, some models might describe the phases that groups go through in which case it is necessary to distinctively elaborate on the tasks that the groups engages in (Chang, 2006).Tuckman's Stages of Group DevelopmentLike in the case of many other theories, Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Stages model is a combination of many models that have been proposed by various scholars. The initial model consisted of four linear stages; forming, storming, norming, and performing. A group was viewed to go through these stages during its development. A fifth stage (adjourning) was added in 1977 when further studies were performed (Tuckman, 1977).It is possible to view the different aspects of the model that can fit into the initial classifications. The addition of adjournment is one of the considerations about change within a group highlighted. The view of a group without the inclusion of adjournment as part of change is that the group would be in existence for eternality. Adjournment makes the model more realistic (Tuckman, 1977).There are more classifications of such theories that be used to describe Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Stages model. The model c an be viewed to be adhering to a liner process as opposed to cycles or a non-phasic process. Another key mode of classification is based on whether the change is influenced by internal or external forces. Most models can be viewed to be a merge of both internal and external forces for change (Forsyth, 2003). Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s theory can be viewed as largely influenced by internal forces but this are also likely to be as response of external factors. The model can also be described as a life cycle model; one that adheres to a prescribed linear sequence of stages.There are five key stages within Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s modelFormingThis is the initial stage within the model. The group is highly dependent of the leader for guidance and direction. This is because there is little consensus on group objectives other than those emphasized by the leader. In addition, individual member roles and responsibilities are also unclear. The leader is hence the key member of the group and is constantly presented with questions that aim at reinforcing team goals and individual roles and responsibilities. The processes agreed upon are regularly overlooked at this stage. This model incorporates a history of the group by including this stage. Other models such as that of Lewinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s model of change excludes this stage (Tuckman, 1965).StormingStorming is the second stage of the model. Decisions are not easy to reach within a group. The members of the group attempt to assume various roles in relation to the other members. This at times may result in members challenging each other for the available positions. This is also a key part of effecting change and is evident in most models. It can be viewed as the unfreezing stage in Lewinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s model, conflict stage in Tubbà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s systems model and Fishers theory, or technical problem solving in TIP theory. Although there is still a lot of uncertainty, clarity has improved as compared to the first stage. The team leader is req uired to keep the group aimed at its objectives and less distracted by the conflicts that may emerge (Tuckman, 1965).NormingConsensus and cohesiveness within the group are first exhibited in this stage. The leader has a lot of support from the members of the group. Less important decisions may be delegated to individuals or specific members within the group. There is commitment and unity among the members of the group, and all members are included in general decision making. The leader is well supported and some of the leadership is shared with the team members. One of the issues that may arise at this stage is that the members may be keen to avoid conflict that they avoid to share ideas. This stage can be compared to consensus in Tubbà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Systems model (Tuckman, 1965).PerformingA group is very strategically aligned in this stage because roles and responsibilities are well defined. The members of the team have share... Stages of Group Development Essay - 3300 Words Stages of Group Development (Essay Sample) Content: Tuckman's Stages of Group DevelopmentNameInstitutionContents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc421292576 \h 3Theories of Small Group Development PAGEREF _Toc421292577 \h 3Tuckman's Stages of Group Development PAGEREF _Toc421292578 \h 5Forming PAGEREF _Toc421292579 \h 6Storming PAGEREF _Toc421292580 \h 6Norming PAGEREF _Toc421292581 \h 7Performing PAGEREF _Toc421292582 \h 7Adjourning PAGEREF _Toc421292583 \h 7Techniques and Application to Specific Populations PAGEREF _Toc421292584 \h 8Life cycle model PAGEREF _Toc421292585 \h 8Leadership PAGEREF _Toc421292586 \h 9Members PAGEREF _Toc421292587 \h 9Objectives PAGEREF _Toc421292588 \h 10Time-Frame PAGEREF _Toc421292589 \h 10Resources PAGEREF _Toc421292590 \h 10Group Leader Roles and Responsibilities PAGEREF _Toc421292591 \h 11Forming PAGEREF _Toc421292592 \h 11Storming PAGEREF _Toc421292593 \h 11Norming PAGEREF _Toc421292594 \h 11Performing PAGEREF _Toc421292595 \h 12Adjourning PAGEREF _Toc421292596 \h 12Summ ary PAGEREF _Toc421292597 \h 12References PAGEREF _Toc421292598 \h 14IntroductionSmall groups change over time under the influence of varying internal and external factors. These changes have been an area of major concern from many scholars because of the considerable roles of such groups in societal settings. Many theories have been proposed to define the evolution that small groups undergo. Much of the work has been theoretical because the nature of the topic, but this has allowed for the exposition of various views that have advanced the field considerably. Some of the most well established theories on small group development are a combination of many concepts that have been proposed by various scholars (Chang, 2006).This work is intended at highlighting the Tuckman's stages of group development from a view of other theories. To have an informed stand on the theories that explain the developments of small groups, an overview of all these theories will be introduced. Tuckman's sta ges of group development will be derived from this cluster and its individual components will be discussed in detail. Personal views will be expressed throughout the text based on the understanding from the various theories that have been proposed to explain similar concepts. The techniques and application to specific demographics will be included. Another inclusion will be the roles and responsibilities of group leaders.Theories of Small Group DevelopmentThe theories that have been proposed on group development have focused on why and how such groups change over time. Most of society is structured into small groups and this makes it even more imperative to understand the changes that such groups experience over time. Researchers have focused on the patterns of change and consistency within groups over time to acquire an informed stance on these changes. There are key aspects to a group that reveal major changes within a group. Some of these aspects include the variance in output, t ype and frequency of activities, prominence of group conflict, and cohesiveness within the group (Chang, 2006).Scholars have merged ideas to come up with theoretical models that can best explain the changes experienced within groups over time. This work will focus Tuckman's theory on the stages of group development. However, there are many theories that take distinctive stands on the same. The different theories are existent because most take differing perspectives to the factors influencing the change. Some theories view small groups as changing consistently through "stagesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ , while other concepts view change as occurring through "phases" that a group may or may not undergo (Chang, 2006). These differences in views and basis through which change in small group is perceived is the key contributor to the existence of various theories on a common phenomenon (Hackman, 2003).More than a hundred theories have been proposed to explain the changes within a group. However, most can fall into similar categories on the basis of their assumptions about the study groups. The wide-spread classification is made on the basis of whether the theory perceives change within groups to occur in a linear, in cycles, processes that combine both, or through non-phasic processes. There are other classifications such as the source of forces influencing change; either internal or external (Chang, 2006).Another technique of classifying theories defining the change within groups differentiates concepts based on four distinct models for generating change; life cycle, dialectical, teleological, and evolutionary models. Life cycle models describe the process of change as the unfolding arranged sequence of stages adhering to a program preset before the commencement of the cycle. Dialectical models define change as a consequence of conflicting entities that later merge to another cycle of conflict. Teleological models view change as a result of the need to achieve a goal with adju stments being made based on the feedback acquired from the environment. Evolutionary models describe change within a population as a result of repeated cycles of variation, selection and retention (Dennis, 2013).It is possible for some theories to consist of all these models particularly because many have been compressed from previous models. A consideration that is made in this context is that the different models might explain separate aspects of the history of a group. For instance, Kurt Lewinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s change model has three stage; unfreeze, change, freezing. There is lack of a specific starting point or history of the group undergoing the changes. Another consideration is that some of the models view the groups as having eternal existence in which case they should be independent of the specific details of the task is undertaking. Conversely, some models might describe the phases that groups go through in which case it is necessary to distinctively elaborate on the tasks that the groups engages in (Chang, 2006).Tuckman's Stages of Group DevelopmentLike in the case of many other theories, Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Stages model is a combination of many models that have been proposed by various scholars. The initial model consisted of four linear stages; forming, storming, norming, and performing. A group was viewed to go through these stages during its development. A fifth stage (adjourning) was added in 1977 when further studies were performed (Tuckman, 1977).It is possible to view the different aspects of the model that can fit into the initial classifications. The addition of adjournment is one of the considerations about change within a group highlighted. The view of a group without the inclusion of adjournment as part of change is that the group would be in existence for eternality. Adjournment makes the model more realistic (Tuckman, 1977).There are more classifications of such theories that be used to describe Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Stages model. The model c an be viewed to be adhering to a liner process as opposed to cycles or a non-phasic process. Another key mode of classification is based on whether the change is influenced by internal or external forces. Most models can be viewed to be a merge of both internal and external forces for change (Forsyth, 2003). Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s theory can be viewed as largely influenced by internal forces but this are also likely to be as response of external factors. The model can also be described as a life cycle model; one that adheres to a prescribed linear sequence of stages.There are five key stages within Tuckmanà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s modelFormingThis is the initial stage within the model. The group is highly dependent of the leader for guidance and direction. This is because there is little consensus on group objectives other than those emphasized by the leader. In addition, individual member roles and responsibilities are also unclear. The leader is hence the key member of the group and is constantly presented with questions that aim at reinforcing team goals and individual roles and responsibilities. The processes agreed upon are regularly overlooked at this stage. This model incorporates a history of the group by including this stage. Other models such as that of Lewinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s model of change excludes this stage (Tuckman, 1965).StormingStorming is the second stage of the model. Decisions are not easy to reach within a group. The members of the group attempt to assume various roles in relation to the other members. This at times may result in members challenging each other for the available positions. This is also a key part of effecting change and is evident in most models. It can be viewed as the unfreezing stage in Lewinà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s model, conflict stage in Tubbà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s systems model and Fishers theory, or technical problem solving in TIP theory. Although there is still a lot of uncertainty, clarity has improved as compared to the first stage. The team leader is req uired to keep the group aimed at its objectives and less distracted by the conflicts that may emerge (Tuckman, 1965).NormingConsensus and cohesiveness within the group are first exhibited in this stage. The leader has a lot of support from the members of the group. Less important decisions may be delegated to individuals or specific members within the group. There is commitment and unity among the members of the group, and all members are included in general decision making. The leader is well supported and some of the leadership is shared with the team members. One of the issues that may arise at this stage is that the members may be keen to avoid conflict that they avoid to share ideas. This stage can be compared to consensus in Tubbà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Systems model (Tuckman, 1965).PerformingA group is very strategically aligned in this stage because roles and responsibilities are well defined. The members of the team have share...