Difference in Leadership Styles with First Born Children

Difference in Leadership Styles with First Born Children These children would want to achieve a lot. They set high standards and they are perfectionists. It is also stated that they focus on achieving the goals in the educational and occupational settings. The transformational leaders are always driven to achieve the goals set. They are also concerned with helping others solve their problems. They are motivated. They have a vision and they try had to achieve it. They encourage others to achieve and fulfil the goals of the organization. The first born children tend to be hard working. They possess authoritarian characteristics. They want to fulfil the expectations of the family. They are responsible. They are set to achieve their goal. They conform to the rules as they need to fulfil the expectations by the parent. Since they act in the same way their parents they tend to inspire others. They have qualities of others as they have grown up with the parents around and tend to pick those up. Hence, based on the above descriptions it was deduce d that the only children and first born tend to have most often the same characteristics. Many researchers have concluded that only-children and first-borns, regardless of gender, appear to be academic achievers as compared to later born children (Coleston, 2008). Thus, the hypothesis that â€Å"There will be no significant difference between Only children and First born on Transformational Leadership style† was formulated. Transactional Leadership Style Transactional leadership style mainly focuses this attention on the role and task and how this is related to the performance. The transactional leadership theory states emphasize on the relationships that are formed between the leader and follower on account of various exchanges (Burns, 1978 cited in Wheatley, 2010). In 1978, according to Hollander he theorised this leadership as to have various dynamic process. These were mainly in relation with the leader and follower and the interpersonal interactions among the two. These leaders were responsible to give clear instructions. They would reciprocate with the follower and respond to them appropriately. This in turn increased the leader’s influence on them (Hollander, 1978 cited in Wheatley, 2010). These leaders rewarded and gave the followers acknowledgement when the expectations or the goals were met. These leaders mainly negotiate and their roles and responsibilities and there is mutual respect and influence. According to Hei fetz in 1994, these leaders influence their followers and they are also under the followers as it is a reciprocal relationship. According to Burns 2003, leaders who are involved in both the simple and complex situations and they try to achieve the organizational goals (Wheatley, 2010). Only children never lack companionships. From an early age they are used to playing alone with their toys and not forming relationships much. Their job satisfaction most often depends on their urge to attain perfection. An only child will find a setting where they can work alone rather than in a team (Leman, 2009 cited in Murphy, 2012). The first born children are well organized. They feel they must be perfect in everything that they do. They stick to authority and they follow the rules (Kalkan, 2008 cited in Murphy 2012). First borns are seen as highly motivated and most often take charge of the things. First born children generally hold the dominant role over the younger siblings in the family (Tucker and Updegraff, 2010 cited in Murphy, 2012). They often fill high positions of authority in their professions. They set high goals for themselves and they generally would do anything to achieve the goals that they have set (Leman, 2009 cited in Murphy, 2012). According to the above literature review it has been seen that only children prefer working on their own rather in a team and also try to seek perfection. The transactional leaders share a relationship with their followers and clearly explain the roles. The first borns try hard to seek perfection. They are very motivated and do anything to achieve their goals. Hence, the hypothesis stating that â€Å"There will be no significant difference between Only children and First born on Transactional Leadership style† was formulated. Laissez faire leadership style These leaders generally cause confusion as they are in leadership positions but they are not working or associated with any kind of responsibility. They are inactive. (Bass, 1990 cited in Hartog et al 1997) reported negative correlations on laissez-faire leadership and this in turn results in the performance, effort and attitudes. This is the most inappropriate way to lead someone. There is not enough motivation given by them. A leadership theory by Kerr and Jermier proposed that subordinate, task, and, organization are the main characteristics. When there is no leader role the subordinates could be empowered to do work and thus this can result in transformational leadership (Hartog et al 1997). Only children are higher on taking initiative and personal aspiration. They are highly motivated. They focus on educational or occupational achievement more often. These children have stronger individual identities (Mellor, 1989 cited in Collins, 2006).The first born children are often seen as powerful and influential (Murphy, 2012). They operate as being responsible for their family members and in return about the productiveness of them. When they feel that the productivity has not been attained they feel that they were not good enough for the job (Hoopes Harper, 1987 Cited in Klas, 2002). According to the above literature review it can be seen how only children are seen are very motivating and focused. The laissez faire leadership style is one where there is no leadership role taken and they are irresponsible. The first born children are seen as powerful and taking initiative to complete a task. Hence, the hypothesis â€Å"There will be no significant difference between Only children and First born on the Laissez faire leadership style† was formulated. 2.2.1 ii Only children and Last Born Only children according to Adler will occupy a unique position as they don’t have another sibling to compete with. The only child generally becomes the focus of attention to the family (Havighurst, 1960; Leman, 1998 Cited in Klas, 2002).They lead their life with dependence and self-centeredness. They gain their family’s attention throughout their childhood. Later on in life there is this awakening where they are no longer the focus of attention anymore. They never had to compete with others. They usually have difficulty interacting with their peers (Hjelli et al., 1992). Only children do not have the habit of sharing their things with others this by default comes across as being selfish (Leman 1988, cited in Klas, 2002). The Last born children are considered the most outgoing and secure one in the family. They are generally the least academic ones (Herra, 2003 cited in Collins, 2006). They are looked as the least capable one when compared to their siblings. They are also looked as having less experience in comparison to the other siblings in the family. These children may become discouraged as they are not able to fulfil the expectations set by their older siblings and hence they are considered as failures. These children possess strengths such as caring, outgoing, thoughtful and empathizing which are certain personal skills that the other siblings tend not to possess (Snow et al, 1981 cited in Collins, 2006). Transformational Leadership Style In Transformational leadership however, the leader fails to understand followers motives and needs. The focus shifts from the need of the leader to the followers needs. By gaining an understanding of their followers needs, the transformational leader can potentially convert followers into leaders (Chandan et al, 2014). Hence, the hypothesis â€Å" Only children will be higher on Transformational Leadership style as compared to Last Born† was formulated. Transactional Leadership Style According to this theory there is an exchange of rewards between the leaders and the followers. Transactional leaders try to motivate their followers through extrinsic rewards. The roots of Transactional leadership theory is grounded in the social learning and social exchange theories, which recognize the equal nature of leadership. Bass and Avolio described contingent reward as that when the leader will give the subordinate once they have achieved goals that were agreed to. Contingent reward is therefore the exchange of rewards for meeting agreed-on objectives. Transactional leaders can also act by relying on active management by exception which occurs when the leader monitors followers to ensure mistakes are not made. In passive management by exception, the leader interferes only when things go wrong (Chandan et al, 2014). Only children are more autonomous when it comes to personal control. Only children prefer being around things than people. This has been seen from an early age where they play with toys rather than mixing with others. When the other person who the only child interacts with does not understand what he/she is trying to say they often get frustrated (Isaacson, 2004 cited in Murphy 2012). Last born generally have a drive for passion in their live. They strive for different type of success most often to a new innovate way something in which they can excel in and not the same field as their siblings. They are attracted by new ideas and innovations. They haven’t had much of the valuable experiences at home instead they are seen more sociable as they have opportunities outside their homes to develop these social skills (Snow et al, 1981 cited in Collins, 2006). According to the above literature review it can be seen that only children prefer working on their own. They do not like when others do not understand them They prefer things over people. The transactional leadership style is where the leader has a reciprocal relationship with the follower. They motivate their followers by giving rewards. Hence, the hypothesis â€Å" Only children will be significantly lower on Transactional Leadership style as compared to Last borns† was formulated Laissez faire Leadership style These leaders allow the group complete freedom in decision making. They never took part in any discussion of any kind. They dint not participate in working towards a goal as well. There were no appraisals also given to their followers. Hence, as it can be seen by the above literature review that the last born children are more sociable and they have innovate ideas which they excel in and especially good social skills. It can be seen since the last born children would be able to express their needs and give the rewards to their followers as compared to the only children. The hypothesis that â€Å" Last born will be higher on Laissez faire leadership style as compared to only born† was formulated. 2.2.1 iii First Born and Last Born First Born generally behave in a more mature way as they have interacted with adults mostly. They are hence expected to assume responsibilities. They resent having to serve as the models for their younger siblings. They also have to take care and look after their younger siblings. They generally conform to the wishes of the group they belong to. They generally give in to the wishes and are suggestible as they have always conformed to their parent’s wishes most often. They have been overprotected and hence there could be a lack of aggressive behaviour. The generally develop leadership abilities and this happens as since they were small they had to assume responsibilities at the house. They are often seen as bossy to others. They are usually really high achievers and sometimes even overachievers and this is due to the parental expectations that make them perform as they need the parent’s approval for almost everything. They feel replaced by the other sibling and therefore try and achieve a lot of things to gain the approval of their parents. They are unhappy and this stems as they feel really insecure after the other younger sibling has come into their lives (Hurlock, 1981).First born and last born generally occupy different positions in their family. First born constantly keep rankly themselves in relationship to the other people present around them. They generally tend to be more conscientious, intellectual, and socially dominant than later born. On the other hand, later born children are more agreeable, socially gregarious, and non-conforming. First born were always used to the attention given by their parents until the sibling was born, this led to feeling of dethronement and they became more dominant. Later born on the other hand were more agreeable and less conscientious as compared to First born (Sulloway, 2001 cited in Roach, 2006). Last born tend to be wilful. They are spoilt by the family and pampered. There wasn’t much discipline given to them and the parents were not that strict. They had greater feelings of security as there was no displacement for them. They are protected by their parents when the older sibling verbal or physically attack them. This is why they are more dependent and in turn they are irresponsible. They generally underachieve as they do not have much parental demands. They have extremely good social relationships outside the house. They tend to be popular but not good leaders due to their lack of responsibilities. They tend to be happy due to the attention they have received (Hurlock, 1981). Transformational Leadership style They are those people that encourage and motivate the followers to achieve the goals. A transformational leader mostly needs to make decisions quickly. They take each opportunity that is presented to them. These leaders are very persistent. They have a vision and are passionate about it. They possess values such as conviction and a good character. These leaders are caring and they respect other individuals. These leaders are competent as well. These leaders tend to see that their vision is achieved in the organization. They see that there is a change brought about in their subordinates. They are innovative. They tend to integrate the creative insight and intuition within themselves. These leaders focus on the other aspects looking towards the future and not just the current situation they are faced with (Bhargava, 2003). According to the above literature review it can be seen that the first born are more responsible as they have grown up with adults. The last born tend not to take up responsibility and they tend not to be good leaders. This helped in concluded and formulating the hypothesis that â€Å" First born will be higher on Transformational Leadership style as compared to Last born†. Transactional Leadership style Transactional leadership style mainly focuses this attention on the role and task and how this is related to the performance. The transactional leadership theory states emphasize on the relationships that are formed between the leader and follower on account of various exchanges (Burns, 1978 cited in Wheatley, 2010). In 1978, according to Hollander he theorised this leadership as to have various dynamic processes. These were mainly in relation with the leader and follower and the interpersonal interactions among the two. These leaders were responsible to give clear instructions. They would reciprocate with the follower and respond to them appropriately. This in turn increased the leader’s influence on them (Hollander, 1978 cited in Wheatley, 2010). These leaders rewarded and gave the followers acknowledgement when the expectations or the goals were met. These leaders mainly negotiate and their roles and responsibilities and there is mutual respect and influence. According to H eifetz in 1994, these leaders influence their followers and they are also under the followers as it is a reciprocal relationship. According to Burns 2003, leaders who are involved in both the simple and complex situations and they try to achieve the organizational goals (Wheatley, 2010). Last borns are considered as saviours of their family as they give more emphasize to the accomplishments and achievements of their older siblings and this gives them a sense of position of esteem and significance (Stewart et al, 2001). They tend to lack in maturity as they have been pampered by their mothers more often. Since they are given more attention by their mother their extraverted ego is being fed and this is a reason they are considered to be more creative (Nakao et al, 2000 cited in Collins, 2006). According to the transactional approach there exists and active relationship among the leader and follower where they are seen to influence one and another. The leader generally gives rewards to the follower and tries not to use authoritative measures (Wheatley, 2010). Younger siblings are described as being co-operative and outgoing. Investigations have also confirmed that middle born and last born are socially adept as compared to the older siblings (Coleston, 2008). According to the above literature review it was seen that the last born are seen more co-operative as compared to the older sibling who is more authoritative. Hence, the hypothesis that â€Å" Last born will be higher on Transactional Leadership style than First born† was formulated. Laissez Faire Leadership style The laissez faire leadership style is extremely the opposite of the other two leadership styles that are active. This is mostly linked to negative outcomes where there is low motivation seen by the leaders (Wheatley, 2010). There is an absence of any kind of Transaction (Wheatley, 2010).They are very passive leaders (Yammarino Bass, 1990; Yammarino, Spangler Bass, 1993, in Hartog et al 1997). These leaders generally avoid the decision making of the team. They also avoid supervising and taking up this responsibility. First-born when compared to last born children and middle children found that they are more socially adept than the rest. It was seen that the first born and only children had similar traits. They tended to be more self-confident, conscientious, responsible and less empathetic. The younger siblings were seen as rebellious and risk takers (Coleston, 2008). The first born children help to mentor their younger siblings. They tend to be good caretakers. The parents give more attention to the first born as compared to the last born. The last born generally don’t take up responsibilities as the older sibling most often does that for them ( Kluger, 2011 cited in Murphy, 2012) According to the above literature review it can be first born will be more confident and responsible as compared to the last born. The will take up initiative and not rebel as compared to the last born. The laissez faire leadership is one where there is no supervising or responsibility taken. Hence, the hypothesis â€Å" Last born will be higher on Laissez faire leadership style as compared to first born† was formulated. 2.3. Summary The given chapter included a detailed literature on the variables that are studied. The hypotheses that were formulated were based on the reviewed literature and were hence inferred.

The Sikhs Essay -- essays research papers fc

In the year 1469 a man named Guru Nanak was born into a Punjabi-Hindu family. His name means "He who was born at the home of his mother's parents", which was in Talwandi, near Labone ("Sikhs" 647). We know little about Nanak's life but a lot about his beliefs from a book called " Adi Granth" or " Granth Sahib", which means holy book. Some of his beliefs were the reality of "karma" and "reincarnation".These are beliefs that our actions in this life determine how high or low we'll be in our next life. The Hindus and Muslims believe it is best to worship, missionize, study and write the sacred scriptures, and other religious public actions and behaviors. Nanak believed that this is wrong. He felt that the people should be involved in inward meditation to the God, Akal Purakh (Nanak was a monotheist, believing in one god). Nanak believed that Akal Purakh is the almighty creator and sustainer of the universe and he has no form. If one is truly devoted to Akal then Akal may reveal himself to you in "nam" or the divine name. Since Akal created the world and everything in it then, the world can be considered an expression of "nam",(McLeod 5). Akal, to reveal himself through "nam", speaks the "sabad" or divine word, through a loyal believer. This believer acts as the eternal guru, or teacher, speaking in the mystical voice of Akal through the "sabad". A guru can achieve this divine harmony with Akal by the practice of "nam simaran". This can be accomplished in many ways. One way is by the repeating of a "mantra", a word that expresses the divine reality. Another way is to sing devotional songs or even to have deep mystical concentration. Guru Nanak attracted many disciples, or "sikha" (this is where the name Sikh comes from). These "sikhas" were the original Sikhs. Before Guru Nanak died he appointed a successor from among his disciples to be the second guru. This started the chain of the ten Sikh gurus which lasted 439 years from the birth of Nanak to the death of Gobind Singh, the tenth guru, in the year 1708, ("Hindus and Sikhs" 11). Nanak appointed as his successor Lehna or Lahina, who later changed his name to Angad (Angada was a lesser legendary hero of that time).... ... run away with the guns given to them by the police or join the Sikh militants, ("Throwing Punches" 30) It is very dangerous for journalists to write about the Sikhs. In the past few years. seventeen journalists have been killed by the Sikhs because they have written unfavorable articles about the Sikhs and their terrorist activities, ("Throwing Punches" 30). A recent Sikh terrorist act involved Sikh "freedom-fighters" stopping a train in Punjab. They boarded the train and killed forty-seven innocent people, ("Forty-seven Killed" A1). Sikhism has changed from the time of Guru Nanak, where it was a peaceful, inward religion to the present where there is much violence by the Sikhs and pride in their violent ways. Bibliography "Forty-seven Killed by Sikh Militants". Wall Street Journal 27 Dec. 1991: A1 "Hindus and Sikhs". Scholastic Update 10 Mar. 1989: 11 McLeod, W. H. The Sikhs. N.Y.: Columbia University Press, 1986. "Sikhs". Encyclopedia Brittanica. 1963 edition. "Sikhs Attack Bombay" New York Times 6 Mar. 1992: A12 "Throwing Punches in Punjab" The Economist 5 Jan. 1991: 30

Charisma: Psychology and Enormous Overwhelming Presence Essay

Whenever we want to define any word we usually look at the meaning in the dictionary. In Greek, charisma is any special grace conferred by God on an individual. Charisma refers to the enormous overwhelming presence that some people have. It is the ability to influence others by being connected with them physically, emotionally, and culturally. Although it is difficult to have a specific definition of charisma, but we could describe some people as a charismatic person who have an extraordinary ability to inspire, influence, and draw other’s attention. Charisma is usually associated with leaders who have a power and high positions, but it could be a characteristic of actors, public speakers, mathematicians, scientists, singers, or any other people. Charisma indicate a positive meaning; however, it could has it own dark side. Some leaders how have charisma causes huge damage to the world in the human history such as Hitler. Hitler was able to get a wide popularity by his support to the nationalism and anti-communism ideas. Later, he established the Nazism organization which believes in racism against other races and the altitude of certain races to others. The real number of his victims is unknown but it said that it reached more than 10 million victim. Some philosophers believe that charisma is innate characteristic while psychologists believe that it could be learned by increasing the individual’s awareness of his emotions and linking it to other people’s feeling, emotions, and needs. So, how can we have a magnesium personality? There are some some tips you could do to be a charismatic person, some of it are: having self-esteem, matching the body language to your speech, thinking before speaking and arranging your ideas, accepting criticism, and being unique in finding practical ideas to develop your character and your surroundings.

Critical Analysis “The School of Athens” Essay

In this painting, you see around 60 Greek philosophers arranged in a very large hall. The philosophers are talking to each other, discussing theories or mathematical queries. It symbolizes philosophic thinking and the search for truth. On the wall you can see paintings and statues. He has used contour lines with domes and actual line with figures. Personalities are arranged like actors in a tired architectural setting, Raphael has represented distinguished Greek philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle (the central figures) Socrates and Euclid. Composition has been ordered brilliantly, clearly revealing his outstanding ability. The placing of each figure and each group combine to produce perfect harmony, order and balance, and, even though some sixty figures are used in the composition, there is no crowding. Therefore painting is asymmetrical. The main focal point of the painting is on Plato and Aristotle. The painting has more emphasis on these two philosophers than the others because they are centered in the middle of the composition and they are the only two standing in front of hall entrance with sky surrounding them. Raphael has demonstrated tone in this painting. An example of this is were the light beaming through the windows and creating darkness on the ceiling of the domes. This gives the painting a three-dimensional effect. Also demonstrates line and a range of different colors but mostly primary and secondary, matching perfectly to each figure and object. The themes he is exploring are philosophic thinking buy Greek Philosophers, who are expressing their theories and beliefs to one another. What this work means to me is, that Raphael had great respect for the Greek scholars and philosophers and admired there teaching and beliefs. Read Also:  What is Critical Thinking Essay The intention on the artist was to express social views as it looks as if the scholars are socialising to one another and sharing their thinkings. This could also come under a political interpretation as they might be expressing their political views. I think the great Greek philosophersAristotle and Plato have influenced this artist because he may of shared many of their beliefs and respect their  great intellect. I also think he is influenced by them because they are centered in the middle of the composition. I find this painting extremely well executed it looks very realistic and the artist puts an amazing amount of detail with every object drawn. I find the painting to be a successful piece of work, the composition is well organised, artist has produced perfect harmony and balance. It expresses many art techniques, such as tone, line, chiaroscuro, shade and perspective. This art would have been well acknowledged at the time, as the paintings shows great thinkers and represents time of knowledge. This is what the Renaissance was about a passion for knowledge and skill. During the Renaissance people had an interest in classical antiquity, it centered around man, his earthly environment and his visual world. The human figure, the landscape, the treatment of deep space, and realistic representation was important. The painting shows this.

the boy who

the boy who MEI STRUCTURED MATHEMATICSMarking C3 Coursework10 tips to ensure that the right mark isawardedMEI Conference 2013 Marking C3 Coursework Page 2Marking C3 CourseworkC3 coursework is very prescriptive. Providing assessors follow the criteria carefully there is no problem with the assessment. However, there are difficulties for the External moderator.à ¢Ã‚€Â ¢ Errors are made in the marking à ¢Ã‚€Â ¢ Work is not checked but assumed to be correct. à ¢Ã‚€Â ¢ Credit is given for work that is not evident.It is not a question of "what is a good piece of coursework?" but "how can I ensure that I give an appropriate mark?" 1 Terminology This task is all about solving equations. Therefore, candidates should write equations. Persistent errors should be penalised in domain 5. Examples which should be penalised: I am going to solve the equation x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1. I am going to solve the equation y = x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1. I am going to solve the equation f(x) = x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1. Correct terminology: I am going to solve the equation x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1 = 0. Or I am going to solve the equation f(x) = 0 where f(x) = x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1. 2 Illustrations All three methods require a graph and an illustration for both success and failure. A graph of the function is not an illustration of the method. Example I am going to solve the equation x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1 = 0 Here is a graph of y = x3 à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 4x à ¢Ã‚ˆÂ’ 1.MEI Conference 2013 Marking C3 Coursework Page 3You can see from the graph that there is a root of the equation in the range [1,2] which I shall find. This is not enough - only the graph has been drawn.English: Fifteen figure accuracy in Excel

History and Members of The Warsaw Pact

History and Members of The Warsaw Pact The Warsaw Pact was established in 1955 after West Germany became a part of NATO. It was formally known as the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance. The Warsaw Pact, made up of Central and Eastern European countries, was meant to counter the threat from the NATO countries. Each country in the Warsaw Pact pledged to defend the others against any outside military threat. While the organization stated that each nation would respect the sovereignty and political independence of the others, each country was in some way controlled by the Soviet Union. The pact dissolved at the end of the Cold War in 1991.   History of the Pact After  World War II, the Soviet Union sought to control as much of Central and Eastern Europe as it could. In the 1950s, West Germany was rearmed and allowed to join NATO. The countries that bordered West Germany were fearful that it would again become a military power, as it had been just a few years earlier. This fear caused Czechoslovakia to attempt to create a security pact with Poland and East Germany. Eventually, seven countries came together to form the Warsaw Pact: Albania (until 1968)BulgariaCzechoslovakiaEast Germany (until 1990)HungaryPolandRomaniaThe  Soviet Union The Warsaw Pact lasted for 36 years. In all of that time, there was never a direct conflict between the organization and NATO. However, there were many proxy wars, especially between the Soviet Union and the United States in places such as Korea and Vietnam. Invasion Of Czechoslovakia On Aug. 20, 1968, 250,000 Warsaw Pact  troops invaded Czechoslovakia in what was known as Operation Danube. During the operation, 108 civilians were killed and another 500 were wounded by the invading troops. Only Albania and Romania refused to participate in the invasion. East Germany did not send troops to Czechoslovakia but only because Moscow ordered its troops to stay away. Albania eventually left  the Warsaw Pact because of the invasion. The military action was an attempt by the Soviet Union to oust Czechoslovakias Communist Party leader Alexander Dubcek whose plans to reform his country did not align with the Soviet Unions wishes. Dubcek wanted to liberalize his nation and had many plans for reforms, most of which he was unable to initiate. Before Dubcek was arrested during the invasion, he urged citizens not to resist militarily because he felt that presenting a military defense would have meant exposing the Czech and Slovak peoples to a senseless bloodbath. This sparked many nonviolent protests throughout the country.   End of the Pact Between 1989 and 1991, the Communist parties in most of the countries in the Warsaw Pact were ousted. Many of the Warsaw Pacts member nations considered the organization to be essentially defunct in 1989 when none assisted Romania militarily during its violent revolution. The  Warsaw Pact  formally existed for another couple of years until 1991- just months before the USSR disbanded- when the organization was officially dissolved in Prague.

The Ostend Manifesto, 1854 Proposal for US to Acquire Cuba

The Ostend Manifesto, 1854 Proposal for US to Acquire Cuba The Ostend Manifesto was a document written by three American diplomats stationed in Europe in 1854 which advocated for the U.S. government to acquire the island of Cuba through either purchase or force. The plan created controversy when the document was made public in partisan newspapers the following year and federal officials denounced it. The goal of acquiring Cuba had been a pet project of President Franklin Pierce. The purchase or seizure of the island was also favored by pro-slavery politicians in the United States, who feared a slave rebellion in Cuba might spread to the American South. Key Takeaways: Ostend Manifesto Meeting requested by President Pierce led to proposal by three American ambassadors.Plan to acquire Cuba was rejected by Pierce as too audacious and unacceptable politically.When the proposal leaked to opposition newspapers the political battling over slavery intensified.One beneficiary of the proposal was James Buchanan, as his involvement helped him become president. The manifesto never led to the U.S. acquiring Cuba, of course. But it did serve to deepen the sense of distrust in America as the issue of slavery became a simmering crisis in the mid-1850s. In addition, the crafting of the document aided one of its authors, James Buchanan, whose rising popularity in the South helped him become president in the election of 1856. The Meeting at Ostend A crisis in Cuba developed in early 1854, when an American merchant ship, the Black Warrior, was seized in a Cuban port. The incident created tensions, as Americans considered the fairly minor incident to be an insult from Spain directed at the United States. The American ambassadors to three European countries were directed by President Franklin Pierce to meet quietly in the town of Ostend, Belgium, to come up with strategies to deal with Spain. James Buchanan, John Y. Mason, and Pierre Soule, the American ministers to Britain, France, and Spain, respectively, gathered and drafted the document that would become known as the Ostend Manifesto. The document, in fairly dry language, stated the issues the U.S. government had been having with Spain’s possession, Cuba. And it advocated that the United States should offer to purchase the island. It stated that Spain would likely be willing to sell Cuba, but if it didn’t, the document argued that the U.S. government should seize the island. The manifesto, addressed to Secretary of State William Marcy, was sent to Washington, where it was received by Marcy and passed along to President Pierce. Marcy and Pierce read the document and immediately rejected it. American Reaction to the Ostend Manifesto The diplomats had made a logical case for taking Cuba, and they argued throughout that the motivation was the preservation of the United States. In the document they specifically noted the fear of a slave rebellion in Cuba and how that might pose a danger. Less dramatically, they argued that Cuba’s geographic location made it a favorable position from which the United States could defend its southern coast, and specifically the valuable port of New Orleans. The authors of the Ostend Manifesto were not thoughtless or reckless. Their arguments for what would be a controversial series of actions paid some attention to international law and demonstrated some knowledge of naval strategy. Yet Pierce realized that what his diplomats proposed went far beyond any actions he was willing to take. He did not believe the American people, or the Congress, would go along with the plan. The manifesto might have been a quickly forgotten exercise in diplomatic brainstorming, but in the very partisan atmosphere of Washington in the 1850s it quickly turned into a political weapon. Within weeks of the document arriving in Washington, it had been leaked to newspapers favorable to the Whig Party, the opponents of Pierce. Politicians and newspaper editors directed withering criticism at Pierce. The work of three American diplomats in Europe turned into something of a firestorm as it touched upon the most contentious issue of the day, slavery. Anti-slavery sentiment in America was growing, especially with the formation of the new anti-slavery Republican Party. And the Ostend Manifesto was held up as an example of how the Democrats in power in Washington were devising underhanded ways to acquire territory in the Caribbean to extend America’s slave-holding territory. Newspaper editorials denounced the document. A political cartoon produced by the noted lithographers Currier and Ives would eventually ridicule Buchanan for his role in the drafting of the proposal. Cartoon of four ruffians robbing a respectable man with the Ostend Manifesto, to capture Cuba, written on a nearby wall and caption The Ostend Doctrine. Practical Democrats Carrying Out The Principle. circa 1854. Fotosearch / Getty Images Impact of the Ostend Manifesto The proposals set forth in the Ostend Manifesto never came to fruition, of course. If anything, the controversy over the document probably ensured that any discussion of the United States acquiring Cuba would be rejected. While the document was denounced in the northern press, one of the men who drafted it, James Buchanan, was ultimately helped by the controversy. The accusations that it was a pro-slavery scheme boosted his profile in the American South, and helped him secure the Democratic nomination for the election of 1856. He went on to win the election, and spent his one term as president trying, and failing, to grapple with the issue of slavery. Sources: Ostend Manifesto. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopediaâ„ ¢, Columbia University Press, 2018. Research in Context.McDermott, Theodore, et al. Ostend Manifesto. The Manifesto in Literature, edited by Thomas Riggs, vol. 1: Origins of the Form: Pre-1900, St. James Press, 2013, pp. 142-145. Gale Virtual Reference Library.Patrick, J., Pious, R., Ritchie, D. (1993). Pierce, Franklin. In  (Ed.), The Oxford Guide to the United States Government. : Oxford University Press.