Abstract This paper examines how The "Great Revolt" in England in the summer of 1381, though perhaps unexpected in its magnitude and diversity, was not a sudden or chance uprising but the product of a number of complicated and inter-related antagonisms. It looks at how, although the unreasonably high Poll Taxes of 1377, 1379 and 1380 were the principal triggers for revolt, there were other underlying roots of disorder, sown into English society in the first half of the fourteenth century. It explores the feudal state of England at the time, the decay of the tenant-serf relationship, the impacts of the 100 years war and the influence of Lollardy and the Wyclif movement as well as the state of the monarchy and the corruption within government in relation to the social and political grieviences of the bourgeoise.
From the Paper "High taxation certainly inflamed the commons though to what extent this was out of desperation or anger is unclear. Interestingly, the first target of the Essex rebels under John Wrawe was the manor of Overhall ? the property of hated financier Sir Richard Lyons. Further targeting of Archbishop Sudbury's fiscal officers occurred. Disturbances in Essex ended with the stoning of poll-tax commissioners; the house of John Cobat, a collector of the Poll Tax, was among the few to be attacked and looted in Ipswich and the prime occupation of the Suffolk rebels was the capture of Sir John Cavendish ? the Chief Justice of the King's Bench and the new Chancellor of the University of Cambridge."
Abstract In this paper the author looks at the regime of Abdul Nasser in Egypt and the changes it brought to the Egyptian lifestyle. He starts the paper with an examination of the early years after Nasser came to power, as a result of the monarchy at that time being overthrown. Nasser declared Egypt a republic, was anti-colonial and steadily developed a state form of capitalism that was typically nationalist. The author goes on to detail the changes that Nasser instituted into society which benefited the Egyptian people, like the laws that privileged industry over agriculture. The author mentions the special law that was introduced which spared new companies from paying taxes on profits for a seven year period. The paper also looks at the political changes that Nasser introduced and how he played the Soviet powers against the U.S. powers. In conclusion the author describes Nasser as a pragmatic leader, willing to cooperate tactically with the West so long as this cooperation was based on his own stipulations.
From the Paper "The Ba'th considered that a conservative boycott might very well result in election victories for the better-organized communists, which would have been particularly true in Populist-dominated Aleppo. The communists were about the only ones in Syria who wanted the municipal elections held as planned. Seventy communist candidates had enroll for the vote by 11 October, compared with 75 for the much more numerous Nationalists and 35 for the Ba'th. Nasser and his Ba'thist allies believed that they could help their cause in Aleppo by staging a dramatic
'rescue', with the likelihood of changing the view of most Aleppans toward Egypt and thus providing more votes for Ba'thist candidates. It is not astonishing that the Egyptians and Ba'thists exaggerated the Turkish threat, giving plenty of airtime to the purported Turkish battle cry 'on to Aleppo'. Nasser and the Ba'thists, as well as the conservatives, were clearly worried about communist advances in Syria and the concomitant increase in Soviet influence. The Ba'th had allied itself with the communists to combat imperialism and the old-guard Syrian politicians; when they thrive, with proportionately more power ensue to the communists as Syria's relationship with the Soviet Union tightened during the crisis."
Tags: arab, bourgeoise, politics, capitalist, syria, populist, military, coup, muslim
