Latest news with #GettysburgAddress
New York Times
04-08-2025
- Entertainment
- New York Times
Heather Cox Richardson Enters the History of ‘Lincoln Portrait'
Say this about Aaron Copland's 'Lincoln Portrait': There is a lot of history to it. Completed in 1942, as the United States battled fascism and prepared to lead the world in the name of freedom, it was commissioned as a musical sketch of a historical figure. Copland scored 'a portrait in which the sitter himself might speak,' as he put it, and gave a narrator the unenviable task of reading from the Gettysburg Address, among other Civil War-era speeches, against orchestral material based on folk tunes from Lincoln's time. History has lent its echo chamber to the piece since it was written, too. In 1953, not long before a young lawyer named Roy Cohn culled Copland's scores from State Department libraries and interrogated him about his leftward leanings in a Senate hearing attended by Joseph McCarthy, 'Lincoln Portrait' was cut from one of President Eisenhower's inaugural concerts. One Republican representative who had protested against Copland's inclusion said he had 'but a passing knowledge of music,' yet favored only 'fine, patriotic and thoroughly American composers.' For his part, Copland believed that 'Lincoln Portrait' had a firm enough democratic spirit that it 'started a revolution' after he led it in Venezuela in 1957. (The scholar Carol A. Hess has called that story 'pure invention.') Typically, orchestras invite a politician, actor or cultural personality to serve as the piece's narrator. Consult an extensive discography, and you can unearth recordings with Maya Angelou, Gregory Peck, James Earl Jones and Adlai Stevenson. But what if you summoned a historian instead? Would a piece so laden with history take on a different power? Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Express Tribune
01-08-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Democracy vs monarchy
The writer is an educationist based in Larkana. She can be reached at sairasamo88@ Listen to article Since its inception, humanity has longed for an ideal state - one where the rule of law is maintained, socio-political rights are safeguarded, and fundamental rights such as education, health and security are ensured. These aspirations are achievable when a governing body prioritises the welfare of its people above its own interests. The question remains: which form of governance is better — democracy or monarchy? Democracy is often described as a government of the people, by the people, for the people, as famously defined by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address (1863). In this system, power lies with the citizens, who elect leaders responsible for creating a government that maintains the rule of law, provides quality education and healthcare, and secures the safety of its citizens. A fundamental feature of democracy is the right to dissent, allowing opposition voices to challenge or support the decisions made by the government. The collective will of the people plays a central role in governance, and mutual consensus is highly valued. Monarchy, on the other hand, is a form of governance passed down through family lineage, without the direct input or consent of the people. The monarch holds supreme power and their decisions are unquestionable. In such systems, the king or queen controls the military, treasury and judiciary, and the distribution of rights such as education, health and security is entirely dependent on the ruler's discretion. If the monarch is capable, these rights may be upheld, but in many cases, they are secondary concerns. Let us now compare the merits of democracy and monarchy using figures and statistics. According to the World Forum on Democracy, electoral democracies represent 120 of the 192 existing countries, constituting 58.2% of the world's population. The Democracy Index, issued by The Economist Intelligence Unit, categorised 167 countries based on governance. Of these, only 24 were fully democratic, 48 were termed flawed democracies, 36 were hybrid regimes, and 59 classified as authoritarian. Data from Google sources says that countries with welfare-focused governance models, such as the US, the UK with its parliamentary democracy, and China with its one-party rule, rank highly in education, healthcare and quality of life. The US records 2.8% GDP growth with a 79% literacy level, while the UK stands at 6.8% and 99%. China maintains 4.6% economic expansion alongside a 99.83% literacy level. Among monarchies, Saudi Arabia records 4.6% GDP growth with 96% literacy, Oman reaches 5.2% and 97.35%, and Brunei follows with a 4.2% GDP growth rate and a 97% literacy level, respectively. In terms of education, life expectancy, living standards and social security, these monarchies vary widely. Interestingly, some countries that transitioned from monarchies to democracies have, at times, reconsidered returning to monarchic rule, believing that monarchy offers certain advantages over democracy. One argument in favour of democracy is that it grants individuals the right to question their rulers and remove them through elections. Every citizen has a voice in governmental decisions. By contrast, in monarchies, executive power lies solely with the ruler, and there are no legal means to challenge their authority. Monarchs are all-powerful, and removing them is only possible in rare circumstances, such as military defeat and internal rebellion. While both systems have their merits, democracy prioritises the power and accountability of leaders to the people, whereas monarchy offers centralised rule. In the modern world, governance is increasingly judged by its ability to improve public welfare, regardless of its form. Churchill once said, "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." In the end, the question remains: which system truly delivers the best outcomes for its people. I leave it to the readers to decide whom they support for governance and how they wish to be governed.
Epoch Times
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Abraham Lincoln's Advice on Learning, Work, Smartphones, and Anxiety
When most Americans hear the name Abraham Lincoln, certain images jump to mind. He's the rail splitter who made it to the White House, served as president during the Civil War, wrote the Gettysburg Address, and was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth. He was tall and lanky and often wore a stovepipe hat. His statue in Washington is encased by a facsimile of a Greek temple, the image of which appears on the back of our $5 bill. On the front is his careworn face with its sunken cheeks, trim beard, and rather large right ear. Dig deeper, and we find a man whose words and life have much to teach us today, particularly teens and 20-somethings. Let's take a look. Get Yourself an Education Had Lincoln depended only on his bits and pieces of formal schooling for his learning, he likely would have ended up semi-literate. Inspired by his stepmother, Sarah, and driven by a burning desire to read and to write well, he instead put the meager resources of his prairie cabin home to good use to
Chicago Tribune
06-07-2025
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: The idea of America, under stress
Four score and seven years ago. The words — as archaic as they sound to today's ears — still cause a stir in many an American heart. Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address is rightly celebrated as one of a handful of American political speeches that live on and inspire, because it defines in remarkably economical language the idea of America — what America is supposed to be. Speaking at the dedication of the military cemetery at Gettysburg in November 1863, Lincoln encapsulated the principles for which so many young Americans had given their lives four months before: 'that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.' Union Gen. George Meade's troops had repelled Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's forces in the Pennsylvania countryside on the day before the nation's 87th birthday. The following day, July 4, 1863, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant won the monthslong battle of Vicksburg in Mississippi, a strategic triumph. The Civil War would last nearly two more years, but its outcome was determined on that Fourth of July, exactly four score and seven years after this nation's founding. During this holiday weekend, we think Americans observing the functioning of our government under the second administration of President Donald Trump could use some refreshers on the idea of America, as articulated perfectly by Lincoln, preserved on the battlefield by those Union soldiers, and painstakingly scaffolded by this country's founders some seven-plus decades before that conflagration. Did we mention that two of those founding fathers, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, both died on the same day — on the Fourth of July? The passing of the two old rivals — the second and third U.S. presidents; the nation's first frenemies, you might say — occurred on the 50th anniversary of the nation's birth. There were the rights enumerated in the Jefferson-penned Declaration of Independence — life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness — and then there was the harder task of ensuring those rights wouldn't be trampled by those who would later govern us. We've heard a lot since Trump's return to power about checks and balances. We now have an executive branch that arguably is the most aggressive in the lifetimes of virtually anyone alive today in terms of acting unilaterally to pursue its agenda. That is an agenda that has seen people in our country with court-ordered protections seized and sent to foreign prisons. It is an agenda in which members of this administration, including the president himself, are suggesting that some naturalized citizens ought to have their citizenship revoked. (See our Friday editorial.) It is an agenda where the executive branch sees fit to eliminate entire agencies created by law without consulting Congress. It is, in other words, exactly the kind of behavior about which our founders warned us — and attempted to equip us with the means to resist. 'If men were angels, no government would be necessary,' stated Federalist Paper No. 51 (attributed to either James Madison or Alexander Hamilton), the clearest articulation of the system of checks and balances. 'If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.' It is one matter to set up a governmental system that prevents any single person from ruling by fiat. It is another matter for the occupants of various offices in those separate branches to exercise the authority given to them to ensure our system of government persists as the framers intended. That brings us back to the Federalist papers, which provide the best insights into what kept the framers up at night. Madison's Federalist No. 10 fretted about the pernicious effect of 'factions' — what today we call partisanship or division. Madison identified multiple causes of 'faction,' including one that is particularly resonant right now — 'an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power.' And he memorably described the risk of excessive partisanship: dividing 'mankind into parties, inflam(ing) them with mutual animosity and render(ing) them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good.' We see examples of this phenomenon all too frequently in today's politics. Under this administration, the federal government has in many cases become a threat rather than a support to smaller governing bodies and other institutions. Universities are threatened financially if they don't adhere to Trumpian orthodoxy. Independent media are attacked in court. State and local governments are threatened financially if they don't adopt policies a majority of their citizens don't support. Madison viewed an empowered federal government as a bulwark against oppressive partisanship, which he thought more likely to emanate from smaller governments. But the framers were fully aware, at the same time, of the risk of cults of personalities and other forms of demagoguery. When asked whether the U.S. under the then-proposed Constitution would ultimately be a republic or a monarchy, Benjamin Franklin famously responded, 'A republic, if you can keep it.' Among the many tasks assigned to us as ordinary citizens, there is no more important one than that — preserving our system of government as it was intended to function. Because as our founders knew so well, human nature recoils all too often at the inconveniences and frustrations of self-government. We are not among those who believe democracy in the U.S. is seriously imperiled, at least as we write. But we do believe it is undergoing a stress test unseen since Lincoln spoke 162 years ago. 'If you can keep it.' Franklin's words for generations have seemed like an historic relic — a window into the nation's infancy. They feel all too current now.
Miami Herald
26-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Miami Herald
Meet the tap dancing queen from Fort Lauderdale who made a splash on ‘Drag Race'
Before she was lip syncing for $50,000 on national television, Suzie Toot was an up-and-coming drag queen in Fort Lauderdale performing for free. She'd show up to open stages at bars that don't exist anymore and leave smelling like cigarettes. She worked hard as a cast member at Lips, the iconic Fort Lauderdale drag venue now rebranded as Aquaplex. And she'd perform her favorite number, a Liza Minnelli-inspired lip sync, sometimes for crowds of just 10 people. But things have changed for Toot, the drag persona of 25-year-old Ben Shaevitz. After a memorable appearance this year on season 17 of MTV's 'RuPaul's Drag Race,' Toot performed the same Liza number in front of an audience of 2,000 in London. Toot is not known for the flips, dips and splits that South Florida's drag scene specializes in. She prefers 1920s flapper dresses and tap dance shoes over glamorous evening gowns and towering heels. She's more likely to perform to Lady Gaga's niche jazz records than her pop hits. Her drag style stuck out in South Florida and on 'Drag Race,' where her fellow contestants weren't sold on her aesthetic — that is, until she outlasted most of them in the competition. 'I love being talked about, whether it's positive or negative,' Shaevitz told the Miami Herald, laughing. 'It's funny how my 'Drag Race' experience, in a lot of ways, reflected my experience coming up in the drag scene in Fort Lauderdale because I was so different and I looked so crazy. I'm a polarizing figure, but I love it.' Shaevitz's Toot went from underdog to semi-finalist, nearly making it to the end to snatch the $200,000 grand prize. Though she didn't win the crown, the drag artist still feels like a winner. And she loves the attention, even when she's the butt of the joke. She won $50,000 during the show's 'Lip Sync LaLaPaRuza Smackdown.' She endeared fans with her comedy, like tap dancing the Gettysburg Address in Morse code. She's touring the country with her cabaret-style act. And her feature film debut, a camp horror flick filmed in Fort Lauderdale, is now streaming on Hulu in time for Pride Month. Toot, alongside season 17 co-star Lucky Starzzz, is among a growing crop of South Florida drag queens who have been elevating the local drag scene to international acclaim, like fellow 'Drag Race' alumni Morphine Love Dion, Mhi'ya Iman Le'Paige and Malaysia Babydoll Foxx. In the pantheon of South Florida drag legends, Toot emerged as an unlikely reality TV star, a fan favorite and an internet meme. But for her friends back home, the Suzie Toot success story is no surprise. From theater kid to tap dancing drag queen Born in New York and raised in Wellington in Palm Beach, Suzie Toot's creator, Shaevitz attended Lynn University in Boca Raton for its 'tiny but mighty' musical theater program. He'd often joke with friends about what they would be like as drag queens, and during the pandemic, 'we had all the time in the world.' That's when Suzie Toot — with her Betty Boop-esque makeup, curly red hair and niche musical theater antics — came to be. 'Weird stuff, the old classics. This big melting pot of my loves and my interest became the Suzie character,' Shaevitz said. After dropping out of college, Shaevitz moved to Fort Lauderdale to pursue a career in regional theater and, eventually, drag full time. 'This is where everything is. There's theater. There's drag. It just pulled me over,' Shaevitz said. 'And it's my favorite place in Florida. I'll say it. Sorry, Miami. Sorry, Orlando. Fort Lauderdale is where to f------ be.' Shaevitz worked tirelessly developing a tap-dancing, live-singing cabaret act. He found friendship — and his first drag gig — with fellow Fort Lauderdale cabaret drag artist Eric Swanson, who performs as Miss Bouvèé. It all started with a message from Shaevitz on Instagram asking for a guest spot at a show, Swanson said. '[Toot] was brand new on the scene then, and I was giving love to anybody who wanted to sing and come share the stage,' Swanson said. 'And she was exactly as she is now. She has not changed. She is an old soul in a little, young person's body.' Swanson and Shaevitz applied their musical talents as the stars of 'Big Easy Queens,' a campy, raunchy, bloody horror movie musical set in New Orleans and filmed in South Florida. The independent film premiered in Fort Lauderdale in 2023 during Popcorn Frights, South Florida's largest genre film festival, and is now available to stream on Hulu as of Saturday. Swanson, 42, recalled a conversation he had with Shaevitz in their dressing room about where his career may go. 'I said, 'This is good. You're going to get calls from people,'' Swanson said. Soon after, Shaevitz got the call from 'Drag Race.' 'And the rest is history,' said Swanson. 'A win for the weirdos' When Kai Gomez met Shaevitz at a drag competition in Wilton Manors, he had a feeling he couldn't shake. 'Before the competition started, I was like, 'OK, you and me are going to the end,'' said Gomez, who performs in drag as King Vyper. Sure enough, they both landed in the top four, and the hosts were about to announce the top two finalists. King Vyper was called. Suzie Toot was called. 'And they tell us both that we didn't make the top two,' Gomez said. They've been friends ever since, supporting each others' careers and performing together. One of Gomez's favorite moments with Shaevitz was their 'Cuban Pete' number for a Halloween show. He dressed as Jim Carrey's 'The Mask' and Shaevitz was dressed as Lucille Ball. While Shaevitz and Gomez's alternative styles of drag are unique in South Florida, Gomez said it's validating to see how well Toot has done on and off 'Drag Race.' 'It makes me so proud. It's a win for the weirdos,' Gomez said. '[Toot] wasn't very favored because she was the artsy fartsy girly. She was the theater girly. But as soon as she started getting to those challenges, she was knocking them out the park.' And it's a win for South Florida's drag scene as a whole, Gomez said. Toot's success underscores drag's continued popularity in South Florida, despite the state government's anti-drag policies and rhetoric of the last few years. 'We really do have heavy hitter performers here,' Gomez said. In April, drag fans packed R House, a popular Wynwood restaurant, to watch Toot on 'Drag Race.' Though she was eliminated that episode, the mood was celebratory. At midnight that night, it was Shaevitz's 25th birthday. 'Once again, I love attention,' Shaevitz said. 'So hey, people are saying 'so sorry.' They're still talking to me.'
