A Study On The Social Policy Social Policy Essay

A Study On The Social Policy Social Policy Essay One definition of social policy is the legal framework from within which society, or in our sphere, medical professionals operate. In the UK social policy mainly consists of Acts of Parliament, although there is also an element of Common Law (laws that are made by the courts) and Ministerial Instruments (Instructions from Ministers that instruct). It is worth noting that all social policy that is passed is within the context of the UK being a western democracy and as part of the EU. The notion of western democracy is important. Parliament does not just pass legislation, it attempts to pass legislation that is either in the short term or long term interests of the electorate, us! We elect and lobby MPs, governments are formed and Bills are introduced and discussed in both Houses. In addition we join pressure groups and professional associations that attempt to exert influence on the legislative process. One of consequences of legislation is that society begins to work on behalf of individuals. John Locke introduced the idea of a Social Contract the relationship between the state and the individual; the idea that the state should provide a minimum standard of living for the individual. Poor Laws were introduced as far Back as 1536 an attempt by the state to provide work for the individual. Laissez Faire the idea that market forces should prevail was being questioned, Charities, the church and philanthropists began to provide for people. Samuel Greg, for example, founded Styal Mill in Cheshire, an industrial work place, but he also took in children and trained them to work in the mill as well as providing quality housing and health care provision for his workers. This approach took a while to bed in bed other captains of industry began to see the advantages of treating their employees with compassion and soon began to lobby government to organise this new interventionist approach t o society. In 1870 the Forster Act was passed, this was the turning point the state took responsibility for education for children between the ages of 5 and 12. Further changes to the education, pensions and benefits systems were introduced over the next 80 years but the main raft of social policies were introduced after WWII. During WWII William Beveridge conducted an audit into the state of the nation. He toured the country and was astonished with what he found. Britain was not a country fit for heroes. Change was needed. He identified 5 great evils: Want, Ignorance, Squalor, Disease and Idleness. Together these evils prevented Britain realising its potential, they were a cancer evident in the fabric of society. Together they negated any notions of meritocracy. With the end of WWII came great optimism, a new post modern society was the vision. Politicians saw their roles as architects of such a society. In July 1947 The Welfare State was officially launched. It aimed to provide a safety net for the population, to intervene in peoples lives and to provide where and when needed. The days of Laissez Faire were over the state would provide. The Welfare State also aimed to eradicate the 5 great evils in the following ways Want: A universal benefits system was introduced. No longer were those in poverty forced to go cap in hand to the church, family members or charities. Many benefits were not means tested they were universal, e.g. Child benefit is paid to all mothers irrespective of income. Ignorance: The Tri-partite system was introduced as a result of the Bulter Education Act 1944. All students sat the 11+ and the result of this exam determined what school they then attended; Grammar School, Secondary Modern Schools, or Secondary Technical Schools. All students attended school until the age of 15 and it was free. Squalor: Squalor means absolute and systemic poverty that is exacerbated by appalling living conditions, e.g. the Gorbals Tenements in Glasgow or the Victorian slums in many industrial cities e.g. Burnley, which were described as, crowded, one of the most filthy and one of the most unhealthy villages P144 Briggs. In addition there was the opportunity that was created by the bombings of the major cities during WWII. People needed housing and needed it fast. The result was The New Towns Act that were passed by Parliament in 1946. It enabled local authorities to build completely new towns in the following areas: England; Basildon, Bracknell, Corby, Harlow, Hatfield, Hemel Hempstead, Milton Keyes, Newton Aycliffe, Peterlee, Redditch, Runcorn, Skelmersdale, Stevenage, Telford, Washington, and Welwyn Garden City. Idleness: People faced crippling unemployment. The Great Depression started in 1929 in the US but continued well into the 1930s and 1940, real economic activity only came as a result of WWII. People needed jobs and the government proposed a policy called Jobs For All. Everyone who needed / wanted a job would be given a job by the government. This was relatively easy to achieve as the welfare state saw a massive building programme and subsequent job in health, education, benefits, etc. The following graph show unemployment rates since WWII: Disease: The government introduced the national Health System in 1947, for the 1st time ever all people had access to free GPs, Hospital care, midwives, Dentists, Opticians etc. Prescriptions were free, inoculations were given, the old killers; TB, Polio, etc were virtually eradicated. Infant mortality rates dropped, life expectance rose and it appeared that the initial spending by the state could be reduced as people were becoming dramatically healthier. All of the above was free at the point of access. The Welfare State was paid for initially by government borrowing and National Insurance contributions. One of the remarkable things about the Welfare State is that is saw the origins of Consensus Politics. Consensus Politics can be defined as the phrase used to describe the practice of government in Britain between 1945 and 1979. The phenomenon was observed by political scientists and media commentators; Britains two major political parties, the Conservative Party and Labour Party, were in agreement, or consensus, over certain basic government policies in the decades after World War II. The introduction of fundamental changes in government responsibility, such as the welfare state, the national health service (NHS), and widespread nationalization of industry, were effectively unchallenged by either party. Essentially this means that regardless of who was in power from 1945 to the mid 1970s both parties agreed to the broad principles of the Welfare State, Interventionism and State Control of Industry. Governments strived to be philanthropic in their nature, to support people, to enable people to realise their potential. Britain strived to become more meritocratic in nature. No longer would it be the case that people were given jobs due to their family, with a free education system according to, age, aptitude and ability theoretically anyone could rise from the lowest social class to the top jobs in society, John Prescott being a relatively good example of where this has been the case. What led to the end of consensus politics is a matter of debate. James Callaghans Great Debate Speech at Ruskin College Oxford is cited as a turning point. Essentially he asked the questions: what has the Welfare state achieved thus far and, more importantly, what is the future? Here both main parties went their separate ways. Thatcher was elected in 1979 and with her came politics of the market and the New Right. During the 1980 Labour wet left on the political spectrum Thatcher sold off the Industrialised industries, she also introduced the broad principles of the market into the various parts of the Welfare State. This policy is know as markedization. Essentially the five major components of the Welfare State were re-orientated in way to create a more flexible workforce, and a way where the principles of the market were the most important. The important policies that were introduced during this time were: Education: The Educational Reform Act 1988 introduced OFSTED, League tables, GM schools, competition between schools. Passing exams became more important that gaining an education. Health: Ken Clarkes mainly effective reforms. Health authorities were now purchasers buying broad block contracts from hospitals. Regional authorities took strategic decisions. Costs became more transparent; the one error was allowing competition on price. To ginger up the market, keen GPs held their own budgets to buy faster services for their patients, creating an unfair two-tier system. But this was a purely internal market with no private involvement and all cash staying in the NHS. The Guardian 7th October 2005 Housing: Council homes were sold off by Thatcher at greatly reduced rates, thus creating a need for more social housing and also a raft of new middle class propertied people who now may well vote Conservative. At its simplest, if the Welfare State were a safety net suspended beneath society to help people bounce back into work, affluence etc, the safety net was lowered, people would have to look after themselves again. The days of Big Interventionist Government were over as epitomised by Thatchers quote in 1987: I think weve been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, its the governments job to cope with it. I have a problem, Ill get a grant. Im homeless, the government must house me. Theyre casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. Its our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. Theres no such thing as entitlement, unless some one has first met an obligation. The New right dominated through to 1997. Blaire was elected on May 2nd 1997, at the celebration party they played d-ream things can only get better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHXA5GykEbw it appeared to be the start of a brave new era, underpinned by Giddens Third Way, neither left wing or right wing politics but a realistic and pragmatic combination of both and a smattering of blue skies thinking the challenging of paradigms. Thirteen years later, subsequent elections, wars in Iraq, sleaze and MPs and it would appear that there was very little difference between Thatcher, Major, Blaire or Brown. All we have seen is the consensus politics after WWII replaced with neo-consensus politics that is to the right of the political spectrum. At the very least politicians campaign in poetry and govern in prose, to be frank they are at least disingenuous, at worse they are mere puppets. The Marxist model of power advocates that power resides in the hands of the bourgeoisie, Britain is not a meritocracy of a democracy, and such notions are illusions perpetuated by the bourgeoisie to perpetuate false class consciousness. All the welfare state actually achieves is a proletariat who are educated, housed and healthy enough to be exploited by the bourgeoisie in the capitalist means of production. Politicians merely manage the affairs of the bourgeoisie. All legislation that has ever been passes is initially in the interests of the bourgeoisie. The welfare state for example is not some altruistic gift from government it is actually paid for by the proletariat. If one were to consider the works of Althusser, Illich, Bowles and Gintis etc, then one might actually conclude that the welfare state is actually against the interests of the Proletariat. To conclude one could look at Britain PLC. Postmodernism would argue that NGOs and TNCs are far more influential that nations particularly small nations like the UK. What politicians do needs to be as a consequence of global factors. Young people today are competing for jobs with people in their own town as well as those from India and China and the skills that they need must reflect this fact. Future social policy will be very similar to legislation passed in other countries. This can be seen with the Health care reforms advocated by Obahma, or the educational policies in operation in Australia, we are becoming similar, globalization is happening, IT is creating a homogenous mass. Biography http://www.manchester2002-uk.com/history/victorian/quarrybankmill.html Sociology in Focus. Haralambos. 7th Edition. 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_Education_Act_1870 Social Insurance and Allied Services. Sir William Beveridge. 1942. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Act_1944 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorbals Victorian Cities by Asia Briggs 1993. http://www.budget.gov.au/2004-05/bp1/image/bst4-1.gif http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/oct/07/publicservices.health Giddens: The Third Way. The Renewal of Social Democracy. 1998

The Unconscious Bias of Intelligence Tests :: Research Papers

The Unconscious Bias of Intelligence Tests In the chapter entitled â€Å"The Hereditarian Theory of IQ: An American Invention† in The Mismeasure of Man (New York: Norton, 1996), Stephen Jay Gould analyzes the reasoning behind intelligence tests. Gould begins the chapter by stating how Alfred Binet, who studied the measurement of intelligence, began this endeavor in order to institute special education for learning-disabled and other disadvantaged children. Gould continues his analysis by reporting that three of Binet’s followers, H. H. Goddard (who brought Binet’s scale to America), Lewis M. Terman (who developed the Stanford- Binet scale), and Robert M. Yerkes (who persuaded the army to test the intelligence of 1.75 million men in World War I), corrupted Binet’s work and used his tests to measure an element they called â€Å"intelligence,† which ultimately resulted in peoplebeing labeled as either â€Å"intelligent† or â€Å"stupid.† In this chapter, Gould successfully demonstrates that the work of these three men was affected by their unconscious biases and preconceived ideas. According to Gould, Alfred Binet developed his scale for a sensible, effective motive. The original purpose of Binet’s scale was to identify children whose poor performances in school suggested a need for special education. Unlike previous tests, Binet’s scale utilized a variety of distinct activities, such as counting coins and comprehension, which tested a child’s different abilitites: â€Å"Binet decided to assign an age level to each task, defined as the youngest age at which a child of normal intelligence should be able to complete the task successfully† (179). The age parallel with the last task the child could successfully complete was that particular child’s â€Å"mental age.† A child’s level of intelligence was determined by subtracting his/her mental age from his/her true chronological age. Those children whose mental ages were a great deal behind their chronological ages were recommended for special education programs. In 1912, W. Stern suggested instead of subtracting the mental age of a child from his/her chronological age, the mental age should be divided by his/her chronological age, and thus the intelligence quotient (IQ) came into existence. Binet never once labeled IQ as inborn intelligence; he simply used his scale to identify those children who were learning-disabled, in an effort to direct them to places where they would receive special help. H.H. Goddard was the first person to make Binet’s scale popular in America. However, Goddard distorted Binet’s scale and relied on it to identify the allegedly intellectually defective people in the country; he even relied on his preconceived notions to label these individuals â€Å"feeble-minded† and â€Å"morons† from the Greek word meaning foolish. All people whose actions went against moral behavior were designated â€Å"morons.† These people included criminals, alcoholics, and prostitutes. According to Gould, Goddard believed â€Å"morons† should be

Comparison of Wilfred Owen Poems Essay

Wilfred Owen is a twentieth century poetry writer who was born in Oswestry in Shropshire. In 1915 he enlisted fighting on the western front. During a spell in the Craglockhart hospital he met Seigfried Sassoon who encouraged him to develop his poetry. Owens’s poems are amongst the most famous and poignant of the war. He died in1918 trying to cross the Sambre canal. From his work I will analyse and study two poems. The poems which I have chosen are Dulce Et Decorum Est and Disabled. The reason why I decided to analyse these poems is because I felt that they both told a catastrophic and heartbreaking story of what war was really like. Both of these poems were written at a time when Wilfred Owen seemed to be bitter, some may say disenchanted by the whole situation. Arguably his most famous poem, ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’, is a fine example of his narrative, first-person poems, written through his own eyes and based on his own experiences and views of the war. I have chosen to describe Dulce Et because it shows the struggle of a group of people who have to overcome the most extraordinary events day in day out. I have chosen Disabled because it shows the struggle of one man who everyday contemplates his wasted life. All he has are the memories but they seem to become more distant as the days go on. Dulce Et Decorum Est Pro Patri Mori translated in to English means It Is Sweet And Honourable To Die For Ones Country. If someone is reading the poem for the first time and learns of the English meaning of the title before reading the poem they may feel it is a poem that represents the army in a positive way. However this assumption could not be further from the truth. After reading the poem a number of times I have come to a conclusion that Owen has titled this poem Dulce Et Decorum Est because of the strong statement that he makes in the poem. In a way I get the feeling that Owen was mocking the saying but I do not think he was mocking the army as a whole just that single principal. The soldiers are weighed down by all the things that they are carrying, perhaps they are even weighed down by the expectation of their country. Owen says, † Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs† The soldiers are exhausted and so tired that even when the flares go off behind them they do not have the energy to or even feel like turning around to see them. Owen describes the soldiers as being â€Å"Drunk with fatigue† He is saying that the soldiers are so tired that it is as though they are drunk. Owen is trying to say that the soldiers are as though they do not know entirely what they are doing. They are just being led along like zombies because they are inexperience and have no clue to what is happening. These men are but mere shadows of the bright vibrant people that started on this epic journey. The pace of the poem quickens in the second stanza. The soldiers are awoken by a gas attack. This effectively shatters the mood that Owen has told of us in the opening stanza. The soldiers are now awoken by the fact that their lives are in extreme danger and they now have to be fully aware of all their surroundings. Owen says, † Dim through the misty panes and thick green light, As under a green sea, I saw him drowning† The green light Owen talks of is the sight of toxic gas which they can see through their gas masks. Owen uses a simile saying that the man is drowning in a green sea. The reality of this is that the man is drowning in a sea of his own toxic blood. He tells us how this memory has stayed with him. The sickening sight of a man plunging at him. Owen seems to have a great fear of the gas attacks when he talks about them. He talks of all of the nightmares he has had because of the war and this event in particular He states, â€Å"In all my dreams before my helpless sight† The word ‘helpless’ shows that he could not do nothing to help that man apart from stare at him and feel sorry for him. He describes how the man was taken away and the narrator Owen walked behind and saw his face. Owen is still haunted by the nightmare. â€Å"We flung him in† The dead bodies are treated like meat there are so many deaths it becomes like a routine thing. He realises the horror that is standing behind the man who has been gassed to death. â€Å"My friend, you would not tell with such high zest To children ardent for some desperate glory.† Owen is saying that if you could see the horrific events he had seen then you would not believe the lie. By saying this he is expressing the bitterness he has not only for the army but the situation as a whole. He believes that the army has portrayed the life of a soldier at war as being heroic and exciting but in real life it is the complete opposite. Owen adds more examples of this throughout the last stanza for example he says, â€Å"If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood Come gargling from the froth coming-corrupted lungs,† In this quote he describes the situation that the men where in and how their lungs were pumping out blood instead of air. Owen is trying to make the reader understand that the war was told to be very fascinating and an intriguing experience but in reality that is far from the truth. Owens main question to the reader in the last stanza is before going into the army think carefully about what you are doing as you might experience something in great contrast to what you may have imagined. The poem is describing a terrible shocking death by gas, how can it be sweet and honourable to die for ones country if you die like this. This is the country that sold him the old lie. â€Å"Dulce et decorum Est pro patri mori.† In the poem ‘Disabled’ Owen is describing someone that he knew in the army. This man was in the Scottish regiment, He has had his leg blown up when he was fighting in the war. His disability is extremely severe, because he has no legs and his arms are sewn at the elbow. He has to be dependant on other people to feed him, clothe him and wash him. He is in an institute, a nursing home of some sort. He wants very much to be in the dark because then everything will be quiet. He is sick and tired with life and is waiting to die. He hears voices of boys singing, these are voices of people playing just as he had once played. He talks about the evenings. He says that at this time the towns atmosphere was fun and happy everyone is dancing having fun. He is very sad that he will never again experience this. He says the girls look upon him like he has some kind of disease. He talks of how he will never again feel the waist of a woman, he also talks about how he, â€Å"threw away his knees in the war†. This quote is a metaphor and it means that his leg got blown up during the war and it does not mean that he literally threw his knees in the war. This type of literary device is used so that the poet could compare one object with another directly instead of using like and as. In the third verse Owen describes the effects after war and how your appearance could change drastically. He says, â€Å"For it was younger than his youth, last year. Now, he is old; his back will never brace.† Owen is trying to show that this person went to the war very young and now as he has came back he is so old that he can not even support his own back. Owen is showing the truth about war and that you do not become heroes when you come back from war instead you become unpopular and hated by people. His negative opinion about war becomes even more apparent when he mentions the blood lost by many soldiers during war. â€Å"He’s lost his colour very far from here, Poured down shell-holes till the veins ran dry.† Owen portrays the war in a pessimistic way and tries to influence people to listen to what he is saying and that war is horrible because it could ruin many people’s lives He feels that he has given so much for his country and he does not get anything back in return instead many people do not even want to know him. â€Å"And leap of purple spurted from his thigh.† He loved his youth. When his leg had blown away a massive part of him was now missing. One time he saw blood down his leg from a football injury, he thought this was great. Now he has no leg. He wonders why he joined the army. He tries to impress people as they told him he would do well in the army. There were a couple of reasons why he signed up the first reason was that his dear Meg would be pleased of him and the second reason was that in those days men thought that if they went to fight in a war the ladies back home would find them more attractive and think of them as heroes. At the time he was not frightened of being afraid. Owen says â€Å"And no fears of fear have come yet† He had thoughts of all the swords and other weaponry that he would receive in the army. He felt very happy in handling all the sophisticated machinery. He had great thoughts of wearing the smart uniform and making those proud salutes. At this moment he had no worries about the war and what he would face but instead he imagines all the enjoyable aspects of war. This quote shows that the war in those days was portrayed as exciting and pleasurable and that no one was told about the injuries that happen during war. So I think this is why the person in this poem had no worries because he did not know the disastrous affects that could scare him for life. He thought that playing football was great, the buzz he got from the cheering. People thought of him as hero. He thought that people would cheer for him in the army, he wanted to be a hero in the army. He thinks of the army spirit, the pride in his unit. He tells about how he was given cheers and the noise of the drums as he leaves. He is so very optimistic. When he is brought back the cheers were not like the ones before the cheers are in contrast to what he imagined. This is ironic to him because he thought everyone will be proud of him and greet him with honour but it was the opposite of what he had expected. Only a few people cheered when he came back only one man inquired this man was the priest. This makes him feel in a way betrayed because he was told that you would become a hero after the war and that your family and friends will be proud and thrilled that you fought for your country. As you can see this is not true and many people ignore him because of his appearance. The man feels that what he has done has been of no use because nobody appreciates that he risked his life for the sake of his country. His final thought in the poem is one of total depression. He thinks that life is pointless. He is so helpless he can not go to bed without someone there to help him. He feels as though he only has a few years left. He wants to be put to death as he feels like he has and can do nothing that he feels will make his life tolerable and he feels as though nothing that he does or feels will make him feel his life is worth it. He feels as if he has been demoralised and disheartened by the people that he used to once know. As you can see from both poems they are very powerful. Each of the two poems make a statement. One difference between the poems is that Dulce Est. is a view on the army as a whole and describes the effects of the soldiers. With Disabled it is just a description of the turmoil of one person. One issue that I feel both poems, have in common is that they both talk about how the soldiers were lied to and how they were sold a lie. This is more true of Dulce Et because it shows that all the soldiers where told the lie but with Disabled it just shows that one man was told the lie. Because of this lie many soldiers were affected in Dulce Et and only one person from Disabled was affected by it. If a person wanted an example of army life was like for a platoon at its worst I would show them Dulce Et Decorum. If I was asked about a poem that describes a poem where a person can see how the war affected people. I would recommend the poem Disabled because as you can see, it has devastating after effects. Disabled is in my opinion the most emotional of the stories as it represents a mans struggle for his life. This man can offer nothing to his country now. He can not even offer himself something. His life is in total disarray and nothing in his life is worth living for. While the people in Dulce Et are still alive this mans souls has in effect died. He has lost his colour and can not get used to the fact of being unpopular. I find Dulce Et Decorum to be the most powerful of the two poems. My reasons are as follows, although Disabled is a very good, very powerful poem in it’s own right it only describes the view of one person in the army. I think that what makes Dulce Et so powerful is that Owen speaks for the masses in the army when he talks of the daily horrifying sights and regular attempts by the Germans to gas them. This poem realistically showed the horrifying events which occurred during war. Reading these poems can enlighten a person. At the moment many people around the world must be thinking that their lives are so stressful and are under extreme pressure. But their life is no way as stressful and pressurising as these young men must have gone through. These events can put many social problems into perspective. Everyday this man had to battle through endless pain and suffering in sake of their nation but is it worth it? Is risking your life worth it for your country? I believe that war should never be the solution to any problem and that many people should discourage war instead of encouraging it.

Major General John B. Gordon, American Civil War

The son of a prominent minister in Upson County, GA, John Brown Gordon was born February 6, 1832. At a young age, he moved with his family to Walker County where his father had purchased a coal mine. Educated locally, he later attended the University of Georgia. Though a strong student, Gordon inexplicably left school before graduating. Moving to Atlanta, he read law and entered the bar in 1854. While in the city, he married Rebecca Haralson, daughter of Congressman Hugh A. Haralson. Unable to attract clients in Atlanta, Gordon moved north to oversee his fathers mining interests. He was in this position when the Civil War began in April 1861. Early Career A supporter of the Confederate cause, Gordon quickly raised a company of mountaineers known as the Raccoon Roughs. In May 1861, this company was incorporated into the 6th Alabama Infantry Regiment with Gordon as its captain. Though lacking any formal military training, Gordon was promoted to major a short time later. Initially sent to Corinth, MS, the regiment was later ordered to Virginia. While on the field for the First Battle of Bull Run that July, it saw little action. Showing himself to be an able officer, Gordon was given command of the regiment in April 1862 and promoted to colonel. This coincided with a shift south to oppose Major General George B. McClellans Peninsula Campaign. The following month, he ably led the regiment during the Battle of Seven Pines outside Richmond, VA. In late June, Gordon returned to combat as General Robert E. Lee began the Seven Days Battles. Striking at Union forces, Gordon quickly established a reputation for fearlessness in battle. On July 1, a Union bullet wounded him in the head during the Battle of Malvern Hill. Recovering, he rejoined the army in time for the Maryland Campaign that September. Serving in Brigadier General Robert Rodes brigade, Gordon aided in holding a key sunken road (Bloody Lane) during the Battle of Antietam on September 17. In the course of the fighting, he was wounded five times. Finally brought down by a bullet that passed through his left cheek and out his jaw, he collapsed with his face in his cap. Gordon later related that he would have drowned in his own blood had there not been a bullet hole in his hat. A Rising Star For his performance, Gordon was promoted to brigadier general in November 1862 and, following his recovery, given command of a brigade in Major General Jubal Earlys division in Lieutenant General Thomas Stonewall Jacksons Second Corps. In this role, he saw action near Fredericksburg and Salem Church during the Battle of Chancellorsville in May 1863. With Jacksons death following the Confederate victory, command of his corps passed to Lieutenant General Richard Ewell. Spearheading Lees subsequent advance north into Pennsylvania, Gordons brigade reached the Susquehanna River at Wrightsville on June 28. Here they were prevented from crossing the river by Pennsylvania militia which burned the towns railroad bridge. Gordons advance to Wrightsville marked the easternmost penetration of Pennsylvania during the campaign. With his army strung out, Lee ordered his men to concentrate at Cashtown, PA. As this movement was in progress, fighting began at Gettysburg between troops led by Lieutenant General A.P. Hill and Union cavalry under Brigadier General John Buford. As the battle grew in size, Gordon, and the rest of Earlys Division approached Gettysburg from the north. Deploying for battle on July 1, his brigade attacked and routed Brigadier General Francis Barlows division on Blochers Knoll. The next day, Gordons brigade supported an attack against the Union position on East Cemetery Hill but did not take part in the fighting. The Overland Campaign Following the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg, Gordons brigade retired south with the army. That fall, he participated in the inconclusive Bristoe and Mine Run Campaigns. With the beginning of Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grants Overland Campaign in May 1864, Gordons brigade took part in the Battle of the Wilderness. In the course of the fighting, his men pushed the enemy back at Saunders Field as well as launched a successful attack on the Union right. Recognizing Gordons skill, Lee elevated him to lead Earlys division as part of a larger reorganization of the army. Fighting recommenced a few days later at the Battle of Spotsylvania Court House. On May 12, Union forces launched a massive assault on the Mule Shoe Salient. With Union forces overwhelming the Confederate defenders, Gordon rushed his men forward in an attempt to restore the situation and stabilize the lines. As the battle raged, he ordered Lee to the rear as the iconic Confederate leader attempted to personally lead an attack forward. For his efforts, Gordon was promoted to major general on May 14. As Union forces continued to push south, Gordon led his men at the Battle of Cold Harbor in early June. After inflicting a bloody defeat on the Union troops, Lee instructed Early, now leading the Second Corps, to take his men to the Shenandoah Valley in an effort to draw off some Union forces. Marching with Early, Gordon took part the advance down the Valley and the victory at the Battle of Monocacy in Maryland. After menacing Washington, DC and forcing Grant to detach forces to counter his operations, Early withdrew to the Valley where he won the Second Battle of Kernstown in late July. Tired of Earlys depredations, Grant sent Major General Philip Sheridan to the Valley with a large force. Attacking up (south) the Valley, Sheridan clashed with Early and Gordon at Winchester on September 19 and soundly defeated the Confederates. Retreating south, the Confederates were defeated again two days later at Fishers Hill. Attempting to recover the situation, Early and Gordon launched a surprise attack on Union forces at Cedar Creek on October 19. Despite initial success, they were badly defeated when Union forces rallied. Rejoining Lee at the Siege of Petersburg, Gordon was placed in command of the remnants of the Second Corps in December 20. Final Actions As the winter progressed, the Confederate position at Petersburg became desperate as Union strength continued to grow. Needing to force Grant to contract his lines and wanting to disrupt a potential Union assault, Lee asked Gordon to plan an attack on the enemys position. Staging from Colquitts Salient, Gordon intended to assault Fort Stedman with the goal of driving east towards the Union supply base at City Point. Moving forward at 4:15 AM on March 25, 1865, his troops were able to quickly take the fort and open a 1,000-foot breach in the Union lines. Despite this initial success, Union reinforcements quickly sealed the breach and by 7:30 AM Gordons attack had been contained. Counterattacking, Union troops forced Gordon to fall back to the Confederate lines. With the Confederate defeat at Five Forks on April 1, Lees position at Petersburg became untenable. Coming under attack from Grant on April 2, Confederate troops began retreating west with Gordons corps acting as a rearguard. On April 6, Gordons corps was part of a Confederate force that was defeated at the Battle of Saylers Creek. Retreating further, his men ultimately arrived at Appomattox. On the morning of April 9, Lee, hoping to reach Lynchburg, asked Gordon to clear Union forces from their line of advance. Attacking, Gordons men pushed back the first Union troops they encountered but were halted by the arrival of two enemy corps. With his men outnumbered and spent, he requested reinforcements from Lee. Lacking additional men, Lee concluded that he had no choice but to surrender. The afternoon, he met with Grant and surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia. Later Life Returning to Georgia after the war, Gordon unsuccessfully campaigned for governor in 1868 on a staunch anti-Reconstruction platform. Defeated, he achieved public office in 1872 when he was elected to the US Senate. Over the next fifteen years, Gordon served two stints in the Senate as well as a term as Governor of Georgia. In 1890, he became the first Commander-in-Chief of the United Confederate Veterans and later published his memoirs, Reminiscences of the Civil War in 1903. Gordon died at Miami, FL on January 9, 1904, and was buried at Oakland Cemetery in Atlanta. Selected Sources Civil War: John B. GordonNew Georgia Encyclopedia: John B. GordonCivil War Trust: John B. Gordon