What goals did the civil war accomplish and how? What goals did it fail to accomplish and why?

There were numerous goals during the American Civil War. The Union's first goal was to bring the Confederacy back into the Union. It would ultimately accomplish this through Winfield Scott's "Anaconda Plan," which involved cutting the South off from outside help and defeating its armies in the field. After four long years of war and over six hundred thousand dead on both sides, the Union achieved its goal. A secondary goal of the Union was to end slavery, but this did not become a goal until late in the war and was not finalized until the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment, which was passed after the Lincoln assassination.
The South did not achieve its goal of independence. The South did not have enough soldiers, money, or an industrial base to compete with the North long-term. While the South attempted to win a war of attrition, it failed to gain the international help it needed to finally pull away from the North.

How does Austen portray regency attitudes towards men?

The portrayal of men in Pride and Prejudice is suitably complex. On the face of it, men in Regency England were completely dominant. Married women had virtually no civil rights as we would recognize them today. The wife was legally under the complete control of her husband, and whatever property she owned passed directly to him upon their marriage.
Yet Jane Austen presents a more subtle picture of the role of men in Regency England. The famous opening line of Pride and Prejudice gives us an inkling of this immediately:

“It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife. However little known the feelings or views of such a man may be on his first entering a neighbourhood, this truth is so well fixed in the minds of the surrounding families that he is considered as the rightful property of some one or other of their daughters.”

Austen is completely overturning the established understanding of gender roles. It is the husband who is the "rightful property" of his prospective wife. The marriage market of the time was one in which both men and women were considered as commodities, items of property to be bought and sold. And in relation to men, it's not enough that they be handsome, dashing, loving or kind; they must be in possession of a fortune.
It's interesting that a number of male characters in the story have a rather romantic ideal of love, going against the established norms to form attachments to socially-inferior women. The central relationship, that between Elizabeth and Darcy, is an illustration of this. In this sense, the female characters have a certain advantage over the men, being more clear-eyed and less naive about the harsh realities of the Regency marriage market.
 

What was the main point of Booker T. Washington's argument in his 1895 Atlanta Compromise Speech?

Washington's main point is summarized in the following passage from his speech:

The wisest among my race understand that the agitation of questions of social equality is the extremest folly, and that progress in the enjoyment of all the privileges that will come to us must be the result of severe and constant struggle rather than of artificial forcing. No race that has anything to contribute to the markets of the world is long in any degree ostracized.

This speech was a call, amid the rise of Jim Crow in the late nineteenth century, for African Americans to focus on material progress—that is, economic success. Washington saw that most African Americans lived in extreme poverty and thought that this was a more urgent concern than the state of legal and social inequality that was increasingly being forced upon them. This speech is sometimes called the "Atlanta Compromise" because Washington, as one of the most recognizable and influential black men in the United States, was urging African Americans in the south to cease "agitation" for legal and social equality in return for the opportunity to gain economic success. In other words, he was asking white business owners to invest in the black community by hiring black men for skilled jobs. He thought that social equality rested on economic equality and that both whites and blacks could flourish under a system of segregation. To illustrate this point, he famously said that the races could remain socially as "separate as the fingers" while economically being part of the same hand, working toward mutual success. The speech was given at the Atlanta Exposition, in front of a predominately white audience. Many of his critics, including most famously W.E.B. DuBois, claimed that his position amounted to selling out, and that his faith that black people could attain social equality through the marketplace, as it were, was naive. They observed that, far from embracing black efforts at self-improvement, whites viewed successful African American men as threatening. Washington's approach, often called "accommodation," nevertheless represented a major strain of African American political thinking near the turn of the century, during some of the darkest days of white supremacy in the "New South."

The purpose of the speech was to convince black people to pursue vocational training, content themselves with segregation, and, in encouraging the former values, placate whites—particularly the philanthropists on whom Washington depended.
Washington had no interest in liberal arts education for African Americans. This put him at odds with educators and intellectuals, particularly W.E.B DuBois who would succeed Washington as a leader of the black community. In the speech, which was delivered at the Cotton States and International Exposition in Atlanta, Washington implored black people to remain in the South—"cast down your buckets where you are"—and to seek work in a new economy that would require workers who were trained in agriculture, as well as in certain new technical skills. However, segregation would make it difficult for them to be hired and, if they were hired, would make it difficult for them to make a decent wage.
He placated whites with his avowal of segregation, arguing that in all things "social" blacks and whites could be as separate as the fingers of a hand. In saying this, Washington acknowledged an interdependency between the races, but insisted that a distinction that should be maintained.
Arguably, Washington's talk of compromise was somewhat self-serving. He had founded the Tuskegee Institute, an agricultural and technical college in Alabama intended to educate young black men in vocational fields. The school owed its existence and its expansion to the white philanthropists who funded it. Washington's accomodationist rhetoric afforded him a prestige and access to resources that other black people, even other leaders, did not have. He was the first black person, for example, who was invited to dine at the White House, during Theodore Roosevelt's presidency.

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 7, 7.3-2, Section 7.3-2, Problem 42

Differentiate $\displaystyle y = e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}}$


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

y' =& \frac{d}{dx} (e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}})
\\
\\
y' =& e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}} \frac{d}{dx} (k \tan \sqrt{x})
\\
\\
y' =& e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}} \left[ k \frac{d}{dx} (\tan \sqrt{x}) + (\tan \sqrt{x}) \frac{d}{dx} (k) \right]
\\
\\
y' =& e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}} \left[ k \sec^2 \sqrt{x} \frac{d}{dx} (x)^{\frac{1}{2}} + 0 \right]
\\
\\
y' =& e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}} k \sec^2 \sqrt{x} \cdot \frac{1}{2^{\frac{1}{2}}}
\\
\\
y' =& \frac{e^{k \tan \sqrt{x}} k \sec^2 \sqrt{x} }{2 \sqrt{x}}



\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$

What is a detailed analysis of Walter Scott's poem "Soldier, Rest! Thy Warfare O’er" in terms of language, structure, imagery, themes, and symbols?

Language
Soldier, Rest! Thy Warfare O'er comes from the First Canto of Sir Walter Scott's poem The Lady of the Lake (which comprises six cantos). The Lady of the Lake tells the story of Ellen Douglas, who is desired by three men (Roderick Dhu, Malcolm Graeme, and James Fitz-James), the conflict between the lowland and highland Scottish clans, as well as the conflict between the king (James Fitz-James) and the Douglas clan. Roderick Dhu leads the Highland clans against James Fitz-James, the king of Scotland. Meanwhile, Ellen Douglas is the lady of the lake (Loch Katrine in the Scottish Highlands). 
The poem Soldier, Rest! Thy Warfare O'er is actually a song sung by Ellen to James Fitz-James while he recovers from his hunt. It uses language that evokes the historical conflict between highland Scottish clans and King James V ("war-steed champing"), where war-horses chew on their bits in their eagerness to participate in battle. The Scottish "trump" or Jew's Harp is mentioned here, as well as the "pibroch," Scottish bagpipes commonly used to summon the clans as well as to lament the death of noted individuals. The tone of the poem is soothing and encouraging. Warriors are told to retire from the din of battle and to calm their spirits with rest and slumber.
Structure
The rhyme scheme of the poem is basically ABAB (or alternate rhyme) with the last four lines of every stanza a variant or modification of the initial ABAB rhyme of the first four lines. Soldier, Rest! is a narrative poem. It is also basically written in trochaic tetrameter. Trochaic refers to the accented/unaccented poetic feet in each line, and tetrameter tells us that there are four feet per line.
Soldier,/ rest! thy/ warfare/ o’er,/   Sleep the/ sleep that/ knows not/ breaking;/Dream of/ battled/ fields no/ more,/   Days of/ danger,/ nights of/ waking./
In our/ isle’s en/chanted/ hall,   Hands un/seen thy/ couch are/ strewing,/Fairy/ strains of/ music/ fall,/   Every /sense in /slumber/ dewing./
Scott uses caesura (a rhythmical pause in a line of poetry) to emphasize the call to tranquil rest: the words "Soldier, rest!" "Huntsman, rest!" and "Sleep!" are repeated in Stanzas 1 and 3, punctuating pauses in several lines. He also uses enjambment to create a sense of the sustained tumult of battlefield conflict.

Trump nor pibroch summon here   Mustering clan or squadron tramping.Yet the lark’s shrill fife may come   At the daybreak from the fallow,

Imagery
There is fantastic visual and sound imagery in the poem. Scott definitely provides clear images of warfare in Stanza Two. We can hear the din of war-horses galloping, the shouts of clansmen, and the clanking of armor.
No rude sound shall reach thine ear,   Armour’s clang, or war-steed champing,Trump nor pibroch summon here   Mustering clan or squadron tramping.
Guards nor warders challenge here,Here’s no war-steed’s neigh and champing,Shouting clans or squadrons stamping.
In her song, Ellen bids her guest to rest from the tumult and chaos of war ("Sleep the sleep that knows not breaking; Dream of battled fields no more, Days of danger, nights of waking"). She reminds him that at dawn in the Highlands, there are no shrill bugles to "sound reveille" or to summon one to war.
Themes
The theme of the poem is rest or repose from battlefield conflict. In the poem, Ellen bids James Fitz-James to retire from battle and the hunt. Although James is on a stag-hunt in Canto One, Scott may also be implying that James Fitz-James (also James V, the king of Scotland) should cease his enmity against the Highland clans.
Symbols
In the poem, the bugle, pibroch, and trump are instruments that summon soldiers to battle. Certainly, these musical instruments are not used for leisure. They are a jarring contrast to the "fairy strains of music" that are produced by the natural surroundings of Lake Katrine. 
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/purdue_owl.html

Between the end of the Korean War and the escalation of the Vietnam War in 1965, the concept of an "American dream" seemed to have its strongest hold on the American population. How did the protest movements of the mid to late 1960s and early 1970s confirm or transform this vision of the "pursuit of happiness" in the USA? (500 words response)

Between the end of the Korean War and the mid-1960s, happiness was equated with material prosperity. A generation scarred by a devastating depression craved consumer goods. Newfound prosperity led to a buying binge. People bought houses, cars, furniture, clothing, stereos, televisions, and hula hoops. Having experienced a war, Americans also wanted a strong military to keep their prosperity secure. Fears of communism grew, as people worried it would expand across the globe.
In the mid-1960s, this emphasis on the pursuit of happiness as found primarily in consumption and materialism began to be challenged. A new generation came of age which did not remember the Depression or world war. Having grown up with material plenty, they saw that consumer goods alone did not buy happiness, but often left people feeling empty. As Viet Nam escalated, young people threatened with being sent to the front lines began to question the assumption that the US needed to save the entire world from communism. Many began to look inward or to community with like-minded people or to drugs, or to alternative ideologies from Hinduism to Taoism to Maoism, to find a fuller happiness. They began to more profoundly question sexism, racism, and other hierarchies. Instead of embracing the latest Madison Avenue fashions, they wore old, bleach stained clothes and went barefoot, seeking a different kind of bliss.
Since the social upheaval of the 1960s, the American notion of the pursuit of happiness has expanded beyond owning material goods to encompass internal well-being. Today most Americans take for granted that inner peace and inner growth should be part of the good life. We see this manifested in the many self-help books and videos that advise on inner growth, the explosion of interest in yoga, and the concern to live a mindful and balanced life. Many believe they should not have to live in "quiet desperation" to earn a living and obtain material goods.

The 1960’s were times of relative prosperity for Americans, as well as a time when more citizens looked to the federal government for leadership and assistance in civil and economic matters. An increased sense of unity also emerged among Americans, in great part due to the country’s growing connection through television. These factors combined to bring public protesting front and center as the method of gaining influence for various causes.  While the “American dream” of the roaring 1920s was all about gaining individual wealth, during the 1960s it was more often related to happiness, equality, peace and the prosperity of America as a whole.
The multiple protests, speeches, and demonstrations for the civil rights movement lead to Congress passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 under President Johnson, putting an end to legal public segregation and discrimination based on race. Women’s rights and gay rights protests also vied to reduce discrimination and gain improved ways of life.
From the mid 1960s through the early 1970s, anti-Vietnam War protests were staged all around the country, especially at universities.  Protesters argued that the war was a civil dispute between North and South Vietnam, and not truly a matter of protecting the U.S. from a communist threat, as our government claimed. Americans were becoming increasingly disillusioned with our government’s honesty and effectiveness. In a sense, the “American dream” was more about unity—being able to trust and rely on our government—and definitely less about gaining individual wealth. Certainly Americans had become more insistent on being informed about U.S. foreign policy, rather than simply trusting the government’s word.
Further reinforcing the notion that the pursuit of happiness had transcended beyond the individual, protesters went to bat for the environment during this time. Their movement was primarily kicked off by Rachel Carson’s sadly prophetic book, Silent Spring, which vividly predicted the downfall of our natural and agricultural world if we continued to abuse the environment as we were.  Many demonstrations took place at universities and other public forums around the country. The effectiveness of citizens’ protests was evident in the passing of the National Environmental Act of 1970, the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency, and a multitude of laws that followed.
With the bulk of these protests staged on national television, all of America was affected on some level by the transforming vision of what Americans valued most in their pursuit of happiness and their quest to attain the new American dream—peace, equality, representation, and a healthy world to live in.
http://www.lessonsite.com/archivepages/historyoftheworld/lesson31/protests60s.htm

https://www.gilderlehrman.org/user?destination=node/78845

Which character(s) have a fixed mindset?

The Crystal Merchant undoubtedly has a fixed mindset. Because of this, he doesn't realize that it's not enough to have dreams; you have to be prepared to take action to make those dreams come true. The Crystal Merchant is a Muslim and yet has never been on the Haj to Mecca. Yet, Santiago sold his sheep and quit his job as a shepherd to follow his Personal Legend.
As the Crystal Merchant's mindset is so resistant to change, he remains stuck in his ways, unable to make any improvements to his life or business. He doesn't seem to understand why his business is failing, yet he only has to look in the mirror to see the problem. It takes Santiago to suggest they build an outdoor display to attract more customers. The Merchant eventually relents and Santiago's idea pays off.
The Crystal Merchant doesn't understand—as Santiago does—that the present moment is the only field of possibility: the past is over, and the future has yet to happen. His trouble is that he doesn't embrace the present and instead allows himself to be defined by his past and a desired future that he has no intention of fulfilling. He wants to have something to look forward to in life. Ironically, this attitude guarantees that he will never have anything real to look forward to.
The Merchant's fixed mindset is largely a product of fear. Fear holds us back and stops us from taking risks. The Merchant won't go to Mecca, nor will he do anything to improve business unless prompted by Santiago. But in order to achieve our Personal Legend it is necessary to realize that the fear of suffering is always worse than the suffering itself. And that requires a mindset a good deal more open and flexible than the Crystal Merchant's.