My Poetry Essays - , Term Papers, Research Papers

My Poetry I heard from a friend today and she said you were in town suddenly the memories came back to me in my mind how can i be strong i've asked myself time and time i've said that i'll never fall in love with you again A wounded heart you gave and my soul you took away good intentions you had many i know you did I've come to close to happieness than to have it swept away I never want to return never fall agan Poetry Essays

Civil War Medicine essays

Civil War Medicine essays There were many medical advances made during the American Civil War. When the Civil War began in April 1861, medicine was approaching what Surgeon General William Hammond called "the end of the medical Middle Ages." American physicians had little knowledge of the cause and prevention of disease and infection. (Maher, pg. 1) The Army Medical Department, which was responsible for the care of the sick and wounded in the North, was unprepared. The staff of 90 doctors was experienced in dealing with the health problems of small military outposts, but had no idea of how to deal with large scale medical and logistical problems. Unfortunately, the war occurred just a few years before Louis Pasteur discovered the role of germs in infection; doctors dug bullet fragments out with unwashed fingers and operated with bloody instruments for lack of clean water (Thomas, pg92). A surgeon recalled: "We operated in old blood-stained and often pus-stained coats, we used undisinfected instruments from undisinfected plush lined cases. If a sponge (if they had sponges) or instrument fell on the floor it was washed and squeezed in a basin of water and used as if it was clean." Civil War surgeons actually thought pus in a wound was good (Maher, pg. 48). Early in the war it became obvious that disease would be the greatest killer. Two soldiers died of disease (dysentery, diarrhea, typhoid, and malaria) for every one killed in battle. Soldiers from small rural areas suffered from childhood diseases such as measles and mumps because they lacked immunity. Outbreaks of these diseases were caused by overcrowded and unsanitary conditions in the field. To remedy this, the U.S. government created the U.S. Sanitary Commission in June 1861. The commission was directed by Frederick Law Olmstead. Preaching the virtues of clean water, good food, and fresh air, the commission pressured the Army Medical Department to improve sanitation, build large wel...

Rhetorical Devices Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Rhetorical Devices - Essay Example Soliloquy is used as the best way to give insight into the character of the narrator because he or she would not lie to himself when he talks to himself. In Act I, scene 3 lines 149-197, Othello basically portrayed himself as a great heroic figure beginning from his childhood to his later exploits evident with this line â€Å"the story of my life  From year to year--the battles, sieges, fortunes  That I have passed. I ran it through, even from my boyish daysâ€Å". This narration of Othello’s heroic exploits was necessary to convince the Venetians that he is not a threat to them, particularly the Duke who was about to send him against the Ottoman soldiers. Othello needs to convince the Venetians as well as the Duke because he is considered as an outsider in Venetian society as he looked different from them and to some extent, he was perceived as a sort of witch doctor. So he has to convince them that he will act in their best interest even if he is an outsider. Othello a lso needs to convince the Duke that he did not bewitched Desdemona (daughter of the Duke) and that the only thing he did was charm her with his stories. These stories were then told to the Duke that these are harmless personal exploits of bravery to convince him and the Venetians that he is not a threat. During the process of Othello’s soliloquy, he claimed that Desdemona fell in love with him because of this background as told by his soliloquy. These adventures of his, was a sort of an aphrodisiac that Desdemona loved him because of this. For his part, Othello fell in love with her because of her fascination to his story indicating that Desdemona’s patronage and faithfulness to his self-image is very important to him and probably one of the pre-requisite for him to fall in love with her. Through this rhetorical device of soliloquy also, it is hinted to us the nature of Othello’s character to be somewhat narcissistic or that he loves himself too much but at

Life Span Research Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Life Span Research - Essay Example At certain foreseeable occasions in the developmental process, new and different abilities emerge that have no obvious originations from earlier developmental periods. These developmental plateaus represent a qualitative transformation in maturity. To assist the study of development, developmental tasks are characteristically divided into four primary domains: physical, cognitive, social, and emotional. This discussion first defines these development domains then applies these definitions to those of pre-school and adolescent age. Physical development refers to the growth of the body structure including muscles, bones and organs as well as comprising all motor and sensory development. Motor activity is dependent on muscle strength and coordination. Motor actions such as standing, sitting, and running involve the large muscles whereas speech, vision and the use of hands and fingers engage the smaller muscles of the body. Sensory development includes the five senses, sight, taste, touch, smell and hearing. â€Å"The coordination and integration of perceptual input from these systems are controlled by the central nervous system† (Roditti, 2002, p. 11). Cognitive development describes activities such as thought, memory, reasoning, problem-solving and abstract thinking. The use of language necessitates symbolization and memory and is one of the most difficult of cognitive activities. The term language does not mean the spoken word, however. Speaking is a motor activity. Therefore, language and speech are operated by different areas of the brain. Comprehending and expressing language is a complex cognitive endeavor. Social development includes the child’s interactions with other people and involvement in social groups. The earliest social function is the attachment to mother leading to the â€Å"development of relationships with adults and peers, assumption of social roles, adoption of group values and norms, adoption of a moral system, and

Many of Steinbecks characters are crippled mentally or physically Essay Example for Free

Many of Steinbecks characters are crippled mentally or physically Essay Many of Steinbecks characters are crippled mentally or physically. How far do you agree with this and how far are they made victims of society of the time? Lennie is probably the most obvious character of the book that is mentally crippled. He has brooder slopping shoulders and walks along heavily dragging his feet. Underneath Lennie is a child, he may look like and man but isnt. Like a child Lennie has a fascination of small cuddle, cute things, especially rabbits. I like to pet things with my fingers, sof things. Lennie is also clumsy like a child and on the ranch others see him as a slow worker. George is like a father to Lennie and he looks up to him, and also fully dependant on him. He wont do anything till George says he can, he automatically turns to George in when in any danger, like a child dependant on his mother. Candy is the oldest of the characters and he is physically crippled, as he has lost his right hand as a young boy. He was one of the best workers of the ranch and everyone respected him in his younger days. But he is slowly becoming useless, with only a job of sweeping and has become very lonely with only the companionship of a dog. But soon found friendship in George and Lennie. However this does not stop him from being a nosy character and finds interest in others gossip. Candy loves his dog to pieces, but like candy the dog is getting old and weak, That dog of Candys is so god damn old he cant hardly walk. Candy has had to dog for most of its life, and its the only thing that reminds him of the good days on the ranch. Crooks is the only black man on the ranch and he is crippled physically as he has a bent spine. Considering how hard it was for black men in those days, they were not given any respect at all and were bullied. The people at the ranch were racist towards him. But I cant play cards cause Im black and they say I stink. He is also lonely like Candy and is rejected from the people at the ranch, he has his own cabin and spends most of his time in there on his own. Crooks seems to be a bit sensitive underneath his brave face and takes it all to heart. He trusts no one but himself, because he isnt respected. Though at some times he has a slightly vicious streak, You got no right to come in my room, nobody got any right in here but me. A lot of the people on the ranch take advantage of him because they know they can get away with it. Listen nigger you know what I can do if you dont shut your trap. I think that Crooks knows that people take advantage of him, but he cant fight back. Curlys is the bosses son and he thinks he is a powerfully man. He has a constant eagerness to prove himself. One of his weaknesses is that he doesnt like taller people because they make him feel insecure, threatened and small. Deep down he is a lonely character and is insecure. Curly copies his Dad like Lennie copies George. By taking on the future job of the ranch and has a future not like most of the workers, and wants to become powerful like his Father. Curlys wife plays a small part, though a crucial one. She is the only one of Steinbecks characters that is nameless. In those times it was hard to be a woman and were looked upon as staying at home all day and cooking for the husbands on return. She is a flirt of the ranch, what with being the only woman and the men on the ranch refer to her as a tart. No one really wants to talk to her as they are worried what curly might do if he found out, and this makes her lonely and isolated. Well I think Curleys married a tart. Curlys wife wanted to make something of her life, so she is very disappointed that she hasnt, this can make her feel very viscous. Though still she has the power, like her husband to make people feel small and unimportant, thats why people chose to exclude her on the ranch. She is young and niave and would believe anything she was told. He says he was gonna put me in the movies. Says I was a natural. I think that Steinbeck wrote his characters to be either mentally or physically crippled. He wrote this book to expose all of the racial and sexist prejudice. He succeeded in this by using the right characters and their every day life.

The Euro Scepticism In The Uk Politics Essay

The Euro Scepticism In The Uk Politics Essay United Kingdom, also known as the UK, is a sovereign state consisted of England, Wales, Scotland and Nothern Ireland. The relationships between the UK and the European Union have still been complex. Indeed, UK has benefited from a specific status in the EU. However, a recent poll showed that a majority of British people would agree for leaving the EU. How to explain that scepticism about the European expansion? Firstly, we will talk about the historical place of UK in Europe since the end of World War II. Then, this will lead us to develop the current affairs about the euro-scepticism in the UK. Eventually, we will conclude with the potential consequences of a British exit. Historical part After the end of World War II, the nationalist sentiment was strengthened in the UK. Indeed, the UK was the only state which resisted against Nazism for one year. British people saw the new European Union as a losers coalition. Moreover, a large consensus existed in the country and both, the labor party and the conservative party, agreed about this. Thats why, when the six pioneers (France, Belgium, Italia, Federal Republic of Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands) first asked UK for joining the union in 1950, the labor party which was in power at the time, refused the offer in order to protect its coal and steel industries. During the fifties, encouraged by the USA, UK changed its position and became in favor of a free trade area. However, UK didnt want to a customs union and the agreement fell through. In 1961, at the same time as the Republic of Ireland and Denmark, the conservative Prime Minister Macmillan decided to open some negotiations to enter the European Union. However, France through De Gaulle was opposed to this idea. He vetoed the entry for political reasons such as the American influence over UK for example. So, two applications for membership were turned down in 1963 and 1967. The resignation of De Gaulle in 1969 will mark a fresh start for UK/EU relationships. After two unsuccessful applications for membership, Edward Heath who was Prime Minister took the United Kingdom into the European Community in 1973. The Labor party, led by Harold Wilson, was obviously against that choice and promised to hold a referendum to leave EU if they won the next elections in 1974. In 1975, after the rise to power of the Labor party, a referendum was held. Eventually, British people voted to stay in the European Community. On one hand, the Labor Party became even more interested in Europe when some social issues were raised by European laws. On the other hand, the Conservative Party gradually started turning against the idea of euro-integration, which accelerated with their new leader from 1975, Margaret Thatcher. Margaret Thatcher, who became Prime Minister in 1979, openly expressed her very negative attitude towards the EEC. The period of her service was marked by an increasing political isolation of Britain from Europe. She was ardently against complete economic, political and social integration. She argued that Britain contributed much more to the European budget than the other countries and she thought that something had to be done about it. In response, in 1984 Margaret Thatchers government negotiated a rebate on the British contribution, and thus received some of its money back. The main reason for this was the fact that a great share of the European budget is spent on the Common Agricultural Policy and since farming does not represent a major sector in the UK economy, Britain felt that it benefited much less than other countries. Also, for Margaret Thatcher, Britain was losing its independence and sovereignty by transferring the power of decision-making to Brussels. During the nineties, Margaret Thatcher and her successor John Major lead heavy negotiations about the European expansion. The conservative party feared to lose a part of the British identity and its countrys sovereignty. John Major was often isolated with the European partners during the European negotiations. Moreover, a part of the british population was becoming euro-sceptic and lobbied the government. As a result, the UK by John Major and his conservative government only accepted some parts of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. Indeed, they refused two essential points: the social chapter (which will be signed in 1997 by the Tony Blair and his Labour government), and most of all, single currency. Besides, for example, UK (such as Ireland) has also negotiated opt-outs from the individuals area of free movement called Shengen and continues to operate systematic border controls with other EU members. This is the whole of these particularities which make this so specific status of the UK in the Europe Union. The Current affairs Since the beginning of the year, the euro-scepticism in the UK has returned centre-stage. Indeed, a speech of David Cameron, UKs prime minister, and a recent poll opened the controversy about the UKs position in the European Union again. Although he ruled out the idea of a In/Out referendum in the 14th of January on the famous BBC, David Cameron, the conservative Prime Minister of UK, eventually announced that he wanted to give a simple choice between staying or leaving the EU. So if Cameron wins next election, there will probably be a referendum before 2017. The Euro-sceptics, very numerous in the Conservative Party, welcomed this news as a result of a long campaign for a vote. More accurately, David Cameron wants to renegotiate the agreement with Brussels and the British relationship with EU before giving British citizens the right to choose. Against the criticism which deplored that the referendum doesnt take place now, Cameron said holding such a referendum now would be a false choice because Europe was set to change following the euro-zone crisis and it would be wrong to ask people whether to stay or go before we have had a chance to put the relationship right. The British Prime Minister lived on the edge towards his European partners. Besides, this statement caused a lot of reactions by the European political establishment. French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, warned : You cant do Europe a la carte to take an example which our British friends will understand imagine Europe is a football club and you join, once youre in it you cant say Lets play rugby. His German counterpart pronounced that Germany wanted the UK to remain an active and constructive part of the European Union but cherry picking is not an option before adding that Europe needed more, not less, integration. This Prime Ministers statement occurs while the population is calling into question the influence of the EU. Indeed, a recent poll showed that a majority (50%) of British people would accept the UKs exit from EU. Only 33% are opposed to that idea when 17% prefer to abstain. According to another poll, a majority of British people agree the Camerons decision of referendum. However, some political specialists see the referendum decision as a political move against the UK independence party, which is a euro-sceptic populist political party. This nationalist referendum could discontinue the increasing popularity of the Conservatives adversary. The consequences of such a withdrawal would be dire Exports The European Union is easily Britains biggest single export market, with 53 per cent of goods purchased by European nations in 2011. This sector of British economy, directly and indirectly, supports three million jobs. Norway, Iceland and Switzerland already sell goods through a free-trade agreement. The difference would be that the UK would not be able to set the rules that govern the European single market. It would, of course, have to implement those rules to keep selling into those markets though. The argument sometimes deployed by the euroskepticts is that leaving would, somehow, encourage British manufacturers to concentrate on exporting to the likes of China, Brazil and India. Imports Britain also imports a great deal from other nations in the EU more than it exports, in fact. In 2011, they exported  £159bn of goods to the EU and imported goods worth  £202bn an annual trade deficit of  £42bn. Their European partners argue that the UK needs Europe more than Europe needs them. The problem is that the UK import a lot of European goods, not because they are doing the Europeans a favour, but because people want to buy things that cannot be produced in Britain think of all those German cars and French luxury goods. If Britain decided to leave the EU, the Government might decide to impose large tariffs on European imports, but this probably wouldnt prove very popular. Immigration If Britain left the EU, the Government would not be required to permit the free movement of all citizens of the 27 nations of the union into Britain, nor their right to work here. About EU 165,000 citizens migrated to the UK in the year to September 2011, after 182,000 arrived in the 12 months to September 2010. Immigrants are an economic benefit for Britain, filling holes in the labour market and boosting overall productivity. But the free movement of people is two-way. An estimated 748,010 Britons live or work in the European Union. Many have holiday homes in France and Spain. If Britain decided to restrict inflows of EU citizens to Britain, the European Union would be likely to respond in kind. Banking Britain is fighting a Financial Taxation Tax, which is much of the rest of Europe supports. British bankers, for their part, are generally in favour of staying in the EU. They fear that their access to lucrative European capital markets could be impeded if Britain left the bloc. And both banks and businesses calculate that Britains EU membership is in their interests because the EU can help to open foreign markets such as China up to them more effectively than the UK acting alone. Politics Europe is more social democratic than the UK. They feel Europe is helping to undermine Britains social and economic freedoms. Yet there are global politics to consider, too. The right wants to rely on Britains special relationship with the US, but Washington prefers Britain to work in closer partnership with the EU. Rising Asian giants such as India and China also seem to regard Britains membership of the EU as a good reason to build economic and diplomatic ties with us. Conclusion To sum up, opinion polls show that most Britons are in favour of leaving the European Union. Britain has long had ambivalent feelings towards the European club it joined in 1973. They were sceptical about big projects like the single currency. At a summit of European leaders on December 8th, David Cameron refused to agree to a fiscal compact designed to safeguard the euros future. But opponents argue that a medium-sized power like Britain can only exert international influence through the EU.

“Ethics in Policing” Essay

In The Ethics of Policing, John Kleinig presents a broad discussion of the ethical issues that overwhelmed existing police organization and individual police officers. This debate is set surrounded by others that bring in the reader to basic approaches at present in support among moral philosophers (social contract, neo-Kantian and utilitarian–though thought of the recent efforts to widen virtue-oriented ethical theories is regrettably absent) and to many of the significant questions posed in the swiftly growing subfield of practiced ethics (such as whether professional ethics are constant with or in clash with so-called â€Å"ordinary† ethics). The discussions are consistently even-handed, broad and extraordinarily rich in detail. Kleinig sets out typologies of the kinds of force used by the police as well as variety of dishonesty in which they occasionally engage range of distort exercise, alternative actions for holding police responsible, and the like. He offers wide-ranging debate of the role and history of police codes of ethics, the changes made on the personal lives of police, and the challenges to police management facade by unionization and confirmatory action. In short, this book is much more than a directory of police ethical issues with reference for their solution–it is that, of course, but it is also an beginning to professional ethics in general, a articulate staging of important existing moral theories, a outline of the key legal decisions affecting police work, and a rich representation, both understanding and essential of the police officer’s world. Kleinig concentrates on his topic with a large idea of ethics, one that runs from meticulous problems (such as police judgment and use of force), through common problems (such as the ethics of misleading tactics and the nature of dishonesty), to deliberation of the effects of police work on police officers’ moral fiber (such as the regrettable inclination of police to distrust and hostility), all the way to organizational difficulty (such as those about the arrangement of answerability and the status of whistleblowers). Right through his rich and caring conversation, it seems as if the difficulty of ethical policing is just that of how the police can morally carry out the job they are assigning and putting into effect the laws they are furnished to implement. Kleinig considers that many of the ethical problems facing the police have their cause in (or are at least supported and assisted by) the trend of police to appreciate their own role as that of law enforcers or â€Å"crime-fighters. † This promotes over trust on the use of force, predominantly lethal force and enhances police officers’ sense of hostility from the society they are sworn to serve. Furthermore, this self-image makes police doubtful of, hostile to, and commonly unhelpful with police administrations inspired programs such as â€Å"community policing†Ã¢â‚¬â€œthat aim to redesign the police into a more comprehensible organization. Amusingly, the police self-image as â€Å"crime-fighters† continue in the face of practical studies showing that law enforcement per se, the engaging and catching of criminals, takes up only a small number of police officers’ work time. Much more time is in fact spent by the police doing things like crowd and traffic organizing, dispute resolution, dealing with medical tragedies, and the like. Consider Kleinig’s argument of police dishonesty. Kleinig takes up Lawrence Sherman’s view that allowing police to agree to a free cup of coffee at a diner starts the officer on a slippery slope toward more serious graft because, deliberating he has accepted a free cup of coffee makes it difficult for the officer to stand firm when a bartender who is in action after legal closing hours presents him a drink–and this in turn will make it harder to resist yet more serious attempts to bribe the officer to not enforce the law. Sherman then suggests that the only way to fight corruption is to get rid of the kinds of laws, first and foremost vice laws that provide the strongest lure to corruption of both police and criminals. In opposition to Sherman’s view, Kleinig believe sthat of Michael Feldberg, who argue that police can and do differentiates between minor gratuities and bribes. Kleinig consent. Kleinig takes corruption to be a topic of its motive (to misrepresent the carrying out of justice for personal or organizational gains) relatively than of particular manners. This is a nice difference that allows Kleinig to detach corrupt practices from other ethically problematic practices, such as taking gratuities–of which the free cup of coffee is an example. Quoting Feldberg, Kleinig writes that â€Å"what makes a gift a gratuity is the reason it is given; what makes it corruption is the reason it is taken† (Kleining, 1996, 178). Gratuities are given with the hope that they will encourage the police to frequent the organization that give them, and certainly, the police will often stop at the diner that gives them a free cup of coffee. Thus, Kleinig follows Feldberg in philosophy that recieving coffee is wrong because it will tend to draw police into the coffee-offering business and thus upset the democratic value of even-handed distribution of police protection. Kleinig takes up the question of entrapment by first allowing for the so-called subjective and objective advances to determining when it has occurred. On the subjective approach, entrapment has happened if the government has rooted the intention to commit the crime in the defendant’s mind. So implicit, the defence of entrapment is overcome if the government can show that the defendant already had (at least) the outlook to perform the type of crime of which he is now blamed. On the objective approach, anything the intention or disposition of the real defendant, entrapment has arised if the government’s contribution is of such a character that it would have made a usually law-abiding person to commit a crime. Kleinig condemns the subjective approach by indicating that the behaviour of a government cause that constitutes entrapment would not do so if it had been done by a classified citizen. Thus, the subjective approach fails to clarify why entrapment only relay to actions performed by government means. For this grounds, some turn to the objective approach with its stress on improper government action. However, as Kleinig skilfully shows, this approach experience from the problem of spelling out what the government must do to, so to converse, â€Å"create† a crime. It cannot be that the government agent was the sine qua non of the crime since that would rule out lawful police does not entice operations; nor can it be that the government agent simply made the crime easier since that would rule out even undisruptive acts of providing public information. The objective approach seems based on no more than essentially controversial intuitive judgments about when police action is excessive or objectionable. The reason is that this account is susceptible to the same opposition that Kleinig raised in opposition to the subjective approach–it fails to explain why entrapment only relates to actions carried out by a government agent. Certainly, the problem goes deeper because Kleinig’s account supposes that government action has a particular status. As Kleinig point to, the same actions done by a private citizen would not comprise entrapment. It follows that actions done by a government agent can dirty the evidentiary picture, while the same actions done by a private citizen would not. But, then, we still need to know why entrapment refers only to actions carried out by government agents. To answer this, Kleinig must give more power to the objectivist approach than he does. When it does more s Kleinig notes but fails to integrate into his account–the government â€Å"becomes a tester of virtue rather than a detector of crime† (Kleining, 1996, 161). Indeed, much practical crime fighting is wrong because it does not so much fight crimes as it fights criminals, taking them as if they were an unseen enemy who need to be drawn out into the unwrap and take steps. As with corruption, it seems to me that Kleinig has measured entrapment with active criminal justice practice taken as given and thus, by default, as not posing a confront to ethical policing. Kleinig suggests that as an alternative of law enforcers or crime-fighters, police ought to be consider and think of themselves–as â€Å"social peacekeepers,† only part of whose task is to put into effect the law, but whose larger task is to remove the obstruction to the even and pacific flow of social life. (Kleining, 1996, 27ff) Kleinig’s disagreement for significant the police role as social peacekeeping has three parts. The first part is the gratitude that, while social agreement theories lead to the idea of the police as just law enforcers, the information is that we have (as I have already noted) always likely the police to play a larger role, taking care of a large diversity of the barrier to quiet social life. The second part of the quarrel is that the idea of the police as peacekeepers, in totaling to equivalent to what police essentially do, reverberates adequately with practice, in exacting with the idea of the â€Å"king’s peace,† the organization of which might be thought of as the predecessor of modem criminal justice tradition. Kleinig thinks will flow from this preconceiving of the police role: a less confused, more helpful and pacifying relationship between the police and the society; a compact dependence on the use of force, particularly lethal force, to the point that force is sighted as only a last alternative among the many possessions accessible to the police for eliminating obstacles to social peace. The very fact that police are armed (and dressed in military-style uniforms) for law enforcement makes it just about overwhelming that they will be used for crowd and traffic control. Subsequently, if a small group of persons is to keep a large, volatile and potentially dodgy group in line, it will surely help if the small group is armed and in distinguishing dress. As for the other jobs allocated to the police, it must be distinguished that these jobs are not generally executed by the police for the community as a whole. Middle class and wealthier folks do not turn to the police for dispute resolution or help in medical emergencies. Ignored in this way, the poor call on the police when there is problem and reasonably so. The police are at all times there, they make house calls, and they do not charge. Practices that outcome from our negligent treatment of the poor should scarcely be lifted to normative position in the way that Kleinig in cause does by speaking of what â€Å"we† have allocated to the police. Only some have had the authority to assign the police these additional jobs, and even those influential few seem more to have deserted the jobs on the police than considerately to have assigned them. Most significantly, however, distinguishing the police as peacekeepers has the trend to cover over what is still the most important truth about the police, the very thing that calls for extraordinary good reason and for particular answerability, namely, that the police have the ability to order us around and to use aggression to back those orders up. For example, when Kleinig takes up the police arguments that they should be treated like proficiently and thus standardize themselves, Kleinig objects only on the position that â€Å"It is uncertain whether police can lay claim to such focused knowledge† not available to lay persons as renowned professions, such as medicine and law’ do. (Kleining, 1996, 40) Similarly, in explanation why police may correctly be focused to civilian review boards, Kleinig says that â€Å"the police provide a society service at a cost to the society† and thus ought to be answerable to the public they serve. (Kleining, 1996, 227) The police are precisely subject to remote review to a level that the local authority company is not, and the grounds are the particular authority and authority the police have and the suitably tense relation involving that power, essential as it is, and the free public it both defend and threatens. Conceivably, after all, the cops are right in opinion of themselves as law enforcers and crime fighters. Reading John Kleinig’s book is an extremely good way for anyone to learn just how uncomfortable that situation is. References Kleining, John (1996) The Ethics of Policing, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Letter to Home – History American Immigration

Mr. Iam Nobody 8 Howling Lane Hackney London E15 6PP United Kingdom Mr. Iam Nobody 8 Howling Lane Hackney London E15 6PP United Kingdom Dear Iam Nobody, Early today I arrived in Ellis Island, as you know I went via steamship which was crowded with all different kind of people from all different places. On the way there I was talking to a German man his name was Kurt even though he was German he spoke very good English I would even say he spoke better than me to a certain extent.When we finally arrived there they took us into the Baggage Room of the Main Building, winding its way up to the second floor where we were met by a team of doctors and inspectors who would decide which way the Golden Door would swing as they called it. Although many did not know it, I could see that the inspection process had already begun. Doctors Scanning the moving line for signs of illness, Public Health Service doctors looked to see if anyone wheezed, coughed, shuffled, or limped as they climbed the stee p ascent.There was another door which about 2/10 people went through I assumed that was the ‘unlucky door’ which meant people didn’t pass the health test. A few hours later I had passed my health test now and I said I would wait for Kurt to come through as he had no place to go and I was going to take him to Uncle Poe. Behold to me that was the last day I saw him; he must have failed the health test. So I carried on once I reached New York I quickly found that there was a lot of segregated area for different religions or nationality’s.When Uncle Poe picked me up he showed me to his diner where once again people segregated from each other blacks in one corner, Polish in another I thought this was madness as I thought one of the main reason why people immigrated to America was to escape discrimination. I will be working in Poe’s diner from now on and living above the diner. I’ve only been working there for a couple of days now there’s al ready been 3 fights and a multiple of hate speech’s and just down the road 2 Irish men were shot and robbed. It’s rough here so when I make enough money to move then you can immigrate over here. Sincerely, Tyler Wakefield.

Women and the Era of Enlightenment essays

Women and the Era of Enlightenment essays After the chaotic years of the Middle Ages, the Reformation and of the Thirty Years' War, humanity was brightened from the dark by a new era, called Enlightenment, one of the most important stages in the development of modern thought. This cultural, intellectual, philosophical and social movement spread through France, England, Germany, and other regions of Europe, even America, in the 1700s. Enabled by the Scientific Revolution, in the Enlightenment the spheres of education, politics, and religion were now subject to investigation, to bring changes where possible. Knowledge, science and rational thought, such as freedom and universal justice, were the cornerstones of the mentality of the age, while religion and superstition were denied. This age is called, in fact, the Age of Reason, and embrace the notion that humanity could be improved through rational change. The American and French Revolutions were inspired by Enlightenment ideals of freedom and equality. Â ¹ Thanks to the development of those ideas, women started gradually to change their role into society. Before that, from the Renaissance to the eighteenth-century , the representation of women was restrictive and oppressive, and they were expected to be subordinate to men in every way. Their role in society was primarily domestic and they were used only for the benefits of men. Wives should take care of the family and the house, do the cleanings and produce children just to carry on the family name; daughters should help the family thanks to an advantageous marriage. The behavior of women was a sort of indication of the reputation of their families, and for this reason sexuality was a subject related only to marriage. During the Protestant Reformation, the concept of patriarchy put men central in every kind of social structure, and from the middle of the sixteenth, tens of thousands of women were accused of witchcraft, and killed. Over 40,000-60,000 women were executed throug...

Compare and Contrast between Socialism and Capitalism

Compare and Contrast between Socialism and Capitalism Introduction Socialism has been regarded as kind of economy which relocates its means of production from individual ownership to state ownership and communal ownership.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Compare and Contrast between Socialism and Capitalism specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More A state that operates under socialism possesses all the means of production and also supervises them. This system has been believed to construct a different egalitarian system which is founded on the values of cooperation and solidarity. However, this further relies on another feature where human beings are viewed as capable of interacting and cooperating with one another (Newman 3). Capitalism on the other hand could be reffered as a system where means of production are employed and owned by individuals. This kind of economy develops under the right of an individual who decides freely where and how they want to produce (Hunt and Laut zenheiser 5). Therefore these are two diverse systems; the following essay illustrates the differences and similarities between these two systems. Economy and Trade Marxist economists described various ideas concerning socialism and capitalism using various illustrations. According to his famous accounts, capitalist was depicted as destructive, a kind of system that is prone to crisis and administered by logic of capital. It was mostly expressed on the basis of economic laws of motion also the desire to accumulate on the capital. However, socialism denoted elimination or suppression of such logic and its fundamental drives and laws, hence created the likelihood of a rational, organized way of managing social and economic life. Marxist economists condemned capitalism because of instability and irrational outcomes of a system based on private markets and properties. Marxist noted the devastating social and economic outcomes of capitalist organizations, economic anarchy; for instance, sales seldom matched actual or expected levels of production, and the overall amount of savings planned for investments, hence affecting business cycles. Other associated crises were ineffective outcomes and uneconomical expenditures which led to starvation, unemployment, and ecological deterioration. There was social disintegration and fragmentation because of unequal distribution of power and wealth and promotion of privacy, social interests, and personal interests over public. It encouraged alienation for instance through commodity fetishism because conception of false needs was encouraged rather than satisfaction of true needs. This led to denial of genuine individual knowledge concerning themselves and also the society surrounding them (Ruccio and Amariglio 216-17).Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In contrast, socialism because of eliminating the scope of priva te markets and properties and its institution of planning, it has been represented as a system that demonstrates basic rationality and stability. Therefore, the results were fairly different; economic coordination and balance which was supervised by a central planning board and analyzed by enterprises and ministries. Furthermore, the system portrayed effective and socially beneficial expenditures which were based on coherent calculations and no profit making motive. The system created unification and social harmony because of establishment of relative equality and social and private interests which were then allowed to converge. More importantly, it promoted self realization and true needs could be articulated and the nature of social interactions was transparent and immediate. Marxist economists has also noted the degree at which capitalism has been based on individual exploitation which involves extraction of surplus value while in socialism almost all surplus was appropriated com munally or socially (Ruccio and Amariglio 216-17). Property Rights Socialism could be defined as transfer of titles of a particular property from those individuals who have invested scarcely to those who have contractually acquired them or for some different use. It could be regarded as a social system where the scarce resources or means of production which are utilized to produce consumption products are socialized or nationalized. The concept of socialization of means of production has been practiced in a number of countries such as Soviet Union and afterwards by Soviet dominated nations of Eastern Europe and various countries all over the world. If private property becomes the means of production, then one encourages differences. By eradicating private ownership everybody’s ownership means of production is equated. Every person becomes the co- owner of all the properties and this reflects every individual’s identical standing as a human being. The economic rationale of a scheme like that one is suggested to be more effective. In contrast, capitalism which concentrates on private ownership as the means of production seems to be very chaotic. It appears more of a wasteful system which is characterized by ruinous competition, duplicating efforts and lacks concerted, coordinated action. Unless the communal ownership is substituted with private then it’s possible to eradicate that waste by executing a single, coordinated comprehensive production plan. The property regulations which are assumed under the socialization policy and those which comprise the general legal principles of nations such as Russia are distinguished by two complementary attributes. First, no one possesses socialized means of production but they are owned socially.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Compare and Contrast between Socialism and Capitalism specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More That means nobody or no group of people, or all of them together have the right to either obtain them or trade them and retain the receipts got from their sale confidentially. Their use is however determined by people not as the owners but as the caretakers of the things (Herman 19-22). Secondly, no individual or groups of people or all of them together has the right to engage in personal investment and form new personal means of production. They could neither invest through changing the existing, nonproductively already used resources into productive ones, by pooling resources with the rest of the people, by original saving, nor by a combination of those techniques. Investment could be done only by caretakers, not for private profit but for the benefit of the community. In an economy such as capitalism which is founded on private ownership, owners resolve what to do with the means of production. However in socialized economy such owners never exist hence it cannot happen and the major problem is what to do with the means of production. The difference between socialized property economy and private one is the concept of whose will prevails if there are conflicts. In capitalism somebody must be there to control and others who do not control and therefore real difference exists among people. In this case, the problem on whose opinion prevails is determined by original contract and appropriation. Similarly, in socialism real difference exists between noncontrollers and controllers under some occasions, the issue on whose opinion prevails is not resolved through previous contract or usership but through political means (Herman 19-22). Therefore, capitalist differs from socialism by replacing public ownership with private ownership. Public ownership caused excessive depersonalization of the property. Neither losses nor gains had exclusive and direct effects on a particular individual, responsibility normally was enormously low. To some extent private property still existed in socialism ( Kornai 87). Nevertheless, it seems to be scarce hence it does not cover the means of production.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More If the property could not be transferred to the state, communal properties like agricultural cooperatives or small businesses such as handicraft were introduced. This shows theoretically the membership is voluntary and such ownership was not affected legally. Hence collective ownership was regarded as an intermediary stage which would be replaced by the state ownership finally. On the other hand, in capitalism under property right it is evident there was division of labor, making of profit and uneven distribution of wealth and massive involvement in economic exchanges. That was portrayed as the only means of maintaining an individual existence which signify a great need for steady rules and enforcement system. That is mainly essential for property rights, and their transfer and their protection. Coordination Another disparity between socialism and capitalism is depicted on how coordination is accomplished. Rather than letting people do what they desire, capitalism organizes the acti ons by restraining people to respect the earlier user ownership. Capitalist is distinguished by decentralist and unstructured coordination instead of centralized management and steering. This is clearly observed in disincentives and incentives which are not set politically. In such society, distribution of resources occurs through the market. On the other hand, in socialism rather than allowing people do what they wish, it manages individual plans through superimposing on an individual’s plan or the plan of a group and that of varying individual or group in spite of prior ownership and other mutual exchange contracts (Herman 23). This depicts central planning where the state owns almost all production facilities. The required inputs for production and preliminary products are determined then organized, political priorities are always considered. The consumer and producer demand are anticipated while correct exchange relations are resolved by the setting of the price. However, this is costly and huge task to be carried by the administration which tends to be more complicated and develops technologically according to the nation economy. Security Capitalists system argues that the major role of the government is to safe guard its citizens from deception or various forms of corruption. They argue that force is the security of individual’s rights. To achieve that, the government employs police force that is in charge of security at their homes and military group which guards any exterior attack while the court ensures that local disputes between the residents are cleared. In addition, they believe that stirring force could only lead to violation of rights; hence the government simply uses force in case one initiates it. In this society, anyone could begin any type of business one desires. This is because the security of monopolies does not operate. The main law which is plainly decreed and everybody is supposed to observe is that members of the societ y should not violate an individual’s human rights (De Soto 68). Thus they give credibility to observing individual’s rights which is supreme and freedoms are also regarded as supreme. On the other hand, socialism is a reverse; the government is centrally involved while the society manages communal properties such as cooperatives and industries. Even though, they own those properties through the government. In addition, the workers are in charge of means of production owned by the society and are invested for the well being of the whole economy but not just the wealthy individuals. In this system, the government manages the overall means of production but the members have the duty of choosing the best setting for the production, the amount to produce and which product should be produced. Those produces should also be allocated fairly to ensure everybody is satisfied. Some philosophers like Karl Marx claimed that there is possibility of capitalism being overshadowed beca use already there are some evident changes in capitalist societies which resemble socialism. They further suggested that they must look for a means to conquer capitalists’ resistance and their proposers to achieve socialism. In socialism economy, there is equal allocation of resources within its members and focuses on providing basic needs to the members to ensure equality. To make sure every member in the society benefits, the government ensures it caters for those who are needy and cannot support themselves, this is achieved through community based programs and related organizations. In addition, socialist societies are usually known because of their charitable social security systems. These include: free education, full employment, total coverage through pension system, subsidized housing, welfare for the sick, orphans and elderly and good public security depicted by low crime rates (Rudiger 14). Social Welfare For several decades the Soviet Union lived as an enormous nati onal socialist government. The Kibbutzim and Mennonites abandoned the Soviet Union and settled in capitalist nations like Israel and United States. The Amish live peacefully under capitalism since the community reaps together and sows together. Because they are not buying food and paying wages, there is fairly little taxable business taking place. Furthermore, the community could also work jointly to produce goods which could be sold to neighbors surrounding the community. That enables the community to pay for things like property taxes (Gilpin 220). That indicates that the socialist society should own the means of production, but not the individuals within their society. Since socialism depends on production which belongs to the collective, then it’s very hard for a single socialist unit to exist in another socialist unit. Also in a case of a joint ownership, one of the parties must have more power over the property than the other. It is impossible for two units to have sove reignty over similar property. As a result, socialist groups like Kibbutzim and Mennonites abandoned areas such as Eastern Europe and Russia in favor of Israel and United States. Socialist society depends on willing contribution of every member of that society. In case of the less productive members within the society, that is not regarded as a problem. Nevertheless, if the most productive members in that society were able of being independent, that could be a problem. This is because if those members who are most productive depart from the collective, then the overall resources allocated to every member decreases. In case this repeatedly happens then socialism would collapse, since the only people who would remain are the less productive (Duck 2). There must be something to maintain the most productive members in the socialist country; this ensures they do not leave. For instance, majority of productive Mennonites are kept within their society by the religion or the Jews in their K ibbutzim. Patriotism might also maintain majority of productive members in a socialist country. Nonetheless, the tie of religion is stronger than that of patriotism. Because socialism cannot permit most of its members who are productive to depart from the collective, then it is very hard for capitalist to exist within socialism. This is evident because socialist government always takes production from those people who are most productive and then reallocate it to the less productive people. If that was done against the desires of the people, subsequently they will harbor bitterness against socialist government. As a result, the tie of patriotism will grow weaker (Duck 2). Government Role on Social Life Critics argue that a government which is capable of providing everything is also powerful enough to take away everything. This happened to German National Socialists and Communist Russia. Nevertheless, government with socialist system does not withhold social welfare but the power it has over the economy of that nation leaves the citizens vulnerable to the dictators (Newman 39). They argue that in a nation where Congress are not permitted to pass law which focuses on establishment of religion, then government social programs seems to be corrupt and mostly tend to be agnostic. As a result, such social programs seem to prohibit religion which is a free exercise or others encourage atheism. There are many well documented government education programs which prohibit prayer and encourage atheism. Socialist governments appear to atheism. The morality of Atheist is only a manifestation of the light reflected by biblical morality. Without the guiding light from the bible, atheist morality is likely to go off course. Finally, it degrades to level where immoral behaviors such as genocide turn to be acceptable. Critics further argue that socialism should not be allowed to exist in a government and socialist groups ought to support capitalism in their government since in ca pitalism they can freely exist. They believe that the framework of capitalism leads to efficient socialism, this is because it allows people to embrace socialism (Duck 2-3). Prices Formation In capitalist system, prices are not determined by the state but set by interplay between demand and supply in the free markets. Nevertheless, the state could affect the prices indirectly through subsidization, taxation, restrictions of imports and in case it manages the Central Bank, through monetary policy like money supply and interest rates. Therefore, in this system coordination of transactions through prices is a distinctive feature of capitalist system (Friedman 8-13). On the other hand, in case of socialist economy channeling so much power on the prices it would require sufficient market structure; it would also challenge the structure and the state that formed such system while trying to allocate resources in the economy. In socialist economy price mechanisms were not fully eliminated, mostly it was incorporated in economic planning. This led to unofficial or multiple official price systems. This altered price system which never reflects true scarcity levels and makes consumers and companies to be price inelastic, thus they do not react adequately to increase and decrease of prices because these are meaningless. Conversely, households in classical socialist economy work under constrain due to the hard budget because their funds are limited. Thus they never respond to prices because the state controls the prices which become political relevance. As a result, the prices of services and basic goods like medical services, staple food, housing, childcare, are normally subsidized whilst the demand for luxury goods is controlled through setting high prices. As proposed by classical economic theory the consumers respond promptly, they buy extra of the subsidized goods compared to what they would purchase in market equilibrium. Market Structure In capitalist system, privat e enterprises of different sizes coexist and usually compete with those enterprises owned by the state and other forms like the cooperatives. The main feature of capitalist system appears to be free market exit and entry. Thus it’s not a static system however it operates under dynamic renewal. On the other hand, in socialist economy the seller incurs total transaction cost, seeks information on how and where to find the product, adapts to the seller’s supply through forced substitution. Therefore, the buyer bears the outcomes of uncertainty. This is opposite of capitalist economy which can be regarded as buyer’s market. In the case of seller’s market as in socialism, it’s usually a stable condition where demand constantly exceeds supply (Rudiger 11). Conclusion According to the discussion above it is evident that these two systems are quite different with a few similarities. Majorly, the socialist economy is depicted by its communal ownership as th e name suggests. The society properties are owned by everybody and there is no one entitled as the sole manager. The property rights are generally communal and the members act as caretakers of the properties. On the other hand, capitalism is distinguished by the private ownership of property. Analyzing on the prices the two systems are really diverse, under socialism the consumers are in control of the market and they bear the overall cost of market uncertainties. Moreover, they are supposed to seek where and how to use the means of production hence the name seller market. On the other hand, under capitalism it’s the reverse it’s called the buyer market since the government is in control of the means of production. One similarity is that both governments control the amount of money workers contributes thus the pension is under government management. De Soto, Hernando. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Rand om House, 2000. Duck, Samuel. â€Å"Comparing national socialism to capitalism, liberty, charity, and local socialism†, 2009. Web. Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Gilpin, Robert. Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001. Hans-Hermann, Hoppe. Theory of Socialism and Capitalism. Alabama: Ludwing von Mises Institute, 2007. Hunt, E. and Lautzenheiser, Mark. History of Economic Thought: A Critical Perspective. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 2011. Kornai, Janos. The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992. Newman, Michael. Socialism: a very short introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Ruccio, David and Amariglio, Jack. Postmodern moments in modern economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003. Rudiger, Frank. â€Å"North Korea: East Asian Socialism, Capitalism, or What?† U niversity of Vienna, 2008. Web.

The segmented labour market theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The segmented labour market theory - Essay Example It is evident from the study that there is a primary sector which produces jobs that have a secure tenure, good benefits, with better working conditions, while a secondary sector is full of instability, limited benefits, and hazardous working conditions with low pay. Thus, workers in industrialised nations do not want the secondary sector jobs, resulting in employers looking for recruits among immigrants to fill the rejected positions. This secondary sector has little mobility options that impact negatively on educational returns, skills, base and working experience as compared with nations. This has been evidenced by educated Mexicans with skills who have migrated internally rather than into the United States as immigrant labour thus this only changes during periods of financial crisis. The above theory can be related that throughout American history, the ambitious and unsatisfied always had an economic theme giving them reason to immigrate to another place. The first three countrie s of European settlement was evidenced by an outward mobility, i.e. getting immigrants to the continent, thereafter the frontier to develop it. After the disappearance of the frontier in the 19thC, foreign conquest continued for example acquisitions of places like Cuba, and the Philippines etc. Late 19thC i.e. from the late 1590s into 1960s due to industrialisation, internal mobility was witnessed i.e. from the rural areas to the cities beginning in the industrial worth then the South with health accumulation and plenty of white collar jobs, movements were from the cities into the suburbs. An aging population moved from the colder regions into the warmer climes. Creating attendant jobs in the construction, restaurants, retail and healthcare industries After the cold war, mobility has tended to stagnant as there has been a wide stagnation in the economic growth of the country. The previous decade witnessed the devaluation of most mortgages resulting in majority owning houses that are not worth the mortgage paid for initially. This segmented the country into the so-called I presenters against the 99ers. But in reality the segmentation has been into two classes: the immobile and mobile. This classification is due to the industrial vibrantly; in the 1870s young people want to Chicage, 1910s people want to Detroit while 1970s movement was to Housen. This were characterised by; cowboys, the auto industry and the oil industry. The cities had industries that could after both skilled and unskilled people ample work. Nowadays due to the decline in industrial activities, mobility tends to be zero. The tech industry still offers jobs to the highly skilled although recruitment in those high tech industries like Silicon Valley computers, Raleigh-Dusham-bio- tech research is global recruitment for people with specific skills (www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/.../adam-davidson-mobile-class.html) These high tech industries afford the mobile class good salaries and high bargaining po wer. The immobile class is constituted by citizens with less specialization; therefore the only jobs are the low paying ones in the declining auto-industry and green energy clusters. The difference in the immobile class now that most are educated to a degree level i.e. B.A. degree meaning a degree especially one not from the top universities does not guarantee a job, but rather with specific skills one has. This has coalesced graduates of mid level colleges into a pool defined into a secondary segment. It leaves problems

The pianist of willesden lane Movie Review Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 2

The pianist of willesden lane - Movie Review Example Different themes have been used to show the fear and what was going through the woman’s head during the holocaust. In life, no one is supposed to go through what the woman in the play went through. We should all try to accommodate each other’s believes and respect them (Hurwitt). The play tells a great story. It incorporates narration of the story with music that fuses well to set the mood and illustrate the exact feelings and the situation at the time. The result of this is the heart responding in kind with the theme. When the play was featured in the theater, everyone sheds a tear. The director has tried to fuse all the tales told in the story with a song. Director Hershey Felder who adapted the book and came up with the play uses music and costumes trying to reenact the mood of the writer while writing the book. These tails are deep and can appeal to any human being. The use of stage lights to further set the required mood for the play. The music only comprises of a piano. This is because in the book the author tells the tails using songs that she played on her keyboard. It gives the play a more intricate meaning because music appeals to the emotions (Hurwitt). The director of the play adds visuals to the play to further intensify the mood that he intends to portray. Since some of the visuals are a bit graphic, the director tries to blend them with the emotional music that accompanies them. The director divides the play in three parts. The first part sets up the conditions that were experienced in 1938 during the holocaust. The intention of this is to bring the attention of the audience to the mood of the play. The music that opens the play is deep and conveys a sad mood. The second part takes the play to a new high. The music and visual introduce a new dimension to the play. They bring out the emotions at the time of the holocaust. It goes deeper in bringing out the mood of the author of at the time of the holocaust (Hurwitt). Being that the p lay is centered on the story narrated by the author of the book, it was important to convey her thoughts and emotions at the time. The last part does exactly that. It brings the play to a fervent resolution. The music at this time is deep and very emotional. The visuals are intense and the play reaches its climax. The response from the audience is amazing. Everyone is full of emotion. The third part makes a passionate appeal to the emotion and humane part to never repeat the issues shown by the play. To illustrate further the theme of the play, the director uses archival photos, newsreels and file videos projected to large old golden picture frames hanging in the middle of the theater stage. The theater stage is painted midnight blue. The contrast in the colors brings out the theme of the medieval ages. The play does not portray comfort of the actor. The actor has to assume the voices of men, women and children written in the book (Hurwitt). The play comes alive in different ways. T he use of the piano music creates a more emotional attachment. The use of visuals in the play lets you tell how the situation was at the time expressed. The actors bring out the physical actions that are expressed in the play. With this, the director tells the story as it is in the book it was adopted. When I watched the play, I felt touched. I understood what the director's intentions were when he created the play. The emotional attachment to the songs and visuals in the play is strong. I think the play was a success in educating us about the holocaust and how it