Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder And Vietnam Veterans Essays

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder And Vietnam Veterans Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Vietnam Veterans The power of the human brain is a mystery of science. For example, while certain parts of the brain are well known to control certain bodily functions, the brains memory capacity is just now being discovered. Scientists believe that only a small fraction of the brain is actually used, and its potential power is much greater than one may expect or believe. Its ability to view and store information is still not totally understood by scientists today. This causes a special problem in the treatment certain mental illnesses such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD, is a reaction to a traumatic event in which death, serious injury, or the threat of either is present. The most common occurrence of this illness is among veterans of war, and it is very common among those who served in Vietnam. Vietnam veterans who suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and do not receive medical treatment are at a high risk of suicide and other horrible demises. They become despondent and hard to talk to. It is as if the sufferers of PTSD are in a different reality. The traumatic events play back in their mind and they have a tough time relating with people. Louise Erdrich illustrates this in The Red Convertible. The short story is about two teenage Native American boys, Lyman and Henry, and the bond of their love for each other symbolized by a red convertible. One summer they buy a red convertible and travel across North America. When they return home, the older of the two, Henry, gets drafted in the war and spends up to three years in Vietnam with several of them as a POW. When he comes back, the effects of PTSD are obvious, but medical treatment is unavailable to him on his reservation because his mother is afraid to visit the local doctor. Henry, who used to be an energetic, joking, happy-go-lucky person, is now very quiet, jumpy, and uncomfortable around other people. He just sits in front of the familys color television firmly gripping his chair. People on the reservation find Henry strange and they do not know how to act around him. Lyman finds his brother hard to understand, so he purposely destroys the convertible, which he had kept in good shape since before the war, and believes that through Henry fixing it, their old relationship can be rekindled. For a while Henry shows a small bit of his old self as he intently works to refurbish the car. When the car is completed, Henry and Lyman go for a drive and end up drinking beer down by the flooded river. In the end, Henry goes for a swim in river where his boots fill with water and his painful memories are finally stopped when he drowns. (Erdrich 293-301) Henry illustrates symptoms many Vietnam veterans have faced after the war. According to Arthur G. Neal and his book National Trauma and Collective Memory: Major events in the American Century, one of the main reasons Vietnam veterans suffer from PTSD is that they were thrown back into society without a any sort of ritualistic purification (140). Neal tells us that unlike after World War II when soldiers were given parades and were praised as heroes, Vietnam veterans were badly treated by civilian Americans because of the huge disbelief in and hatred of the war (140). The lack of this purification was especially bad for those veterans who were underprivileged, such as Native Americans. These underprivileged veterans were unable to get the required medical attention to treat their disorder. The poverty that Native Americans and those of other similar demographics lived in caused a sharp difference in veterans who suffered from PTSD, as Sarah L. Knox writes in a review of Eric T. Dean, Jr.s Shook over Hell: Post-Traumatic Stress, Vietnam, and the Civil War (111). Knox says Dean argues that the privileged veteran would receive better treatment and medical attention compared to his impoverished counterpart (111). Neal also states that the communities and employers of Vietnam veterans treated them as if they had just gotten back from a vacation (140). This casual handling

Can democracy be spread by force

Can democracy be spread by force Introduction Typically, democracy is a system of governance in which people choose their preferred government and rulers. This can be exercised through voting in a free and fair mannerism.1Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Can democracy be spread by force? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More It is instantiated by rights like freedom of expression and freedom of speech amongst others. Therefore, at its core, democracy signifies a fair and justifiable power distribution in any kind of society. This paper discerns whether democracy can be spread by force. Concurrently, it argues against the possibility of attaining democracy through forceful strategies. It also provides relevant countries and global instances (as examples) to certify this claim. This is a critical provision when considered comprehensively in the realms of democracy and its relevant benefits. In a democratic society, an individual has more power of governing his or her life as it would be appropriate (self choice of expression). Considerably, there are four main elements of democracy.2 Besides a political system where people choose and replace their government through elections (which are free and fair), people also participate actively as citizens in their civic life and politics. In addition, the rule of law which applies equally to every citizen should be used to protect the fundamental human rights of each and every citizen. Even though democracy is much embraced in most countries of the western world, it has failed in some continents such as Africa, Middle East regions, and to some extent, south Asia. Tribalism, which has its deep roots in these counties, is the major reason for this failure.Advertising Looking for essay on government? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Considerably, some attempts to attain democracy through force have worked in some countries includi ng Japan and Germany after the World War II. Nonetheless, some forceful efforts have failed significantly. Actually, the majority of people from these countries would prefer voting for a candidate who is a member of their tribe, religion, or sect rather than someone else who is a not a member even if that individual have got better governance ideologies. This is very evident in countries such as Zimbabwe and Iraq. The United States of America is at the forefront in spreading democracy.3 But why should they seek to spread democracy? And can democracy be achieved by force? Evidently, forced democracy might destroy a society during its establishment. Consequently, the society should be rebuilt after achieving the concerned democracy as it happened in the developed nations such as the Japan and Germany amongst others. Democracy can be spread by force To some extent this statement is true. For instance, the United States of America has launched an international war on terror, which invol ves strategies that embrace the regime change concepts. This creates new identities which are politically democratic and wins the hearts and minds of people. As an illustration, the involvement of the US in both Afghanistan and Iraq was premised on the view of eliminating terror and putting democracy in place. The United States has been successful in campaigning and spreading democracy through the use of military, politics, and psychology in almost each and every area that is involved around the world.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Can democracy be spread by force? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Definitely, this close connection has implied that the extent of influence by the United States around the globe has been expanded. In fact, they have exploited every globalization device like television broadcasting and internet to compound the extent of its influence. These have been very effective in spreading democra tic propaganda in most regions of the globe that are governed by dictatorships. In addition, they have created changes in the political awareness in support to democratizing. At the end of the Second World War, US took an active role to deepen and widen democracy in western parts of Europe. The European integration was encouraged by the United States in establishing and stabilizing the democracy. NATO was the fortification within which West Germany, Spain, Portugal, and Italy became democratic. The integrated Europe and the twin NATO institutions jointly formed powerful incentives for developing democracies of the East European countries to link with the multilateral institutions of Western Europe at the end of the cold war.4 This shows how democracy spread in the western countries. However, it is important to note that war is characterized by the destruction of economy and ruining of the whole society. The society is rebuilt after the achievement of democracy as it happened in the developed nations such as the Japan and Germany amongst others as indicated earlier. There are certain problems that plague political efforts; typically, creating an arrangement that is able to safeguard people’s interests without persecution threats. Different nations around the globe have struggled with power balance by either using imperial or even more idealistic schemes to concentrate power for governing the world.Advertising Looking for essay on government? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More There has been lots of debate domestically on how much right the executive should have. The strong executive supporters believe that the best way of preserving peace is through uncontrolled ability to discourage or anticipate an attack. However, the antagonists of such kind of a scheme distress that it is likely to allow the executives to start war very easily and would be particularly unstoppable if many nations adopt it. This dilemma was tried to be resolved by the administration of George W. Bush by creating the democratic empire concept.5 America is regarded as inalienable military power that is able to enforce a peaceful order in any part of the troubled world. In this way, America continues to keep unchallengeable military strengths. Thus, it is not necessary to destabilize weapon competitions of other eras and also restricts the contentions to trade as well as other peace pursuant. Actually, most people around the globe are uncomfortable with the policy of the United States w hich welcomes power in the provision and commitment to freedom.6 Their policy stresses that freedom commitment can and must create a common cause to counter the enemies of freedom. This a clear indication that if such policies are not available to safeguard the rights and freedoms of individuals in the society -their democracy- then most of the nations will not allow their people to exercise these rights. It is very likely that the democratic institutions of governments will not be able to thwart the abuse of power used in promoting democracy and the application of military power will instill democracy in these nations. The demonstrations and protests that swept the Middle East in the beginning of the year 2011 is a further illustration that indeed democracy can be spread by force. These protests resulted to the removal of Tunisian president Ben Ali and shook Hosni Mubarak’s government of Egypt. In these countries, it is not only the world superpowers like the United States t hat gave a more vocal support to the people who demanded democracy on the Cairo streets but also the people stood firm in calling for change of leadership in their country. Eventually, the kind of leadership that was characterized by dictatorship and the oppression of the poor and the disadvantaged in the society had to cede power, sending a strong message to the rest of the world that if a leader clings to power through corruption and denial of democracy, at long last he or she will have to face the consequences. This is one way in which democracy has been spread around the globe. There is also a lot of argument as to whether the use of force or military action is justifiable in promoting democracy. In some cases, the action of military may not only be essential in facilitating and restoring democracy but also in ending certain cruel kind of dictatorship. For instance, in Rwanda genocide of 1994 is a typical example. The military involvement was very justifiable to put an end to ge nocide and restore peace in Rwanda. Nonetheless, military intervention should be considered as a last resort since a lot of destruction of the society as well as economic degradation is associated with such forceful democracy. While considering other viable theories, democracy is a major contributor to fundamental human values and should be encouraged all over the world. It promotes values such as the rights of workers, freedom of speech and movement. It also establishes an environment that is secure and stable for citizens of a country. In addition to this, democracy is a value that ensures interests of all citizens and the country are taken care of and their rights are secured.7 Governments that promote democracy are the ones that enhance peace, avoid violence and wars, encourage development, and advocate for the rights of all humans. Democracy should be promoted in the modern world to assist in the achievement of stability and growth for humanity. Its development should also be p romoted to enable countries that are newly formed to adopt democratic principles. Countries that have not implemented principles of democracy should be denounced and encouraged to adopt them. Many countries in the world have adopted democracy and continue to promote human rights. There are others still in the process of implementing strategies that will ensure democracy.8 The growth of democracy has taken a long time and there are various methods that have been used to spread it. There have also been various barriers to the spread of the value and commercial barriers are among them. Some of the methods that have been used to spread democracy are through use of religion and education. However, there is the question of the effectiveness of coercion in spreading democracy. There are people who believe that force can be used in spreading democracy while others believe that it is not an effective method. The question to use force or not in spreading democracy can be answered using theori es of international relations. This section of paper will attempt to answer the question using realism and liberal theories. With respect to democracy, realism focuses on the motives leading to proper security, control and capital (Gilbert 58). On the other hand, liberalism proposes that the difference that exists between countries regarding principles of democracy is the main causes of wars. Realism first focuses on the main causes of wars. The theory also believes that the international structure and systems has an important role in international relations. The proponents of this theory further believe that the absence of authority from a central point leads to dilemma on matters of security. This therefore means that attempts by one country to seek security assurance are likely to make its adversaries feel insecure. These adversaries can them arm up and use other forms of interactions that are hostile by nature. The relative capabilities of countries thus play an important role i n international relations. Concurrently, the central authority plays important roles in the international relations and gives a reason for countries to relate in the international system.9 Groups based in various parts of the world are also important in international relations (according to the realists). Additionally, the behavior of the states is considered to be rational according to this theory. The reason for this belief among realists is that states use logic when making decisions and act in the interest of the nation. They do this so as to survive, be secure, be powerful and gain capital. The motives of the nation usually make analysts to manipulate how policy makers think and this has the effect of policy makers making laws that are in the interest of the nation.10 The realists also note that states respond to external factors. Thus, their actions are guided by what happens internationally. These can be used to explain how democracy can be spread using force. For example, Ir aq was a country led by a dictator. There were also extremists in Iraq and the rights of the citizen were not guaranteed. The United States, on the other hand, is a country that values democracy and protection of the rights of individuals. United States thus attempted to promote these values in Iraq forcefully. However, according to realists, there are other interests that the United States had apart from the promotion of democracy in Iraq. United States wanted to ensure that it is secure and its citizens are safe. The United States also wanted to avoid Iraq’s quest to develop weapons of mass destruction. If Iraq developed these weapons, then it would be a threat to United States and countries that are allied to it. In addition to these interests of the United States, the need to develop military bases in the Middle East was another reason for going to Iraq. The United States wanted to develop military bases in Iran and Syria so as to help Israel, which is an ally of Unites S tates. Another reason was the need to secure the supply of oil for the United States and the need to reduce complications that could result from energy shortage. This is a critical provision when scrutinized comprehensively. Finally, United States hardly ratified inspections UN executed in Iraq to determine whether there were weapons of mass destruction. These, according to realism theory of international relations, guided the policy decisions of the United States. It means that the United States checked the benefits that could result from invading Iraq and the costs of the invasion. It then made decision based on the findings with respect to democracy. Additionally, the United States was a central point of authority. It had the military might and is a super power.11 The foreign policies of the United States are also war preventive against countries considered to be rogue. The military might of United States also played an important part. According to the theory, the military streng th of a country is important. It determines how the country establishes, ratifies, and protects its foreign policies.12 Thus, US ensured that its military might was unmatched and if Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, then it had to be dealt with. These informed one of the policies of Bush administration and this was to remove the Baathist regime in Iraq. It did not, however, attack other countries such as North Korea or Libya or Iran. This is because of the interests that it had. In the attack, democracy was to be achieved by force in Iraq. In other words, the foreign policy of the United States is democratic in nature. On the other hand, according to liberalism, decisions to ratify force (to initiate democracy) are made based on differences that exist between countries that are democratic and countries that are non-democratic. Thus it is the ideologies that exist in a country, the beliefs and the views to the world operations are the guiding factors on whether to go t o war or not. This is different from the realists who see financial, political and bureaucratic motives of the elites as the reasons for going to war. Liberalism theory believes that the spread of democratic principles can lead to peace in the whole world. They argue that countries that uphold democratic principles are usually peaceful compared to countries that are ruled by authoritarian regimes. In addition to this, the liberals argue that economic interdependence among countries can promote peace too. This is because countries that are cooperating or depending on each other economically cannot go to war against each other because this would destroy both economically.13 According to liberals, states are the main actors in international matters and relations and not any other organization such as international corporations. According to liberals, the United States fear that Iraq could attack it and its allies because the ruler in Iraq was a dictator is one reason it attacked Iraq f irst. Secondly, it attacked Iraq because US’s security, security of other nations, and the rights of the Iraqis could only be derived through democracy. This means that the security for the whole world can be achieved when democracy is spread in the whole world. Security for the world can also be attained through trade and regulation of conflicts by international organizations. The liberals thus propose that force can be used to remove dictators from power and this will enable enhancement of freedom and thus democracy. In Iraq, this is what happened according to many people. A dictator, Saddam Hussein, was removed from power and the Iraqis gained democracy. Democracy cannot be achieved by force Even though most nations (especially in the western world) have been able to achieve forceful democracy, there are some regions where forced democracy has failed. Currently Americans have different opinions about the idea of promoting democracy.14 Even though most people believe that t he aim of the US foreign policy should be focused on endorsing democracy, there is unwillingness to make its promotion a key theme in their foreign policy as well as an opposition to the use of military force or threats to achieve democracy. Concurrently, the Americans believe they have a moral obligation of promoting democracy.15 There is a considerable support for cooperative approaches to promote democracy and involving the United Nations. There are people who would prefer to promote democracy in more friendly dictatorial countries regardless of whether it may result into unfriendly governments. Most people approve putting public and diplomatic pressure to respect the fundamental human rights. In 2005, the Americans resisted the recommendation of George w. Bush to make democracy promotion as the Central American policy. Evidently, Iraq and Iran have indicated unsuccessful instances where force was applied to establish democracy. Despite the US’s efforts to restore democrac y in the region, some instances of impartiality can be noticed within the region. The main purpose of democracy is creating reason and order in the society. However, when forced it could result into even more chaos, like in Israel and Palestine. Here the Israelites were given land (by the US), which the Palestinians claimed to be theirs. Consequently, there has been a constant war between the two countries. There are other countries which cannot keep democracy whether forceful or peaceful. Russia is a typical example where capital revolution rather than democracy has taken its deeper roots.16 In the majority of the undeveloped countries, democracy is difficult to sustain. In most cases, in smaller countries with already established set of cultures or government, when democracy is forced upon them it is more likely to backfire. In this case democracy will lead to tyranny17. Democracy has failed in America, majorly, because the government gets involved too much in the activities of bu sinesses like Microsoft. It imposes lots or restrictions which limit what can be done by the company thus hindering the value of democracy within these businesses. Even if democracy is forced on some countries, leaders still manipulate their way into dictatorship with impunity. Ngo Diem from the republic of Vietnam was a leader who never liked the public elections idea. When he was forced to establish and agree to the democracy of holding public elections, he organized it in a way that favored his victory. In this case, he sent soldiers in plainclothes into the districts of his opponents to make sure that he wins. This shows that democracy was still not yet exercised. The concerned election was not a free and fair. Precisely, the democratic society idea has changed and evolved over the past years to fit the country and its citizens. Even if not everybody is willing to accept a democratic government easily, there should be willingness of all parties involved. Democracy has succeeded in some countries simply because people have decided to exercise democracy rather than using force to impose it. Conclusion In conclusion, using force in spreading democracy is often necessary in most cases; however, it is not a vital success element. Democracy is changing regularly, not just for the citizens but also for the period it takes place. As evident earlier, democracy can be achieved through force in some cases; nonetheless, force never gives positive results in other instances. This is a critical provision when considered critically in the context of democracy and its promotional events. Every government should embrace democracy to give its citizens their necessary freedoms and rights. Bibliography Aron, R, Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations, Transactions Publishers, New Brunswick, 2003. Art, RJ K, Waltz. The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics, Rowman Littlefield, Lanham, 2003.. Barkawi, T M Laffey. Democracy, Liberalism, and War: R ethinking the Democratic Peace Debate, Lynne Rienner Publ, Boulder, 2001. Benjamin, P, The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Dont Get, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2006. Botscher, J, Neorealist Assessment of Indias Look East Policy, Grin Verlag, London, 2011. Bulliet, R, The Earth and Its People: A Global History, Cengage Wadsworth, Boston, 2011. Bundu, A, Democracy by Force?: (a Study of International Military Intervention in the Civil War in Sierra Leone from 1991-2000, Universal Publication, Parkland, 2001. Carter, A, Direct Action and Democracy Today, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2004. DAnieri, PJ, International Politics: Power and Purpose in Global Affairs, Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Boston, 2012. Fortmann, MT JJ, Wirtz, Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2004. Gilbert, A, Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy?: Great-power Realism, Democratic Peace, and Democratic Internationali sm, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1999. Hobson, J, Imperialism: A Study, Cosimo, New York, 2005. Lambert, A, Democratic Civilian Control of Armed Forces in the Post-Cold War Era, LIT, Münster, 2008. Rousseau, DL, Identifying Threats and Threatening Identities: The Social Construction of Realism and Liberalism, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2006. Traub, J, The Freedom Agenda: Why America Must Spread Democracy (just Not the Way George Bush Did), Straus and Giroux, New York, 2009. Varas, A, Democracy Under Siege, Greenwood, Westport, 1989. Footnotes 1 A Bundu, Democracy by Force?: (a Study of International Military Intervention in the Civil War in Sierra Leone from 1991-2000, Universal Publication, Parkland, 2001, p. 65. 2 T Barkawi M Laffey. Democracy, Liberalism, and War: Rethinking the Democratic Peace Debate, Lynne Rienner Publ, Boulder, 2001, p. 73. 3 P Benjamin, The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Dont Get, Univ. of Chicago Pres s, Chicago, 2006, p. 23. 4 A Veras, Democracy Under Siege, Greenwood, Westport, 1989, p. 45. 5 PJ DAnieri, International Politics: Power and Purpose in Global Affairs, Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Boston, 2012, p. 86. 6 J Botscher, Neorealist Assessment of Indias Look East Policy, Grin Verlag, London, 2011, p. 36. 7 R Bulliet, The Earth and Its People: A Global History, Cengage Wadsworth, Boston, 2011, p. 67. 8 R Art K Waltz, The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics, Rowman Littlefield, Lanham, 2003, p. 25. 9 J Traub,The Freedom Agenda: Why America Must Spread Democracy (just Not the Way George Bush Did), Straus and Giroux, New York, 2009, p. 50. 10 A Gilbert, Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy?: Great-power Realism, Democratic Peace, and Democratic Internationalism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1999, p. 97. 11 MT Fortmann JJ Wirtz, Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2004, p. 64. 12 A Carter , Direct Action and Democracy Today, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2004, p. 60. 13 A Gilbert, Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy?: Great-power Realism, Democratic Peace, and Democratic Internationalism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1999. 14 DL Rousseau, Identifying Threats and Threatening Identities: The Social Construction of Realism and Liberalism, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2006. 15 A Lambert, Democratic Civilian Control of Armed Forces in the Post-Cold War Era, LIT, Münster, 2008, P. 467. 16 J Hobson, Imperialism: A Study, Cosimo, New York, 2005. 17 R Aron, Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations, Transactions Publishers, New Brunswick, 2003, p. 25.

Paper Communication in China Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Paper Communication in China - Essay Example (2008) and Yuezhi Zhao’s ‘Communication in China’ (2008) and uses these insights extracted to examine the role of Chinese government in promoting desirable national image. In order to derive an-in-depth understanding two major media campaign cases including Beijing Olympic (2008) and Sichuan Earthquake (2008) has been duly focused upon. With reference to Zhao’s ‘Communication in China’ (2008), numbers of key influencing factors within the party-state’s regime that have significantly imposed greater control and domination over the Chinese media and communication has been identified. In this context, the power of formal bureaucratic procedure along with improvised regulations has critically identified by the author to have significant influence towards the development of the Chinese mass media and communication. Moreover, it has also been recognized that there are numerous control strategies and measures that characterize discipline including rationalizing, normalizing and synergizing of the current media performance within the nation (Zhao 12). Correspondingly, the re-invention of the power and control mechanism of the party-state has been further observed as the key influencing factors while making developmental decision of the Chinese media industry. According to the discussion of Zhao, the current role of media in the party-state affects the Chinese class structure in a distinctive manner. In this context, the author eloquently stated that â€Å"it affects class structure not only as an increasingly central vector of production and economic exchange, but also as the means of social organization and site of subjectivity formation.† The statement of the author significantly justifies the impact of party-state on media and communication which further creates major perplexities regarding the ownership structure along with property rights and corporate identity of the mass media in China (Zhao 76). In the similar context, it has been observed from

Recruiting,retaining and developing staff Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Recruiting,retaining and developing staff - Essay Example Some of the processes considered during recruitments are planning, strategy development, searching, screening, and evaluation. Research shows that strategies are more important for any company that needs to recruit or attract employees. Such strategies address the immediate and long term needs of finding potential employees (Kumar & Sharma 550). An organization uses various methods during the recruitment process. Such methods have effects on the selection process and the efficiency of selection in a number of ways; first, methods used determines the number of applicants, more so qualified applicants that can be recruited for certain positions. Secondly, it determines the organization’s process of meeting its obligations to hire minority groups. This is done by advertising, sending information to minority colleges, and searching for qualified minority women. Thirdly, effects on the turnover rates of employees is inevitable, the facts is that lower turnover rates is evaluated because recruiters shows the positive and negative aspects of certain jobs. For example, in most cases the recruiters provides unrealistic expectations to the applicants about the company and jobs. Applicants are likely to be frustrated, dissatisfied, or leave a job at early stages. To avoid such actions, a company should provide a clear picture o f a company’s working, and training process (Kumar & Sharma 551). The recruitment process is done through two different sources; internal sources and the external sources. The internal source of recruitment is done by promoting workers in the lower level of job to the higher level. In most cases, the employees in the lower level are trained by the organization to have enough qualification for higher level. Research shows that, an internal source of recruitment is good for an organization because low cost of training is realized (Kumar & Sharma 551). External sources of recruitment are done to fill the vacancies at the lower level

The Inaugural Address of John F. Kennedy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The Inaugural Address of John F. Kennedy - Essay Example This paper analyzes the speech of President Kennedy’s activity using words, which exemplified his main goals of uniting the two opposite forces. Through the speech, he communicated his determination and his preparedness in striving for peace, and more importantly, includes everyone in the role of pursuing the goal. His metaphorical diction demonstrated the appealing nature of his leadership among the audience, where he encapsulates poverty and the liberation of Americans in well thought-out metaphors. Through his diction, he evokes a sense of justice, emphasizes the importance of national pride and demonstrated the respect deserved by Americans, by stating that they were forebears. In appealing to the masses, he mentions the general Americans along with the icons of American presidency mentioned, among them the outgoing president. President Kennedy’s speech incorporated declarative sentences that showed his strength, for example, by making the declaration of welcoming n ew states to freedom and all other people of the world. Through the repetition of the declarative phrases, he demonstrates his energy and the zeal to push forward with the plan. A considerable portion of the speech was focused around calling American’s into action, using statements like â€Å"let both sides†, to show that the huge task was not for him or his office alone, but also for all Americans. He presented a careful mix of the things to be done and those not to be done; he started by stating the ones not to be done and then those to be done, which exemplified his use of antithesis (Sorensen 37). In stating strong areas like the struggle against poverty and tyranny, he uses strong diction, and in some cases, backward syntax to clarify his plans for America and the world as a whole. The Excellent Characteristics of the Speech The first characteristic that made the speech a success until the present time include the use of contrasts, including â€Å"Ask not what yo ur country can do for you, but what you can do for your country† (Atkinson 1). The use of contrast is a sharp skill used by President Kennedy when communicating what the Americans were expected to and what they were supposed to do, all within the same context. Through the skilled communication of President Kennedy, he combined the areas that he wished to see coming to an end in American politics, including that he was in support of fighting for freedom and liberation. The second characteristic that made President Kennedy stand out through the speech included that he incorporated the three-part lists, which he used to demonstrate the outlook of the American community, particularly the areas that needed to be addressed. For example, he used the statement, â€Å"where the strong are just, and the weak secure and the peace preserved† (Atkinson 1). He incorporated the speech model and the system to tell the audience, the things that they needed to work on eliminating from th e American society, and at the same he painted the picture of the ideal society to them. For instance, by mentioning societies where the strong

Analysing Levels Of European Integration In The 1970s Politics Essay

Analysing Levels Of European Integration In The 1970s Politics Essay How much, and for what reasons did the process of European integration slow down in the 1970s? The decade of 1970s is very often considered as the time of stagnation or slowing down in the process of European integration. Some analysts like Caporaso and Keeler call this period doldrums era of the Dark Ages for the Community,  [1]  or like Dinan characterises it a harmonization in European integration.  [2]  However, can we say that the phrase harmonization equals stagnation? The more adequate appears to be Andrew Moravcsik claiming, that the particular era can be considered twofold, from the federalist point of view it was the time of stagnation, but on the other hand, it was also a decade of both consolidation and innovation.  [3]  For the reason of such diverse outlooks towards that certain time of European integration, in order to testify and assess how much process of integration in European Community slowed down, important is to explore and explain the achievements a nd innovations that were implemented during the whole 1970s. Nevertheless, in order to obtain more objective picture crucial is to include in that considerations also all failures of the decade. Furthermore, with the intention to determine a reason for the lack of significant progress in 1970s, the domestic situation of member states and events that took place inside the Community will be studied in this essay, but also for the enhancement of the general conclusion, an overall condition of Europe and the world in that specific period of time. 1970s seems to be a phase of changes in directions of integration in Europe, therefore it is vital to found out why states are considered to act more separately than collectively in that time, and began to be, to a greater extent than in previous decades, concerned with their national interests. Next, another fundamental question emerges, i.e. why consensus and unanimity in decision-making became so difficult to achieve. In addition, it is esse ntial to mention, that the starting point for the decade was Hague summit, held in 1969, which prepared the ground for further advances,  [4]  in other words, during that summit aims were established to be attained during next few years. Consequently, it will be analysed whether and to what extent such goals has been realised during the decade. In order to make this essay clearer, in the first part will be analysed how much the process of European integration slowed down, and in the second will be provided reasons for such occurrence. In the conclusions the main points of the essay will be summarised and there will be created an overall picture of the decade. The attempt of assessing how much did the process of European integration slow down in the 1970s appears to be problematic, because this particular decade, as well as all previous periods beginning from the end of the Second World War, differ substantially in many scopes, consequently it is hard to compare them. All the most meaningful agreements and treaties for the establishment the European Community, and then finally European Union have been inaugurated in 1950s, namely Treaty of Paris launching ECSC, then establishment of WEU, as well as Treaty of Rome founding EEC and EURATOM. Also 1960s is important time, when EEC and Custom Unions were instituted, the European Community was formed, and the Hague summit took place determining strands and goals for the next decade. It can be argued that in that context 1970s are seen as quite poor period, because of the lack of any significant treaties or innovations, which would be meaningful from our perspective, over 30 years later. Neverthe less, during 1970s numerous important improvements were introduced, but in order to obtain more insightful and comprehensive image of the overall decade it is essential to revise not only all the most principal achievements of that time, but also all attempts and efforts that have been undertaken, even if they ended up unsuccessfully. After the Hague summit first meeting aiming to determine necessary task to fulfil in order to make a progress in functioning European Community was Paris summit, where has been agreed by the participants, to modify the present Community into more official form of political cooperation, namely European Union. Although Paris summit can be regarded as an attempt to develop European collaboration, its contribution into genuine integration is rather slight, some find it as the summit defining intention for further integration rather than producing any vital advancement. Nevertheless, Paris summit had an impact on few important innovations that have been achieved later. For instance, during that summit has been made significant effort to initiate collective environmental policy, Dinan claims Paris summit was the genesis of the ECs first Environmental Action Program.  [5]  Another successful outcome of Paris summit was the implementation of the European Social Fund in 1974 to improve th e quality of life of its citizens.  [6]   Next noteworthy achievement of the 1970s was the signing of the Lomà © Convention in 1975, the trade agreement between the EC and group of 46 African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. That enhanced the meaning of the EC in the international arena. In the result, for the first time in history of the European Community, European Political Cooperation has been launched, granting the EC official significance as the unity in foreign policy. From that moment during numerous international meetings of states or institutions, the EC was capable to perform and participate as the single body of cohesive states, acting as a representation of all member states of the European Community. Furthermore, the Treaty of Luxembourg in 1970 extended the European Parliaments role in budgetary dispositions and regulations.  [7]  It was not, however, the only improvement affecting the functioning of the European Parliament during that certain decade. At the decay of the 1970s, after long lasting struggles, mainly because of the long process of legislative amendments in British Parliament,  [8]  in 1979 for the first time direct elections to European Parliament were held in all member states, which consolidated the EC democratically, and granted the EC more legitimate power. Nonetheless, European Parliaments innovation was not the only progress in context of institutional improvements that have been reached during 1970s. Even more important than Parliamentary elections emerges to be the creation of the European Council in 1974, as the body for the regular meetings of heads of all the member states to determine the direction for further progress. Some analysts call the decade of 1970s an era of summitry.  [9]  Nevertheless, the European Council was first authorised body of the EC, where political leaders of the member states were formally able to meet and discuss the future of the Community and the collective interests. Moreover, 1970s was a time of significant progress towards Monetary Union, which was not established eventually in that decade, and it is very often regarded as the main failure of that decade, but the reasons for that will be explained later in that essay. However, negotiations in that field have been inaugurated. The most successive achievements towards future European Monetary Union was in 1978 the decision to implement of the European Monetary System.  [10]   All the above programs and creations were of the significant importance primarily because they are concerned as the policy of deepening of integration. In spite of that, 1970s was the period of the first enlargement of the European Community, subsequently first step of the policy of widening. In 1973 three states, namely United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland joined to the six states that founded the community in 1957. Even if we say that all endeavours during the whole decade of 1970s aiming to deepen European integration was not very successful, we definitely cannot deny the significance of the first enlargements of the Community. Therefore, at least from that perspective, 1970s appears to be crucial period of time for the EUs future. Above examples prove that 1970s is not accurately regarded as the total stagnation in European integration, both in the scope of deepening as well as widening. Notwithstanding, the process of integration certainly slowed down to a significant exchange in that particular decade. In 1970s vital is the fact that the character of the European integration has diametrically changed in a comparison to previous periods. In further part of that essay the reasons for that phenomenon will be clarified, and the motives for difficulties with launching certain innovations, for instance European Monetary Union, will be explained. One of the arising questions whilst studying this period of time is why negotiations did last so long, and therefore impede implementation of any modernising treaties and resolutions. Crucial factor whilst considering the reasons for such slowing down is a historical context. Important here is the fact, that Europe, but also the whole world, was, we might say, in the middle of the Cold War. Started process of dà ©tente, literary divided Europe, and two ideological camps in the struggle for the influence in the world politics, also lasting Vietnam War, all of that factors had a significant impact on the domestic politics of the European Community. During Hague summit has been agreed to introduce European Monetary System, however the EC was already divided into two camps of opinions and perceptions about the future reforms. On the one side stand economists, namely group created by Germany, Netherlands and to a certain extent Italy; they opted for harmonisation of the economic policies in Europe in the first line. On the other side were situated France, backed by Belgium and Luxembourg, namely monetarist camp proposing the monetary cooperation first, and then economic collaboration. In the result Werner Report has been created calling for simultaneous and gradual implementation of both strategies in near future.  [11]  Subsequently, common currency and Central Bank as the controlling organ coordinating the financial and currency policy of the EC was decided to be introduced. However, future events of the decade undermined the whole process. One might ask why, for instance, Vietnam War had any impact on the domestic situation of the EC, but that together with another important event during that certain decade resulted in the economic instability, and in a consequence, major changes in world economic policies. More precisely, in 1971 Europe has been hit by the international monetary crisis, which began in US, country involved in ideological and military Cold War struggle for hegemonic power, and greatly weakened by military operations in Vietnam. Here can be seen how worldwide events directly affect the ECs domestic situation. Monetary crisis was furthermore enhanced by the huge American payment deficit, which also prominently destabilised European financial difficulties. The European Communitys member states struggled to find a suitable resolution of the monetary crisis; however the opinions how to face the problem were diverse. On the one hand, Germany proposed to join the ECs floating system; however, France opposed that solution and opted, on the other hand, for devaluation of dollar. In Council meet ing no agreement has been achieved, and finally Germany and Netherlands floated their currencies. In 1972 during Paris summit an agreement to a certain extent has been reached, and plan for the implementation of the European Monetary cooperation Fund was set up. Moreover, the EC states obliged themselves to reduce fluctuation and eventually launched the resolution called snake, in order to consolidate currency system among the ECs member states. Notwithstanding, snake failed later on as the result of the oil crisis, which occurred as the consequence of Yom Kippur war between Arab states and Israel in 1973. Oil crisis led to an occurrence called stagflation, and that affected the interior stability of the whole EC. The national bargaining between monetarists and economists demonstrates changes in the character of the process of European integration. The importance of effect in changing leading ideology of the integration was proclaimed in 2000 by Joschka Fischer, who said In the past, European integration was based on the Monnet method with its communitarization approach in European institutions and policy.  [12]  Founding fathers of the Community, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet, advocated the communitarian vision of European unity, they believed in the possibility of creation of federation of European states, and supranational institutions as the leading and joining organs of the community. It is apparent in 1960s the existence in French foreign policy of the resistance to the supranationalism and federalism. It was particularly evident in de Gaulles vision of an intergovernmental Europe,  [13]  resulted in long opposition of an enlargement of the EC and protagonist policy protecting n ational interests. Changes of the leading figures of the member states lessened a little these national bargaining, and subsequently when Pompidou became the president of France, British membership was no longer resisted. Nevertheless, after final enlargement in 1973 there aroused another problem, namely Euroscepticism, mainly in UK and Denmark, what became another issue in decision-making process. The outcome of the intergovernmental atmosphere and changed attitudes of the member states, enhanced additionally by the economic crisis, were predominantly evident in the work of the European Council. Some analysts even claim that the European Council in 1970s was symbolic of a profoundly intergovernmental era in the history of the EU.  [14]  All of the above factors extremely weakened and undermined the decision-making process. Further aspect that caused the difficulty in the reaching an agreement was the 1973s enlargements. It was not only, as has been said above, due to the less pro-European policy in new members than among other ECs states, but mainly because the effect it had on the European institutions. It was the first enlargements in the history of EU, and institutions such as, for example, the Commission, faced the problem of the growing number of diplomats and bureaucrats. Another problem of the European Community, beside the insufficiency of the European institutions weakened by the enlargement, was the lack of the leadership. As Jean Monnet claimed in 1974: What is lacking more than anything in European affairs à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ is authority. Discussion is organised: decision is not. By themselves the existing Community institutions are not strong enough.  [15]   Moreover, substantial impact on the process of European integration in 1970s to a great extent had a domestic situation of the member states, in particular of Germany, France, and UK. The Western Europe in 1970s had to face numerous problems of the various natures, economic, social as well as political. Rising unemployment, high inflation, and decline of the domestic growth forced the members of the EC to secure their national interests rather than prioritise greater integration. As Urwin argued In the 1960s the average annual growth rate within the OECD countries had been 4.8 per cent; in the 1970s it sank to 3.4 per cent.  [16]  Another issue was the spread of the terrorist threat, as the outcome of movements of 1968 in Germany, namely RAF organisation, and in France as well. However, also the importance of the feminist notion cannot be omitted, as it has a great impact on the economic situation, mainly because larger amount of women were seeking for work. As long as feminist h as usually positive effect on the social progress of states, in that situation it exacerbated the scale of unemployment. Additionally, strikes in UK, and rising opposition in the political arena in Italy and Denmark, caused that member states governments focused more on the problems stroking their countries and autonomous solutions, rather than integration. Many of those problems aroused because of the financial crisis of 1970s, and affected the decision-making process in European institutions, what subsequently slowed down the negotiations, reaching of agreements, and finally integration per se. To summarise, the whole period since the 1969 Hague summit until, we may say 1979 wise mens report had been very unsuccessful period for the European integration. Three appointed experts characterised in their report in 1979 bad condition of the Community and had blamed for that substantive problems stemming from economic and political constraints.  [17]  On the one hand, there have been some substantive improvements achieved during 1970s, such as first enlargement, EPC, or implementation of the European Council, nevertheless although the long struggles and negotiations the European Monetary System has not been launched, and member states acted more separately than collectively, securing their national interests. Derek Urwin argues that the EC failed to develop a concerted economic or political response to the crisis, indicating perhaps how easily narrower national interests could uproot the common structure.  [18]  The main reasons for the slowing down in the integration app ear to be monetary and economic crisis, exacerbated by war in the Middle East; domestic problems of the member states, which enhanced the intergovernmental character of the European cooperation; and first enlargement, even if also seen as an achievement in a context of the widening, it had a great impact of the stability of the European institutions and decision-making process. We certainly can admit that to a significant extend process of European integration did slow down in 1970s, nevertheless that stagnation was a motivation for actions that have been undertaken in 1980s and further decades to recover a condition of the EC and improve the integration, which finally led to the signing of the Maastrich Treaty in 1992, establishing European Union. Bibiography: Bache I., S. George and S. Bulmer, Politics in the European Union, Third Edition, (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), chapters: 10-11 Dinan D., Europe Recast, A History of European Union,(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), chapters: 4 5 European NAvigator, The authoritative multimedia reference on the History of Europe, Historical Events: 1969-1979 Crises and revival, http://www.ena.lu/? EUROPA, The EU at a glance > The history of the European Union > 1970-1979 A growing community, http://europa.eu/abc/history/1970-1979/index_en.htm modified 08 June 2010 Milward A.S., The European Rescue of the Nation-State, Second Edition, (London: Routledge, 2000), chapter 1 Moravcsik A., The Choice for Europe, Social Purpose State power from Messina to Maastricht, (Oxon: Routledge, 1999), chapters: 4 7 Nelsen B.R. and A.Stubb (eds.), The European Union, Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration, Third Edition, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), chapters: 6, 9 12 Urwin D.W., A political History of Western Europe since 1945, Fifth Edition, (London: Longman, 1997), chapters: 15-20 Urwin, D.W., The European Community: From 1945 to 1985, in M. Cini and N. Pà ©rez-Solà ³rzano Borragà ¡n (eds.), European Union Politics, Third Edition, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 15-31 Urwin D.W., The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration since 1945, Second Edition, (London: Longman, 1995), chapters: 10-15

Uniforms of the British Army 1812-1815 :: Military Uniform Clothing

Uniforms of the British Army 1812-1815 Major General of Infantry Since my character was Major O'Dowd I decided to do my presentation on the uniforms not only of the Major, but also the men that were in his regiment including Captain Dobbin, George Osbourne and Captain Rawdon. When Major O'Dowd headed off for the Battle of Waterloo outside of Brussels he was most likely outfitted in something along these lines; a Red jacket lined with white. It had a royal blue collar patch and cuffs, golden buttons, shoulder epaulettes, shoulder cords, trimming and piping. He wore a black stock and white collar band with white enamel crossed with a red center. This same cross on the collar band would also be found on his breast. Next came a crimson sash, white waist belt and slings. A gentleman of his position would wear white gloves, gray trousers with a golden side stripe and black shoes. Major O'Dowd would have carried a steel sword and a scabbard with mother of pearls embedded in the grip, a golden guard and a sword knot. He wore a black cocked hat with silver lace, golden tassels and a white and red plume. This was noted as the correct outfit for a major general of infantry. This link will also show you an exact replica of an 1812 ' 1815 'Waterloo' Shako Plate. Please make reference to the codes, charts and tables that I have handed out to determine exactly what each regiment including the cavalry, dragoon guards, hussars, staff, footmen and engineers wore (Smith). Soldiers and Officers of the Guards This costume would most likely have been more customary for our younger men to wear, I.E. Captain Dobbin, George and Captain/Colonel Rawdon. This link is the closest I can find to what the uniform might have looked like, but it is not perfect. This uniform is more precisely defined as having a black cocked hat with a black cockade, golden border lace, tassels loop and button and white plume with crimson base. The jacket was scarlet with white lining, collar, lapels and cuffs; golden lace and buttons. They wore a white stock, breeches, gaiters and gloves, a crimson sash, black shoes and a black sword scabbard with a golden point. The colors (royal colors) have a brown staff with a golden spearhead. The colors properly are the Union, having golden trimming and writing in the center and on the arms of the cross. Uniforms of the British Army 1812-1815 :: Military Uniform Clothing Uniforms of the British Army 1812-1815 Major General of Infantry Since my character was Major O'Dowd I decided to do my presentation on the uniforms not only of the Major, but also the men that were in his regiment including Captain Dobbin, George Osbourne and Captain Rawdon. When Major O'Dowd headed off for the Battle of Waterloo outside of Brussels he was most likely outfitted in something along these lines; a Red jacket lined with white. It had a royal blue collar patch and cuffs, golden buttons, shoulder epaulettes, shoulder cords, trimming and piping. He wore a black stock and white collar band with white enamel crossed with a red center. This same cross on the collar band would also be found on his breast. Next came a crimson sash, white waist belt and slings. A gentleman of his position would wear white gloves, gray trousers with a golden side stripe and black shoes. Major O'Dowd would have carried a steel sword and a scabbard with mother of pearls embedded in the grip, a golden guard and a sword knot. He wore a black cocked hat with silver lace, golden tassels and a white and red plume. This was noted as the correct outfit for a major general of infantry. This link will also show you an exact replica of an 1812 ' 1815 'Waterloo' Shako Plate. Please make reference to the codes, charts and tables that I have handed out to determine exactly what each regiment including the cavalry, dragoon guards, hussars, staff, footmen and engineers wore (Smith). Soldiers and Officers of the Guards This costume would most likely have been more customary for our younger men to wear, I.E. Captain Dobbin, George and Captain/Colonel Rawdon. This link is the closest I can find to what the uniform might have looked like, but it is not perfect. This uniform is more precisely defined as having a black cocked hat with a black cockade, golden border lace, tassels loop and button and white plume with crimson base. The jacket was scarlet with white lining, collar, lapels and cuffs; golden lace and buttons. They wore a white stock, breeches, gaiters and gloves, a crimson sash, black shoes and a black sword scabbard with a golden point. The colors (royal colors) have a brown staff with a golden spearhead. The colors properly are the Union, having golden trimming and writing in the center and on the arms of the cross.