Social Stratification and Politics Essay Example

Social Stratification and Politics Essay Name: Instructor: Course: Date: We will write a custom essay sample on Social Stratification and Politics specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Social Stratification and Politics specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Social Stratification and Politics specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Social Stratification and Politics Introduction Social stratification is a concept that encompasses classifying members of the society into various groups based on common socio-economic status (Owen 3). This sociological concept involves relational sets of inequalities that have political, social, ideological and economical origins. Social stratification is a system that divides society into various hierarchies. This system is based on the principles that view social stratification as a generational inheritance, societal trait and societal belief. Social stratification is also considered not only a universal principle but also a variable principle. There are various system s used in social stratification. These systems are caste, class, slavery and estate systems. The estate system was predominant during the medieval time and consisted of the clergy, serfs and nobility. The slavery system was based on the ownership of individual s by others. The caste system encompassed ascribed status. This was popular in India. The hierarchies were scholars and priests, warriors and nobility, skilled artisans and merchants and finally there were the unskilled labor. The class system is a stratification based on occupational and economic roles. Different theories define different hierarchies in the class system. The concept of social stratification is synonymous to inequality as it segregates members of the society allowing others an easy access to resources. The implication of this is that societal stratification affects the political structures of society. Politics refers to the activities that surround the authoritative distribution of an entity’s resource (Tansey 4). National politics refers to exercising authority over the distribution of a country’s resources. Politics in its self is a study that involves an analysis of the factors that affects an individual’s ability to possess society’s resources and to have control over the ability of others to gain the same resources. It is a power concept. Social stratification is the basis for defining relational power. This is because the actions of man are dictated by their economic and social positions in society. Therefore, social stratification remains to be an important aspect that influences distribution of political power among members of a society. Theories Relating Politics to Social Stratification Theorists who talk about the relationship between social stratification and power are Karl Marx and Max Weber. Both Karl Marx and Max Weber approach the concept of social stratification using the class system. Karl Marx defines class based on the ownership of means of production. The stratification gives rise to class struggle. The basis of the class struggle is the political inequality that exists in society. Weber on the other hand, talks about class from the perspective of economic, political and social status. Karl Marx on Social Stratification Introduction Marx analyses the history of class struggle in his theory of social stratification (Owen 18). In his analysis, he looked at those who own the means of production. He also talks about those who participate in the production process and the relationship between labor and work. Karl Marx also looks at the members of society who not only produce but also control the surplus produce. Control of the society’s resources is what gives rise to political segregation and struggle. The ownership of property allowed particular members of the society to control the distribution of these resources. According to Marx’s theory, political power is allocated based on basis of one’s ranking on the social hierarchy. Theory Karl Marx’s analysis is of a capitalist society and the main classes are the proletariat and bourgeoisie. Other subclasses like the peasants, proletariats, property owners and petty bourgeoisie but they do not have a major impact on the theory. The bourgeoisies are the capitalist who own the means of production. The means of production are land and labor. They possess not only capital, but also power to exploit purchased labor. The surplus value obtained from the produce of the purchased labor is used by the bourgeoisies to expand their capital. The class of bourgeoisie is defined by the ownership of means of production and the use of this capital to exploit members of society and to expand their scope of possession. According to Marx, wealth is not sufficient to get one to the bourgeoisie class. This wealth has to be used to sustain status quo through the continuous manipulation of labor and the expansion of their capital. This has to be a continuous process that has to be sustained by the use of surplus value. In the contemporary society, the bourgeoisies represent the members who possess political power. This power is gained through their social status. Marx brings an economic basis for the stratification of the society. This implies that the political structures are controlled and maintained by the wealthy. They use their wealth to manipulate the structures of society like the judicial system, the electoral process and even the legislative process. This control is used to maintain the status quo and to ensure that the cycle of wealth accumulation is continuous. An implication made by Karl Marx is that members of various states have been socialized to believe that social status is a basis for distribution of political power. Marx takes a deeper analysis of the process of accumulation of wealth among the bourgeoisie. He talks about the historical fight against the feudal system that existed in medieval Europe. The proletariat comprised of mostly merchants, industrialists, craft men, traders and manufactures. They fought against the feudal authorities to gain the liberty to expand their businesses through marketing of their products. This struggle marked the formation of the class. Old feudal and hierarchical systems were undermined and while new structures and orders were put into place. The economical prowess among the bourgeoisies was later sustained through the purchase and manipulation of labor. This was the case in Britain during the nineteenth century when the bourgeoisie maintained ideological and political predominance. The British hired labor that created surplus value maintaining the wealth of their wealth. According to Karl Marx, the other class is that of the proletariat. It comprises the members of the society who own labor power. They dearth of property forces them to depend on the bourgeoisie for survival. This creates an exploitative relationship where the proletariat is hired by a capitalist bourgeoisie. There is a constant recreation and reproduction of this exploitative relationship. The proletariat works for extra hours with low wages. This is done to ensure that the bourgeoisie gets profits. The results are an increase in poverty and wealth for the proletariat and the bourgeoisie respectively. The proletariat’s output during the extra hour is sold. The process prevents the proletariat from gaining wealth and subsequently maintains society’s status quo (Owen 19). According to Marx, he predicted that various political events would occur in the capitalist society. In order to maintain their social status, the bourgeoisie would enact laws that are more repressive. With the increase of oppression, class-consciousness would increase among the proletariats and a subsequent labor movement would be formed. The end of the capitalist era would be marked by a revolution instigated by the movement among the proletariats. This would usher in a communist society. Conclusion A contradictory and antagonistic relationship exists between the proletariat and bourgeoisie. This is because the former is struggling to increase their wages and alleviate their social status while the latter is doing the opposite. The bourgeoisie manipulate labor and work to ensure that the proletariat remains without property. This represents the struggle that is seen in the contemporary society. The struggle is that for power in society. This is because power is the exercise of authority over the various structures in society. This shows that Karl Marx’s theory on social class shows the relationship between social stratification and politics. Max Weber on the Theory of Social Class Introduction Max Weber discusses the concept of social stratification with a view on social classes (Owen 20). He argues that social class is the most influential cause of conflict in the society. He stipulates that the different dimensions of social structure are class, status and honor. He establishes a relationship between the ideological and material aspects of society through status and class. He attributes social action to the both status and class. He argues that the concept of class comprises power, prestige and wealth. Wealth is a representation of the economic structures of the society while prestige is symbolic for the social aspect and power is the representation of political structures of the society. Theory Max Weber describes power as the ability to exercise authority over various resources in society (Owen 20). He argues that it is the ability of individuals to see the realization of their desire even against the will of other members of the society. Societal power encompasses political, economic and social powers. Weber also analyses the concept of domination, which he says is the possession of authority in a particular sphere. Domination can occur because of tradition, rational-legal reasons and charisma. Class, according to Weber, is a component of an individual’s life chances. The life chance results to wealth and economic interests. This wealth is represented in the aspects of market commodity and labor. Possession of property and advantage in the market place increase one’s living standards. Weber argues that those who own property are able to control the methods of wealth creation. This is because of their control over the market. Among the wealth owners, there exists a subdivision based on the means used to create wealth. Among those who do not own property, there exists further stratification based on the services that they provide to the market. There are skilled, unskilled and semi-skilled workers. The grouping is based on the value of one’s labor and the different values produce different standards of living. In his theory, Weber argues societal action will only occur when there is a consciousness on the influence of economic power and the distribution of property on stratification. While discussing the concept of status, Weber defines it as the probability of an individual’s life chances being influenced by prestige and social honor. Prestige is influenced by wealth and social restrictions. These restrictions are like residence and the patterns that are followed during marriage. High status groups enjoy distinct lifestyles and definite patterns of consumption and association. On the other hand, those occupying the low status in the society, have their sense of worth pegged on futuristic hope. Both class and status have an influence on the political aspect of society. Status and class interests define political power. This implies that the interests of a particular influential class are well reflected on the political structures. According to Weber, parties are the definite structures of political power. The main aim of parties is to obtain dominance in the various spheres of influence. Parties are organized based on the interests of various social classes. The influence that the different classes have in the market is well translated to the political sphere. Charismatic dominance occurs among the classes that are exposed to concepts of leadership and governance. This might me among the elite of the society who hail from a family background of leaders. Conclusion Max Weber’s argument is that class and status influences the dominance of an individual in the various spheres of society. This dominance affects the activities of parties in the political avenue. Those in the higher classes at times experience dominance based on the legitimacy that is pegged on traditional authority. Members of prestigious classes dominate over those of the lower classes based on the belief that they have better life chances in the economic, political and social spheres of life. Blackman’s Struggle for Social Equity American treatises published from as early as 1854 spoke of the racial segregation that existed. Conservatives such as Henry Hughes and George Fitzhugh justified the slave system in America (American Sociological Association, 265). Hughes argues that the essentials of slavery should remain unchanged because the practice is civilly and morally right. Fitzhugh expressed his concern in relation to the suggested liberty in America. This liberty was in regards to accommodating the African America community. Fitzhugh felt that this liberty had failed. He opposed democracy and justified the slavery among the black American community. He opposed a free society where every man acted for himself and he attributed the growth of poverty and crime in Europe to concepts like freedom, liberty and equality. He argued that morality could only be maintained in a society that upheld slavery along side Christianity. Fitzhugh and Hughes were proponents of the philosophical justification of slavery. The s ocial atmosphere among the African American community was echoed in other parts of the globe like in South Africa. The fight against apartheid was the black man’s plea for equity in all aspects of the society. Slavery was the basis for the African American struggle for equity. Slavery among the African community is vividly remembered because of its brutality and inhumanity. Although white slaves were used earlier than 1942 in the Mayan Temple, Egyptian pyramids and the Mongolian fighting machine, a lasting legacy of oppression was left by the enslavement of Africans. African slaves were not treated as humans but commodities. They were abused and sold for the main reason of accumulating profits. The abolition of slavery in various countries did not mark the end of the oppression. This is because current economic, social and political structures remind the society of the enslavement of the African community (Vorenberg 154). The end of the American civil war in 1865 was to mark the end of slavery in America. Slaves were freed after Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. However, the white American still oppressed the African Americans. Attempts towards granting the African community equality were encouraged by amendments in America’s constitution. These were the Thirteenth to Fifteenth Amendments. The Thirteenth Amendment of 1965 illegalized slavery. This particular amendment passed Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation into law. The congress was granted the liberty to enact laws that abolished slavery. The implication of this law was that slave owners were to incur greater costs in order to have work done. Other slave owners wanted compensation for seceding slaves. In the northern states, the citizens feared that the released slaves would take their jobs. The African Americans were denied good jobs and they were restrained from accessing proper education (Vorenberg 160). After the Thirteenth Amendment, the Andrew Johnson succeeded Abraham Johnson as the American president. He enacted retrogressive laws that segregated the African American community. He stipulated that members of the white race were the only ones who could participate in the legislation of the Southern Constitutions. However, in 1866, the congress tabled a bill that acknowledged African Americans as American citizens. Johnson’s efforts to stop the bill were futile when it was finally passed by the congress. The bill acknowledged the incoherent rights of African Americans, regardless of their race. The bill stipulated that the federal government was to intervene in the event that a state would not comply with this law. The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted in 1868. This amendment stipulated that the freed slaves had to be given their rights. This amendment safeguarded the rights of the American citizens. Such rights were like those of a right to education, the ability to sue othe rs and the right to make political decisions and vote. The citizens in the south still undermined the African Americans and the white population still had more rights. The years 1867 and 1868 saw the congress pass the Reconstruction Act. This act stipulated that the African American community were granted the liberty to participate in political decisions that were involved in creating the Southern State Constitutions. The act distributed political power among the black and white community. The government gave all races in America the liberty to make political decisions. In the South, civil education was carried out among the Africa Americans. However, by 1867 many African American men could not vote because of the threat they received from the white citizens. Women were allowed to participate in other political activities apart from voting. In 1870, the Fifteenth Amendment was introduced in the American Constitution. This was an emphasis on the African American’s right to vote. The law stipulated that the government did not have the ability to refrain any citizen from voting regardless of their color or background as slaves. Black men were given the right to vote. The departure of the Union Soldiers who protected the rights of the black prompted the enactment of laws that made it difficult for black men to vote. The laws were referred to as Black codes. They were oppressive to the black population as some of them demanded that they sign labor contracts to work for full years. Other codes required the unemployed African Americans to be incarcerated and their children be taken up to work as slaves. The employers of the black community were also allowed to whip their workers. The codes required the African Americans to take and pass voting tests before they were allowed to vote. The white population easily passed th ese tests because unlike the black community, they knew how to read and were well educated. The African Americans were threatened by the Ku Klux Klan, a white men’s group that oppressed the black community. Apart from this, they also attacked members of the white community who accommodated the blacks. They carried out cruel punishments to these individuals. Such punishments were like hanging them, torching their homes and beating them. Despite of the enactment of these laws, the rights of the African American community were infringed. They were treated as animals and there was great inequality in the society (Vorenberg 172). Obama and the Politics of Race The year 2008 will remain recorded in American history. This is because, for the first time, a black president had been elected to lead America. Many had never expected the day to arrive because of the racial prejudices that are embedded in the American society. President Obama’s rise to power was met by large opposition that was driven by racial perspectives. Such racial aspects are the evidence of contemporary forms of slavery and discrimination among the African American society. During his 2008 political campaign, president Obama faced opposition from citizens who believed that a black man could not lead the country (Teasley Ikard 10). Racial prejudices prevented citizens from voting the America’s current president. The president’s healthcare reforms were also rejected by some based on racial discrimination. According to a study, more citizens would support a bill by the former president, Bill Clinton. Implicit racial prejudices affect the voting patterns in America. The simple identification of Obama as a ‘black’ candidate during the 2008 campaigns was a sign of social inequalities. This awakens the era of slavery in America. The roots of president Obama trace him to a black father and a white mother; this implies that he is biracial. He is as black as he is white. However, the categorical rejection of him being white due to mixing of the black and white race shows racism in America. Conclusion Politics and social stratification are correlated concepts. This is because the former deals with power struggle in the society while the latter is what determines who is allocated power in this struggle. Power struggle can be ascertained through an analysis of social stratification. This is because man’s actions are influenced by his economic and social position. Interest groups and political organizations are the avenues where interests of similar social groups are promoted. Various philosophers discuss the concept of social stratification in relation to power struggle. Politics becomes a major area of focus in these philosophical studies because it is believed to be teleological in nature. Man is in a constant struggle for power and his social position can act as advantage when it comes to gaining and sustaining this power. Therefore, social stratification will always be viewed in light of its effect on politics. Work Cited American Sociological Review. Washington, D.C: American Sociological Association, 1936. Internet resource. Owen, Carol. Social Stratification. London: Routledge K. Paul, 1968. Print. Tansey, Stephen D. Politics, the Basics. London: Routledge, 2002. Internet resource. Teasley, Martell, and David Ikard. â€Å"Barack Obama and the Politics of Race.† Journal of Black Studies. 40.3 (2010): 411 – 425. Print. Vorenberg, Michael. Final Freedom: The Civil War, the Abolition of Slavery, and the Thirteenth Amendment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Print.

Do you think Atticus is a Convincing Character or is he just a way for Harper Lee to convey her ideas Essay Example

Do you think Atticus is a Convincing Character or is he just a way for Harper Lee to convey her ideas Essay Example Do you think Atticus is a Convincing Character or is he just a way for Harper Lee to convey her ideas Essay Do you think Atticus is a Convincing Character or is he just a way for Harper Lee to convey her ideas Essay Essay Topic: Literature In this essay I am going to address the way in which Atticus Finch is portrayed as a character, but also as a symbol for humanity and a way for the authors possibly radical ideas to be conveyed in Harper Lees novel To kill a Mockingbird. Atticus is one of the main characters in the play and novel and is also the strongest and most complex figure to study. As a father, lawyer and member of the community, Atticus plays many roles, all very similar, yet all different. As a father Atticus is truthful, fair and never patronises his children, Jean Louise (Scout) and Jem. He acts as both a father and a teacher to them, educating them in the social and moral expectations and etiquettes of their society. He treats them with respect and wants them to understand why things happen in the community, what is wrong with society and how to try and change them and improve themselves at the same time. Atticus didnt believe in spoiling his children or shouting at them and believed in respect between himself and his children. Honesty and self respect were very important to Atticus and in order to be able to tell his children what to do or to enable him to order them about, he firstly had to prove to himself that he was doing the right thing, and that he could hold his head up high in the community, for example in taking the case of Tom Robinson: The main reason not do something again Atticus needed to be able to live with other people, and gain their respect by doing what he knew was right before he could live with himself and take control of other peoples lives, especially his childrens. He needed them to see what the difference was between the fine line of right and wrong and show that he carried through his own teachings. Atticus needed to show the children what he called Real courage and in taking Tom Robinsons case he knew it was the right thing to do, to stand up for something he believed in even though he knew he would lose the case before he started. However, the important thing to Atticus was to give it his best shot and to give his very best to try to help some one worse off than himself, especially as Tom was a black man, showing that he was a man of principles and someone who wasnt hypocritical about his beliefs. In the early stages of the play, Scout and Jem are doubtful of their fathers abilities, as he is different to other fathers in Maycomb, the small, southern American town where To Kill a Mockingbird was set: Because he doesnt do anything nd he reads They thought that Atticus was boring; he wasnt what they considered to be a stereotypical man. He didnt do any kind of manual labour, and instead worked in an office. He said he was too old to play football with the rest of the fathers and therefore the children underestimated his abilities. However, when they found out he was an excellent shooter, after the killing of the mad dog and found out his childhood nickname: When he was a boy his nickname was Ol One-Shot Scout and Jem gained a new respect for Atticus, and this grew later in the play as they discovered where Atticus real talents lay in the courtroom. This realisation helped them to understand the points Atticus was trying to teach them those of equality, and not to judge a man by the colour of his skin. He tried to make Scout and Jem understand things from other peoples points of view and try to see why this is important: You never really know a person until you climb into his skin and walk around in it. This basically says: dont judge a book by its cover; dont kill a mockingbird, something which has done no harm, for this, as well as being part of the title is the underlying theme of the play and the role of the mockingbird is portrayed through the characters of Tom Robinson and Boo Radely. The role Atticus plays as a father is in a way an idealistic role. He is never too harsh and never overly kind, he gives respect and is respected, in fact, he seems in every way the ideal parent . The reader is shown in every aspect of family life what a good father he is and perhaps his only fault as a character is that he has no large flaws, no vices or bad habits, and this, in a way, begins to make you wonder if Atticus is really a believable character. After all, is anyone really perfect? As a lawyer, Atticus once again comes across as the ideal character; clear, fair and eloquent- the best man at his job. The whole fact that he took Tom Robinsons case and listened to his conscience, when he knew he would lose, howed what sort of character Harper Lee wanted Atticus to be. He knew that the justice system at that time was prejudiced and immoral and that it was certain that Tom Robinson would be found guilty. We were licked before we started This shows the reader that deep down Atticus was aware that the case was hopeless, but he acted on his principals and took it anyway. In this role it also came across how clever Finch was. He used subtle but clear points to tear the oppo sition to shreds yet always remained calm, cool and polite; the perfect southern gentleman. This part of his character is at least I think partly believable. Comparisons with this aspect of Atticus character- the lawyer- can be made with the real world or the present day. Although it is true that not many lawyers would take a case they knew they were going to lose, the play is written so cleverly that you think it could happen. The play makes you feel good knowing that someone would take so great a risk, knowing they would come out of it the worst for someone less well off than themselves. It makes you want to believe in the character of Atticus and want to think that there are people out there like him. The way Atticus is portrayed throughout the trial seems to demand respect, so his character immediately gains some dimension by relating to and involving the reader. In the trial, he completely turned the case around, proving just by asking simple questions that Mayella was lying and that Bob Ewell was an awful father. It was obvious by the end of the trial to everyone that Robinson was innocent and it was then that Harper Lee used the injustice of his imprisonment to put across her ideas about racial prejudice in the deep southern of the United States. So, not just Atticus but also the whole play is used as a way for the author to convey her ideas, as is true with any book. As a member of the community, Atticus had the complete respect of almost the whole town, from the upper class ladies such as Miss Maudie Atkinson down to what were considered to be the lowest of the low- the black people, who stood for him as he left the courtroom. Although he was not rich, Atticus was seen as one of the pillars of the community which in a way was unusual, as he had neither status or wealth yet was kind, generous, clever and polite, many of the qualities which the upper classes often forget about. The most important thing of all, however is that he was trusted by Maycomb: We trust him to do right. This is why the case of Tom Robinson was given to Atticus and not to another, less capable man. He knew to do what was right and that if he didnt do it, nobody else in the highly prejudiced town would: I simply would like you to know ne of them. Everyone saw him as someone they could turn to, and this was a fair judgement on their part. Atticus judged people on their own personal merit, regardless of their background or past. He was freethinking and respected people for what they were, regardless of the colour of their skin, once again showing he was the ideal character- the Hero of the play. Atticus understood that people were poor and that the depression had hit people hard, so he was generous and let people use other forms of payment such as crops to repay any work he did for them. He was portrayed as someone everyone wants to know and aspire to, fair, firm and modest. As a believable character, Atticus is not one hundred percent realistic. He is definitely an ideal character and therefore all the other characters are compared to him and he is also someone you want to believe in, yet somehow this is not quite possible. In a way, I think Atticus is not quite human enough to be believable, and the fact that his only flaws are that he is too nice and always sees the good in people confirm this. No one is perfect and the fact that Atticus has so little faults takes away some of his dimension and gravity. He is believable only as a character of fantasy and as a subtle way for Harper Lee to convey her ideas about racial prejudice and her views on America at that time in history. Throughout the play Atticus is the voice of truth and fairness, and is a very consistent character, keeping to his principals and values- he is the same at home as he is in front of the community, which although sounds like a wonderful thing to be, is highly unrealistic. He shows the reader everything that is wrong with society and how, if more people are like him in the future people and society might change. He is a series of ideas, beliefs and dreams, and is therefore used as a way to channel Lees new ideas into a believable format. Enveloping these radical ideas within a mild mannered, moderate, inoffensive character perhaps made them more acceptable to the people of the time.

Drect effect Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Drect effect - Essay Example The Court of Appeal referred two question to the ECJ and this are whether a different retirement age for men and women in breach of Directive 76/207 and if so whether Directive 76/207 to be relied on by Mrs. Marshall in the circumstances of the case. The Equal Treatment Directive 76/207, which is based not on Article 141 of the EC treaty but on the institutions general powers under Article 308 (ex 235), lays down the principle of equal treatment for men and women in Article 1(1). 1 (iii) The logic of this reasoning is that a Directive can only be invoked vertically, by an individual against the state, and not horizontally, by one individual against another, because individuals are not to blame for the non-implementation of the Directive. This view was EC law and national law confirmed in this case. In Marshall the issue of the horizontal effect of directives was, it seemed, finally laid to rest. In favour of horizontal effects is the fact that directives have always in fact been published, that Treaty provisions addressed to and imposing obligations on, MS have been held to be horizontally effective that it would be anomalous, and offend against the principle of equality. If an individual’s rights to invoke a directive were depend on the status, public or private, of the party against whom he wished to invoke it, that the useful effect of Community law would be weakened if individuals were not free to invoke the protection of Community law against all parties. Although ECJ imposed limitation on the HDE of directives, it also creates other strategies or ways to advance the domestic enforcement of these meaner which broadening the concept of state, indirect effect, incidental horizontal effect and state liability. However, the ECJ is expanding the concept of public sector in the case law and thus including more individual capable of protection of community law [Johnson v RUC2 and Foster v British Gas3] Part b) (i) The

Methods for accident investigation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Methods for accident investigation - Essay Example Causal factors can be broken down into three types. The first of these is direct cause, which describes the immediate aspect that caused the event. The second is a contributing cause, which acts with other events to increase how likely the accident was to occur. The final type of cause is a root factor, which would prevent the accident from reoccurring if it is corrected. These aspects can be determined through the use of different analytical approaches. The deductive approach makes use of a reasoning approach, which moves from a general perspective to a specific one, based on the postulation of the failure of a specific system or process. The second approach is inductive, which postulates that a particular event of fault has initiated the process. This is an overview approach. Finally, the morphological approach makes use of the way that the system that is being studied is structured. This considers what aspects have the most significant effects on safety. A five-step model was developed by SINTEF for investigating accidents. The first step is identifying the sequence of events the occurred prior to the accident, the second is determining failures and deviations that influenced the events. The third step involves working out the problems with the systems of management. The fourth step involves the identification of weaknesses in top management. Finally, the fifth step involves finding the weaknesses in the public safety framework. When investigating an accident, one of the main objectives is reporting and the provision of recommendations, which have the potential to prevent similar accidence from occurring in the future. The TRIPOD concept examines the organizational failures that are crucial to accident prevention, based on the arguments that substandard aspects occur as the result of mechanisms within organization. These often occur due to decisions in the organization, and the underlying mechanisms are

How to Improve Our Government Essay Example for Free

How to Improve Our Government Essay People every day make mistakes, and find flaws in their everyday tasks. No one person in this country can consider his, or herself, perfect. Knowledgeable people do exist in this world though, and our government strives to find and elect these representatives. These representatives then make decisions that affect our country in ways some might find positive, though others perceive as negative. Representatives could make decisions that would only impact our government in a negative way. Our government has its flaws, along with the people running it. I can think of several ways to help to improve the government and its efficiency. A decrease in government funding for our National Defense would increase funding in other important areas. People across our nation need jobs, and are struggling to find a source of income. If we used some of the funding that we attribute to our Nation Defense, then this money might benefit in the use of creating new jobs and opportunities for people. Not only would we have money to provide jobs, but this funding could be used to help create and search for new information in the field of Cancer Research. The government funds provide people that lack occupations and have no source of income, with a reliable way of obtaining money for themselves to provide for his or her, and/or his or her family. These welfare recipients may draw unemployment after applying and meeting the requirements need to obtain this welfare money. These requirements may not be strict enough, which would lead to the allowance of the unemployed to gather money while being lazy in the process. Due to the lack of work ethic found in people, drug use may attribute to this laziness. A requirement may need to be added in order for the recipients to pass a drug test (a test for multiple drugs) in order to draw unemployment, in return saving the wasted money the government provides to the unworthy. The government could invest much of their funding in renewable energy sources. The post installation outcome of these windmills, energy providing dams, etc. would help save money later on in the future. With these funds being provided to help â€Å"Go Green†, the earth itself would take a drastic increase in cleanliness. The government then might avoid conflicts  with foreign nations in the search for the fossil fuels, of which we currently use as energy. Doing this might then allow us to pull our troops out of these foreign nations, saving lives and money provided for the troops. The government has a reliable system that has gotten our country out of some troubled times, and may be one of the most united governments the world has seen. As previously stated though, nothing and no single person is perfect. With these little changes in the way the government goes about, it may impact funding, our unity, and occupations for the people of the United States, allowing people to live and prosper, with freedom and peace throughout.

Epic of Gilgamesh Essay - Desperate Search for Immortality :: Epic Gilgamesh essays

Desperate Search for Immortality in the Epic of Gilgamesh The search for immortality seems to be an obsession for many men and women all throughout history. In the Epic of Gilgamesh a man investigates the possibility of immortality following the saddening death of his friend, his brother Enkidu. That man, Gilgamesh, feeling the fear of the possibility of his own mortality which was before unrealized before the death of Enkidu, searches for a way to preserve himself.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Is it truly that Gilgamesh searches for a physical immortality or more of a spiritual immortality? Gilgamesh wishes to give the flower of immortality to the elders of the city to rejuvenate them and return the youth to the kingdom of Uruk. This show of selflessness and concern for his people is a sight that might not have been seen a short while before his meeting with Enkidu and his influence on Gilgamesh which changed his view of life. Gilgamesh clearly tries in the end to restore the youth to the elders for the purpose of keeping the memory of not only himself but also Enkidu alive. As long as your culture and relatives survive so do you. Every relative has a piece of you carried along with them.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Why didn’t Gilgamesh just eat the plant and live as an immortal? Perhaps it was because if he were to eat the plant he would become a lonely king who just would become more and more saddened by his people whom he loved die over and over again and only he would remain. His close friend, Enkidu, was gone.   His father warnied him of the loneliness - perhaps this convinced Gilgamesh of his course of action.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Gilgamesh has been through many adventures and he gained wisdom to go along with his god like physical powers. Gilgamesh learns that the greatest type of immortality is the noncorporeal. The worth of a man's life is many times said to be measured by the things he has done and the legacy that he has left behind. After realizing that he was not a god-man, Gilgamesh understood that the real glory is in the deeds you have done and the people you have affected in good ways over your life.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Many ancient peoples had stories with morals to them. The Epic of Gilgamesh clearly promotes the moral feelings of the time.

Al Capone The greatest Carthaginian Essay

The play ‘A View from the Bridge’ is full of suspense which puzzles and mystifies the audience to specify the principle reason behind the tension that causes the immature death of Eddie Carbone. The author Arthur Miller delineates the dreadful ramification of the tension derived from the opening scene of the play. Accordingly, the presence of tension throughout the play keeps the audience alerted for an inexorable tragedy. By way of this, the author tries to pinpoint the other significant themes imminent to the play. Yet, this essay will concentrate upon the techniques that Arthur Miller devises to build up tension in the opening scenes of this play, which dominates the whole parts of the play. At the beginning of the play Alfieri, the lawyer who has originated from Sicily, starts by introducing himself, the area and the people to us. In his opening speech he presents the violent nature of the neighbourhood of Red Hook which refers to 1940s slum area in New York. So, he describes Red Hook and talks about the history of it. When he talks about the gang leader, Al Capone ‘The greatest Carthaginian of all when precisely shot Frankie Yale in half with a machine-gun’, the audience starts thinking of violence and gangsters, and a place which is utterly dangerous. He also describes Red Hook as a slum that triggers the audiences’ attention to think that the place is an uncomfortable one. Alfieri is unlucky as he is connected with disasters. Since he is a lawyer, a very few people like him in fact. This makes the audience think that Alfieri is an unpopular character in the area. However, being a lawyer he must get involved with some uncomfortable incidence and dangerous situations. Although in the middle of his speech he talks about the reality of Red Hook, saying that, ‘now the people are civilised and I no longer keep a pistol in my cabinet’. He still describes Red Hook as a slum and yet keeps feeling discomfort in the area. So far, it gives the audience a sight of relief that the area has calmed down. In this regard, he states that, ‘out of all of my clients I admire Eddie Carbone the most, a longshoreman working the docks from Brooklyn Bridge to the breakwater were open scene begins’. This amplifies the tension, already in the audiences’ mind to enquire into the fact why this is. And this tension takes the audience to the main conflict between the characters where Eddie is in trouble in controlling his family. The relationship between Eddie and Catherine (Eddie’s niece) is very confusing, as a normal family wouldn’t act like he does in the play. This confusion comes into play when Eddie tells Catherine that her skirt is too short. So their conversation reveals that they are in an argument, as they argue: Eddie- I think it’s too short, ain’t it? Catherine- NO! Not when I stand up. Eddie- Yeah, but you gotta sit down sometimes. In this speech there are plenty of strong feelings of resentment, where Catherine doesn’t think her skirt is short but Eddie does. The reason for this antagonism is due to all the male suppression being turned to Catherine. Eddie being a man and also being obsessed with his male authority actively tries to manipulate Catherine’s private life. Eddie is jealous, so Catherine doesn’t know what he is talking about. One more is when Catherine greets Eddie saying, ‘hi’ and Eddie is pleased and therefore, becomes shy. The audience are now in a puzzle to understand why he is shy. A normal person wouldn’t act in this way to their niece what makes the audience think why Eddie is behaving in such a mysterious way. Therefore, this mystifies the audience and brings tension as they would like to know why these unnatural activities are happening. The relationship between Eddie and Beatrice is again not like a normal husband and wife. Beatrice dominates Eddie too much; she disagrees to Eddie most of the time and doesn’t appreciate him at all. The reason for this is because Eddie gives much attention on Catherine than Beatrice. It goes to such an extent which seems Catherine is more important to him. This makes Beatrice getting upset. These are the downfalls in their relationship that leads them to departing from their normal married life. Eddie doesn’t appreciate Beatrice anymore; we notice signs of this problem when Eddie asks Beatrice, ‘are you mad at me lately’. And Beatrice replies back in a very irritated way, ‘I’m not mad, you’re mad. ‘ This makes the audience think how could a wife talk to her husband in such a impolite way; maybe this is because Beatrice is upset with Eddie as he is not caring about her that much, and putting all his attention to Catherine. A good concrete example of this is when Eddie stands face to face with the two seated women Catherine and Beatrice. Beatrice smiles at Eddie and so to Catherine; Eddie looks at Catherine and smiles at her which makes Beatrice feel very uncomfortable. Eddie doesn’t want to let go off Catherine and wants her to stay beside him all the time. So, he doesn’t want to let Catherine work. We now know that Eddie and his wife Beatrice’s relationship is not going to last for long because of Eddie’s obsession to Catherine. The audience can assume, from this conflict, what types of social phenomenon exists at that society. Thus, the conflict becomes apparent in that American society where huge migrants including Sicilian start living there. The way the American federal government deals with their law is completely different to how the people of Sicily deal with that. America only observes the literal interpretation of law written in a law book. So, if anybody goes and tells the police about someone who infringes any minor branch of law according to the strict rule becomes a good person for his/her extreme cooperation. On the contrary, Sicilian Code of honour differs with the American federal laws. In Sicily the community law is much stronger making the community people safe regardless of infringing any minor laws, such as immigration laws. If anyone does not abide by or observe this, s/he has to face the hatred of others. In that respect, a striking example becomes apparent when we find Vinny Bonzano had informed the immigration office about his uncle who had been hiding in his house. He broke the Code of Honour and for this treachery, he was punished and abused physically by his five older brothers and father. Eddie Carbone adopts similar kind of betrayal when he finds Rodolpho and Catherine having a relationship. He cannot bear this to continue any further. So, the only way to destroy their relationship is by informing the immigration officers that he is an illegal migrant, even though Eddie realises that people including his own wife are going to rebel on him. However, he still goes through it —- because his jealousness and personal vendetta is uncontrollable —- and virtually he embraces the consequence — the death. By and large, it seems that the whole play turns to its final fatality where all characters bear some responsibility, however trivial in some extent, which descends to the tragic death of Eddie. Arthur Miller builds up such tension by showing difficulties in the relationship between Eddie and Catherine as well as Beatrice. The way he shows the conflict between American and Sicilian justice is really remarkable. He does this so well that we are ready for the predicament that happens when Marco and Rodopho arrive and he also prepares us for the tragedy of Eddie’s downfall to come into death.