A Robust Misunderstanding of the American Dream free essay sample

Ronald Regan once professed, â€Å"The American dream is that every man must be free to become whatever God intends him to become.† Under this idea of the American dream, opportunities prove boundless. Every American has the freedom to explore any of his individual passions with the feasible probability of material comfort. In its essence, the American dream is a profound concept, as it provided the foremost illustration of equal-opportunity in our modern world. The Roaring Twenties, however, tested the waters of this idealistic notion of self-prompted prosperity. With its lavish parties and cultural decadence, the Jazz Era exemplified the deficiency of integrity among upper-class citizens. The American dream had become skewed by self-gratification and indolence, rather than the complete expression of hard work in order to overcome disadvantaged odds and achieve success. A keen observer of such distorted values, F. Scott Fitzgerald constructed the novel The Great Gatsby with e fforts to shed light on his observations. We will write a custom essay sample on A Robust Misunderstanding of the American Dream or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Despite the novel’s widespread popularity and literary acclaim, some critics did not care for the novel. At any rate, Fitzgerald intended to write a novel to highlight the lopsided sense of morality among the upper-class members of society. Gatsby’s obsession with unimportant objects, like money and material luxuries, demonstrates his lack of morality as a wealthy character of the Jazz Age (â€Å"F. Scott Fizgerald’s True Purpose for Jay Gatsby†).As a symbolic paradigm of his lack of ethics, Gatsby dies an obscenely prosperous member of society, but without love, happiness, or family.Due to the fact that he never established proper moral principles, he became obsessed with capital and self-love throughout the course of his life.This overabundance of self-focus becomes fully manifested in the fact that hardly anyone shows up to his funeral.Ultimately, Fitzgerald wanted to show that money does not outweigh integrity in terms of importance, and he follows accordingly through Gatsby’s love of self and elaborate indulgences. Likewise, the manner by which Gatsby acquires his wealth reveals the author’s assessment of the vast exploitation of the American dream during the Roaring Twenties (â€Å"F. Scott Fitzgerald and the American Dream†).Jay Gatsby makes a living through his business with Meyer Wolfsheim, a powerful black-market criminal and an illustrious bootlegger.When Gatsby introduces Nick Carraway to Meyer Wolfsheim, Wolfsheim says, â€Å"I understand you’re looking for a business gonnegtion† (Fitzgerald 42).Nick Carraway, the only consistently honest character throughout the whole novel, politely declines to get into business with Wolfsheim.This single moment provides a glimpse into the window of the author’s purpose. Nick Carraway, the character that represents decency and moral respectability, refuses to become rich through illegal activities. He chooses, rather, to follow the American Dream in the traditional sense, and keep his well-earned occupation. Essenti ally, through the character of Gatsby, the author intends to rebuke the common misapplication of the American dream. In The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald effectively portrays the ills of the affluent class in the Jazz Age.With the end of World War I, a new wave of young-adults was introduced to the distinctive side-effects of a war-torn generation (â€Å"Jazz Age Influence in The Great Gatsby†).Flapper culture began to set its course and became an advancement for women’s rights.Jazz music became increasingly popular, progressively influencing popular culture as a whole. While these boisterous times seemed exciting through an immediate lens, the broader picture was met by a clashing sense of debasement and corruption.The prohibition of alcohol gave rise to widespread bootlegging and other illegal activities (â€Å"The Roaring Twenties†).Many of these defining characteristics of the Roaring Twenties and the Jazz Era are strongly reflected in The Great Gatsby.The novel’s portrayal of Gatsby’s extravagant parties, the bootlegging scene, and the fancy automobiles on the 19 20’s all stem from the author’s witness of the culture.In general, members of the well-heeled estate began to disrupt the integrity of the American Dream. The author’s background provides the novel with a framework for many characters.For one, Fitzgerald’s experience proves revealingly outward within the character of Jay Gatsby (â€Å"Zelda Sayre Fitzgerald: Artist, Dancer and Wife†).Jay Gatsby serves in the military, briefly attends a prestigious university, and eventually drops out.Though the sequence of events occurred in a different order, F. Scott Fitzgerald did all of the previously-mentioned undertakings. Additionally, the character of Daisy Buchanan symbolizes the author’s real-life love interest, Zelda Sayre. Initially, Zelda Sayre broke off her engagement with F. Scott Fitzgerald due to his lack of affluence. Fitzgerald worked tirelessly to produce a novel, This Side of Paradise, in order to acquire enough wealth to earn the affection of Zelda Sayre.In a similar fashion, Daisy Buchanan could not marry Gatsby, because he lacked wealth and material possessions. A little more romanticized than the au thor’s life, Gatsby devotes the rest of his life to attain enough fortune to earn the love of Daisy Buchanan. These obvious parallels of the author’s real-life experiences help the readers to contextualize the fullness of the novel. While Fitzgerald’s novel was almost universally appraised, not all critics took a liking to The Great Gatsby. In 1925, H.L. Mencken wrote a review in The Chicago Tribune, where he belittles the novel (â€Å"H.L. Menckens 1925 review of The Great Gatsby†). Mencken, an avid fan of Fitzgerald’s This Side of Paradise, disliked The Great Gatsby’s so-called lack of meaning. He claims that the novel merely tells a suspenseful story without any deeper substance for the readers to ponder, â€Å"Scott Fitzgeralds new novel, The Great Gatsby is in form no more than a glorified anecdote, and not too probable at that† (Mencken). While this review stands merely as a reference, the novel received praise from most literary critics. Altogether, Fitzgerald sought to write a novel in order underline the skewed sense of morality among the upper-class members of society. Jay Gatsby’s obsession with insignificant material items determines his lack of morality as a wealthy character of the Jazz Age. The illegal manner by which Gatsby acquires his wealth reveals the author’s critique of the systemic manipulation of the American dream during the Roaring Twenties. In addition, Fitzgerald effectively portrays the ills of the affluent class in the Jazz Age. Lastly, the author’s background provides the novel with a framework for many characters. Despite the upper-class’ frequent misinterpretation of the American dream, self-prompted success is still alive and well for those who desire it.

What Do Passovers 4 Questions Have to Do with Our Modern Lives

What Do Passovers 4 Questions Have to Do with Our Modern Lives Passover started last Monday night and I was fortunate enough to attend a lovely seder (traditional Passover meal) with a family here in Madison. What especially impressed me was that they were open to discussing the contemporary implications of the traditional â€Å"four questions† (which are actually one question followed by four answers). The Four Questions Why is this night different from all other nights? On all other nights we eat leavened products and matzah [unleavened, cardboard-like â€Å"bread†], and on this night only matzah. On all other nights we eat all vegetables, and on this night only bitter herbs. On all other nights, we dont dip our food even once, and on this night we dip twice. On all other nights we eat sitting or reclining, and on this night we only recline. The explanation for each of the four items goes something like this: We eat matzah because the bread on the backs of the Jews fleeing Egypt did not have enough time to rise. The bitter herbs remind us of the bitterness of slavery in Egypt. Dipping karpas (potato, onion, or other vegetable) into saltwater reminds us that the joy of spring was tempered by the tears we cried while in Egypt. Similarly, the charoset (fruit-nut paste) into which the bitter herbs are dipped reminds us of the cement we used to create the bricks in Egypt. Again, a mix of sweetness and bitterness. Reclining like â€Å"royalty† is a way to commemorate our freedom. Now you might be saying, Thanks for the lesson in Jewish religion, but what does any of this have to do with business or job search activities? Well, let me tell you. The Four Questions in Our Modern Lives Remembering the matzah means remembering that if we rush around without giving ourselves time and space for our bread to rise, we will end up with a cardboard life. It’s the equivalent of sending out a mediocre resume or blindly taking action in a business without stepping back to strategize and consider the implications of those actions. Will we get results? Sure. But maybe not the robust ones we’re hoping for. It’s important during Passover to actually EAT matzah, not just avoid leavened food. Why? Because if we don’t eat the unleavened bread we will forget not to eat leavened food. It’s like saying Oh, I’ll remember to call x person back but not putting it on the calendar, then realizing at the end of the day that it never happened. Or saying I won’t spend 3 hours on Facebook today but failing to put any structures in place to make that happen. If we don’t eat the matzah- if we don’t create a structure for remembering- we are in danger of forgetting and falling into our routine lives. Does this ring true for you? We all have bitter moments to remember in our lives. We have been rejected for our dream jobs. We have had clients asking for refunds. We have made poor, often costly decisions. We have had great ideas that bombed. It’s important to remember the bitterness of those moments, even as we move on into freer and more successful times. We will then appreciate our successes more and have greater perspective when things take what seems like a bitter turn. On Passover we dip a symbol of new growth into a symbol of sadness, then dip something bitter into something sweet yet representative of pain. Perhaps we dip twice because if we only dipped once we would forget. Forget how growing pains are not just something we have as children, but a fact of life for anyone committed to their own personal development. Forget that every move forward requires letting go of the way it was before. A new job might mean saying goodbye to trusted colleagues or spending less time at home with the kids. Taking on more leadership might mean leaving a comfort zone that was, well, comfortable. Life is a mix of bitter and sweet always, and if we forget, if we start expecting it to be some other way, we are likely to become even more bitter. The commandment to recline like royalty is a great reminder to take care of ourselves and allow ourselves to be taken care of. It means taking a break from rushing around without allowing time for the bread to rise. Whatever it represents for you, consider in this season giving yourself the gift of luxuriating just a little in the abundance and joy that surrounds you. I would love to hear your interpretation of Passover or Easter themes and how they relate to your personal or professional lives. Please share!

Transition to Walsh College Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Transition to Walsh College - Essay Example However, it must be admitted that many of my peers have experienced a tough transition period. As far as I can see, the major difficulty encountered by students is the rigor of the academic curriculum. Many students struggle to cope with the coursework on entry because of the varying standards of their previous accounting backgrounds. Of course, any dilution of academic standards will only be counterproductive to the college’s aim of producing graduates of the highest caliber in accounting practice, and no student would wish for that. I recommend that all transitional students take a brief test to ascertain their level of proficiency as measured against the standards of Walsh College’s program. Any students falling short in this could be given the opportunity to attend a short bridge course tailored to bring them on par with the prevailing standards in college. In this context, optional courses in English communication may also find some takers. This would iron out any differences in academic foundations and make the transition smooth and stress-free to all students, giving everyone a level playing field.

Strategic Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words - 3

Strategic Analysis - Essay Example Being in 62 countries, the company has employed over one hundred and eighty-two thousand people. They offer their services in their coffee shops, homes and even in offices. The flexibility has made them acquire the loyalty of many customers. They operate in the stock market and have the majority of the market shares (The New York Times, 2014, retrieved fromhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/starbucks_corporation/index.html ). They have a variety of brands that help meet the varying demands of customers. Starbucks operates in a highly competitive environment with many and strong competitors. The coffee business has no entry limitations and therefore competition grows each day. Despite the situation, Starbucks has managed to remain competitive and providing its customers with high-quality products. Starbucks operates well-maintained stores in terms of health and comfort (Michelli, 2007, p. 22). Their neatness maintains their customers and attracts new customers too. The management in each of the stores is strategic. They have ensured that all the services offered are premium. The managers have ensured that their customers feel that the products are adapted and personalized. The comfort in the coffee shops has made them become social places and hence, attracting many customers. The many people meeting in the Starbucks coffee shops have been their largest strong point in terms of expanding and increasing their economies of scale. The organization is very selective when hiring their staff. Well-trained employees who have a sense of customer service run the corporation. They train their employees on a yearly basis, hence growing to the world’s leading coffee shop in terms of restaurant service. Starbucks trains their employees not only to make coffee but also on service value of the corporation. This has improved their employees’ productivity and innovation capacity. They motivate their employees through provision of medical covers and

How 'In the current environment knowledge and its effective management Essay

How 'In the current environment knowledge and its effective management are central to gaining competitive advantage' Discuss - Essay Example gement; for example, as Miller and Shamsie (1996) have shown in the case of the film industry, it is knowledge based resources in the form of production and financial knowledge which have boosted financial performance in an unpredictable global environment. The availability of specialized as possessed by a Company can help it to not only attain and sustain a competitive edge in the marketplace. According to Nonaka (1998), the uncertainty in the global environment means that the only aspect that is guaranteed to always provide a competitive advantage to a firm is knowledge; hence knowledge management through outsourcing is an organizational tool to achieve innovation and competitiveness. According to Quinn et al (1996), managing professional intellect is the key to value creation and profitability for most companies, especially within the framework of technology, which has created new rules and opportunities for organizational design. The traditional approach to knowledge is that it may be used freely by everyone without limitations. According to von Krohg et al (1994), knowledge is that which enables an individual to interpret and give meaning to the information he receives. However, they also argue that knowledge is subjective and is therefore linked to the group of individuals who are generating it. Therefore such information may be confined to a particular area or Company because of the inherent complexity of the information or because individuals are unwilling to codify the knowledge and present it in a format that can be shared with others. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995:6) describe codified knowledge as something that is formal and systematic, which may be expressed in a number or words form and may be easily communicated because it is in the form of information – for example hard data or scientific formulae. Therefore, such information can easily be communicated to others. However, there may be certain kinds of knowledge which cannot be easily communicated,

Defining The Concept Of Terrorism

Defining The Concept Of Terrorism The phenomenon of terrorism has become a major concern of the international community. It is elevated to the foremost foreign policy problem of the states. The terrorists power is growing day by day. The new and faster modes of transportation and communication technologies have made it easier for the terrorists to reach their targets and strike them without any difficulty. This has magnified the threat of terrorism and made it more sinister than it has been in the past. Although the menace is very dangerous and terribly affecting our daily lives, the states and even the academics have so far failed to comprehensively define and build a consensus on the term terrorism. The analysts face difficulty when it is considered that some forms and classes of terrorism are justifiable whereas others are not.  [1]   This article is an effort to highlight the complexities in defining terrorism, and to find out some ways to reach at least a partial consensus among states. The article is divided into four parts. The first part focuses on the definitional problems as far as the term terrorism is concerned. In the second part an attempt has been made to distinguish between terrorism and freedom fighting. The third part deals with the changing meaning and nature of terrorism over a period of time. And the last part discusses some practical approaches to reach a partial consensus over the definition of terrorism. II. PROBLEMS IN DEFINING TERRORISM Who will define terrorism? A victim state or a society, a stronger state, any international or regional organization, or the Super Power? Terrorism is a relative term and expresses different meanings to different people. To Israel terrorism means when a suicide bomber blows himself up in a market place. To Palestinians, it means when Israeli troops bulldoze a house or shoot stone-throwing kids. India views Pakistan sponsored militancy in Kashmir as terrorism. On the other hand, overwhelming majority of the Kashmiris calls it freedom fighting and resorts to the use of brutal force by the Indian troops as state terrorism. Terrorism is sometimes properly or sometimes improperly used as a synonym of rebellion, insurrection, guerrilla warfare, coup detat, civil strife, or any of many other related terms that produces fear or terror. Most of the times, such lackadaisical and random use of the term may make the understanding of the specific meaning and nature of terrorism more murky and intricate. Although the literature on terrorism offers plenty of definitions, most of them give a very narrow vision of the concept of terrorism. While some view terrorism in political terms, others insist that it should be defined in legal terms. Still some believe that it is related with morality. Undoubtedly, academics works on terrorism have helped understand the problem, but their contributions have not even materialized to create a consensus among the political circles. The academics themselves are divided on the very particulars of the concept. Experts on terrorism, such as, E.V. Walter  [2]  , Grant Wardlaw  [3]  , Leonard Weinberg  [4]  , Steven Spiegel  [5]  , Thomas Mathieseu  [6]  and Richard Overy  [7]  have all defined terrorism in the political context. (See Box 1). For them, terrorism is mainly a sophisticated violence, politically exploited by a group or organization with a religious, ideological or ethnic appeal. Box 1: Definitions on terrorism Terrorism is a process of terror having three elements: the act or threat of violence, the emotional reaction to extreme fear on the part of the victims or potential victims, and the social effects that follow the violence (or its threat) and the consequent fear. (E.V. Walter: 1969) Political terrorism is a sustained policy involving the waging of organized terror either on the part of the state, a movement or faction, or by a small group of individuals. (Grant Wardlaw: 1982) Terrorism is a politically motivated crime intended to modify the behavior of a target audience. (Leonard Weinberg: 1989) Terrorism is the use of violence by an individual or group, designed to create extreme anxiety in a target group larger than the immediate victims, with the purpose of coercing that group into meeting certain political demands. (Steven Spiegel: 1995) Terrorism is violent and arbitrary action consciously directed towards civilians, with a political or ideological goal more or less clearly in mind. (Thomas Mathieseu: 2002) Terror is not an organization or a single force. It is related to a variety of political confrontations, each of which has to be understood in its own terms. (Richard Overy: 2004) However, political biases increase difficulties in defining the term because of its subjective nature. The subjectivism is captured in a popular saying that one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter, for whom terrorism is a calculated tactic of the weak against the strong and established authority. The problem is how can one get out of this relativist enmesh? Similarly, the US State Department in its annual document, called, Patterns of Global terrorism, defines terrorism as politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.  [8]  The problem with this definition is that it does not clearly explain non-combatants, and the perpetrators, according to the definition, are non-state actors (sub-national groups and clandestine agents), while exclude the state terrorism. Moreover, the interpretation of political motivations is very broad. Some intellectuals have tried to define terrorism in legal terms and consider it a criminal act. J. Dugard notes that when a person commits an act which threatens the stability of other states or undermines the international order, he ceases to be a political offender and becomes a criminal under international law, like the pirate or hijacker.  [9]   But the problem with legal definitions is that they completely ignore the political aspects of violence. Treating a terrorist as a criminal undermines the legitimacy of political violence. In other words, the political notion in any terrorist activity cannot be discarded, which, again, becomes the major source of confrontation to reach an international consensus on the definition of the term terrorism. The moral connotations of terrorism have further divided the experts between right and wrong. Do all the nations take moral values uniformly or there are different patterns and orders of priority? Moreover, in this world of power politics, where states give priority to their national interests, what will be the extent of relationship between moral values and power? The common observation is that states are unwilling to give equal status to non-state actors which challenge their authority, and try to deal with them sternly by using brutal force. There are five major problems in defining the term terrorism and building a consensus. The first major problem faced by the academics and even the nations in defining terrorism is the relativist enmesh of the concept. For one it is a freedom fighting, while for the other it is terrorism. This aspect in defining the term has made the task more difficult. Second problem is related to the contents of the definition. If it is described as violence against the innocent people or non-combatants for achieving various goals, the application of the term, then, becomes too broad. It is very difficult even to define non-combatants. What if a soldier is not on the battlefield or he is performing peacekeeping duties under the aegis of the UN, attacked by a suicide bomber of a warring faction? Or would the terrorist attack on the U.S. Pentagon Building on September 11, 2001, not qualify as terrorist act? Moreover, the indiscriminate use of violence does not include those who employ terrorism against specific targets, such as, political assassinations. Third, when it is referred to spreading fear among the audience, one cannot distinguish between terrorism carries out by any individual, group or organization, and the state itself. This is also a major problem in defining terrorism that all the definitions portray non-state actors as terrorists, while completely ignore terrorism perpetrated by the state. Instead, it is called as the gross violation of human rights. It is also a fact that the incumbent political regimes have used terrorism as a means of repressing elements in their populations they view as a threat, real or imagined, to the continuation of their rule.  [10]   Amalendu Guha emphasizes that the recent use of power hegemonism by certain global nations, can be regarded as state terrorism, in the sense that its symptoms, behavior and actions as well as effects are, either the same, or, similar to the terrorism launched by fundamentalist beliefs or ideologies. Both are anti-human, anti-social and frightful.  [11]  The history is full of the tragic incidents, where state, instead of protecting its citizens, has unleashed reign of terror and has become responsible for their annihilation. The fact is that the state terrorism has killed more people as compared to terrorism by non-state actors. Fourth problem in defining the term is whether the act of terrorism is seen in terms of historical continuity or every incidence is considered as a unique in history and dealt with separately. Those who believe in the historical continuity, analyze this phenomenon since the French Revolution. They insist on the unity of terrorism throughout ages.  [12]  Others view each act a unique and absolutely different from the previous one.  [13]  So the rivalry is between the two extremes. Fifth problem in defining terrorism is: whether any act of violence should be analyzed by considering means or ends. As all ideologies sanctify the ends for which every mean is justified. The ideological indoctrination compels the terrorists to the righteousness of their cause and to justify any violent means to accomplish it. On the other hand, many researchers believe that the unethical means may also question the legitimacy of the cause. It is because of the above-mentioned problems in defining the term terrorism, that making distinction between terrorism and freedom fighting has become very difficult. However, there are some aspects which help differentiate between a terrorist and a freedom fighter. III. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TERRORISM AND FREEDOM FIGHTING It is a well-known fact that the subjectivity of the term terrorism has made it very difficult to distinguish it from freedom fighting. In this process, another difficulty is which forms of violence should be recognized as legitimate and which should not. Martha Crenshaw  [14]  opines that revolutionary violence and terrorism are two different phenomena and should not be confused with each other. The activities of freedom fighters cannot always be termed as terrorism, because their target is the repressive government. John Gearson raises some pertinent questions: What, if anything, is legitimate dissent using violent means? When is being a freedom fighter acceptable?  [15]  Labeling any group terrorist is very difficult particularly when the same group becomes the part of the negotiation process, and the governments have to sign peace deals with them. Nelson Mandela himself has provided perhaps the most satisfying answer to this perennial question. Pointing out that many people once described as terrorists are leading governments today, Mandela says: When you succeed people are prepared to accept you and have dealings with you as head of state. You become a terrorist if your aims and objectives fail.  [16]   In my opinion, the distinction between freedom fighting and terrorism must be made on the grounds of the legitimacy of the movement for independence, recognized by the UN. Article 1(2) of the UN Charter recognizes the right of self-determination of the peoples. It emphasizes the respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of the peoplesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ã‚  [17]   Article 7 of the Definition of Aggression adopted by the General Assembly in 1974 authenticates the right of self-determination. It states: Nothing in this definition, and in particular Article 3 (which gives an inventory of the acts that are regarded as aggression) could in any way prejudice the right of self-determination, freedom, and independence, as derived from the Charter, of peoples forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination; or the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and seek and receive supportà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.  [18]   Similarly, Article 12 of the International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages (1979), which came into force on June 3, 1983, clearly recognizes the means used by the people for their right of self-determination. It states: [The] Convention shall not apply to an act of hostage-taking committed in the course of armed conflicts as defined in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Protocols thereto, including armed conflicts mentioned in article 1, paragraph 4, of Additional Protocol of 1977, in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.  [19]   The liberation movements are deprecated as terrorists by the governments against which the struggles for independence are conducted. While analyzing the independent movements in Kashmir and Palestine, one may disagree over the means; it is beyond any doubt that both the movements are recognized by the UN. Terming these movements terrorist may also undermine and question the legitimacy of the UN itself. So, one can say, here, that the movements for freedom fighting are those movements whose legitimacy is recognized by the UN. Besides this, in both the cases, the role of state is very repressive and brutal. Both India and Israel have illegitimately occupied the land of the Kashmiris and the Palestinians respectively. Moreover, both states, since the inception of disputes, have been continuously denying the right of self-determination to these people. For this, they have also completely ignored the UN resolutions. So, if anyone calls struggle movements in Kashmir and Palestine as terrorists, it not only refutes the UN resolutions, which give right of self-determinations to the oppressed nations, but also legitimizes the power of the strong over the weak. According to Moulaye el-Hassen, the former Mauritanian Ambassador, The term terrorist could hardly be held to apply to persons who were denied the most elementary human rights, dignity, freedom and independence, and whose countries objected to foreign occupation.  [20]   Now the question arises why is there no consensus on the definition of terrorism? The most convincing reason is that the meaning and nature of terrorism have frequently been changed over a period of time. IV. CHANGING NATURE / MEANING OF TERRORISM The lack of consensus among the nations on the definition of terrorism has caused a continuous change in its nature and meaning. According to Jonathan White, the rise of modern terrorism in the West is linked to the struggle for freedom in the Western World in the 1700s and early 1800s when most Europeans did not enjoy freedom, and America was still only an experiment. A change in social perceptions and actions, however, revolutionized the system and structure of Western governments. Many forms of violence accompanied the struggle for democracy; terrorism was one of them.  [21]   The popular use of the term terrorism occurred during the French Revolution. Contrary to todays usage, terrorism at that time was seen in a positive context. The Jacobins reign of terror was purely a political in nature, which was a deviation from the old sacred terrorism. Also, that terrorism was unleashed by the State to protect the Revolution on the basis of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. The terrorism during French revolution provided a model to the other revolutionary groups in Europe to use it as a strategy to transform their societies as they wished. But the failure of the 1830 and 1848 revolutions compelled the revolutionaries to change their strategy. However, the use of force to bring any revolution remained the main weapon at the hands of revolutionaries. The 19th century witnessed the rise of nationalist movements, which struggled against the colonial powers for the self-government. Although the nationalists adopted violent means to achieve their objectives, unlike anarchists, they considered themselves freedom fighters. Anarchists were socially isolated, but the nationalists could hope for the possibility of greater support. Governments labeled them terrorists, but nationalists saw themselves rather as unconventional soldiers fighting in a patriotic war. They opted only the tactics of anarchists.  [22]   During the inter-war period, a new form of terrorism emerged in Europe, known as Right-wing terrorism. The purpose of this terrorism was to preserve the status quo. There were two important factors, which contributed to the surfacing of Right-wing terrorism in Europe. First, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, which gave confidence to the socialist movements in other European countries to bring a possible change in their societies as well. So, such movements were considered a great threat by the respective governments and the elements which wanted to maintain status-quo. A second factor was the establishment of fascist governments in Italy and Germany during the same period. They justified violence by uprooting the communists and anti-nationalist elements in their societies. The dominant form of violence in the post-War period, aimed at either de-colonization or social revolution, was rural-based guerrilla warfare.  [23]  The major success stories were those of Mao-Tse-tung in China, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, and Fidel Castro in Cuba. But there were also less publicized failures. Guerrilla insurgencies were defeated in Greece, Malaya, and the Philippines. In some of these instances, both the successful and unsuccessful, terrorism was used by those groups pursuing national liberation (Vietnam) or social revolution (Greece).  [24]   During 1960s and 1970s, the world witnessed this sudden upsurge in the form of Left-wing terrorism. This confused the experts on political terrorism, who saw terrorism as a new and unprecedented phenomenon, something that was essentially a response to injustice.  [25]  This meant that the focus was on to address the root causes of terrorism, which could be political, economic, social or religious grievances. The end of Cold War was followed by an eruption of religious terrorism in a large number of countries, particularly in the Middle East, South and Central Asia. The Soviet disintegration provided an inspiration to the Islamic movements particularly in South and Central Asian regions to launch an organized offense against their respective states to: 1) seek freedom; 2) capture the state apparatus; and 3) replace the old communist system with the new Islamic order. The vacuum, which was created because of the Soviet disappearance, also provided a great amount of solidarity among the Muslims all over the world as it gave them a confidence that they were the main force behind the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Furthermore, the American neglect to Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, added to the already existing political chaos. Out of this situation, the Taliban emerged as an organized political force with the support of Pakistan and to some extent Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan under the Taliban proved to be a place for socializing Islamic radicals from all over the world. The Saudi-born millionaire and Afghan war veteran, Osama Bin Laden, was one of them who took refuge in Afghanistan under the Taliban government. He had resentments against the Saudi Royal family for permitting the Americans to stay on the holy soil after the Gulf War in 1991. As his criticism against the Royal family got severe, he was compelled to flee Saudi Arabia. His nationality was cancelled. The stateless Osama then entered Sudan. But under the U.S. pressure, Sudan expelled him in 1996. Then he moved to Afghanistan, where the Taliban government was recently established. To run the state machinery, the new government badly needed financial assistance, which was provided by Osama and his organization, Al-Qaeda. Consequently, Osamas influence on the Taliban leadership increased. In a unique sense, Afghanistan became a terrorist-sponsored state. Taking advantage of his influence, Osama not only established links with other militant groups in Pakistan, Egypt and other Muslim countries, but also posed himself as a highly religious figure, who could issue a fatwa (Islamic ruling). In 1998, he issued a fatwa, stating, To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is an individual duty of every Muslimà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦until their armies, shattered and broken-winged, depart from all the lands of Islam, incapable of threatening any Muslim.  [26]  Since then, a series of terrorist attacks can be observed on the U.S. civil and military installations. The September 11 catastrophe could be seen in this connection, though Al-Qaeda did not take the r esponsibility of it. The September 11 incident has further changed the meaning and nature of terrorism. The incident has characterized terrorism as transnational with religious orientation. The purpose of these groups is not only to overthrow their respective governments, but also to establish a worldwide authority on the basis of their own religious interpretation. Today, terrorism has become very lethal and destructive. Technological changes in the fields of transport, military and communication have added to the strength of terrorists. In such a scenario, it is indispensable to evolve a consensus, at least partial one, over the definition of terrorism. V. HOW TO REACH A CONSENSUS: SOME PRACTICAL APPROACHES The world has now entered a New Age of Terrorism.  [27]  Three important factors confirm this hypothesis. First, the terrorists are equipped with deadly weapons and sophisticated technology at their disposal. Second, the religious orientation has compelled them to believe the rightness of their cause. In other words, the ideology and cause of the terrorist group or organization attracts the potential terrorists to join it. Third, the transcendence of national boundaries has further complicated the issue. In the presence of such emerging threats, it is necessary to evolve a working definition with little disagreement. Although it is extremely difficult for the nation states to compromise over their national interests, still there must be some starting point because there is almost a consensus among the states that the modern transnational religious terrorism is the major threat to the world peace and stability. To begin with, it is the responsibility of the academics to provide some basic roadmap which can help the states reach a consensus on the definition of the term terrorism. First, the academics task is not to label any individual or a group as terrorist but to objectively analyze circumstances which compel the weaker to take arms against the stronger. In doing so, we consciously or unconsciously put all the freedom fighters into the category of terrorist, as well as we also question their legitimacy. This must be kept in mind that a freedom fighter can be distinguished from a terrorist on the basis of the legitimacy and mass support to the organization and the cause. If these factors are absent, then a person or a group can be termed as a terrorist. Second, states must stop defining the term on their own, because the problem starts when two rival states or parties define terrorism by themselves and believe in the authenticity of that definition. In contrast, they should discuss and debate this issue in the UN, particularly in the General Assembly, to reach a consensus. It must be noted that there is no universal definition of terrorism that can be applied to every act of political violence. Besides, every act of violence should be analyzed separately, while keeping in view the motivations of the perpetrator. It means that there must not be any generalization. While analyzing any violent act to be qualified as terrorism, following aspects need to be kept in mind: If the motives are abstract, meaning if any individual or a group aims to commit violence with the purpose of achieving goals on the basis of religious interpretation of its own. If the struggle is transnational in character, meaning affecting the political, social and economic life of the other country. If the struggle is not recognized by the UN. If the violence is not aimed at against the repressive government. If the target is innocent people who have nothing to do with the government policies. So, if any violent activity fulfills any one or all the five aspects, should be considered as terrorism. VI. CONCLUSION As discussed above, todays terrorism is distinct from the past terrorist activities and tactics. The emergence of transnational religious terrorism, coupled with the advancement in military, communication and transportation technologies, has enhanced the power of the terrorists and intensified their brutalities. Despite all such known threats and hazards, the world community is still far from reaching a consensus on the definition of terrorism. The disagreement between one mans terrorism, another mans freedom fighting is still there. A collective and mechanized effort on the part of the international community is needed to overcome this relativist entangle. A genuine understanding of the phenomenon can only be achieved if it is considered beyond the propaganda purposes, and concerted efforts are made to discuss and analyze this menace at international forums, with the consideration that terrorism is equally threatening the peace and stability of the whole world.

Computer-Mediated Versus Face To Face Communication :: Essays Papers

Computer-Mediated Versus Face To Face Communication The invention of the computer changed the face of interpersonal communication forever. The Internet has contributed even further to this change. Through the Internet we can communicate with others online, through text, in almost any part of the world at any time. This is called computer-mediated communication and has become a major part of our lives. In many cases, people communicate by computer more than face to face or by phone. Is this a good thing and is communication in our society heading in the right direction via computer? Researchers have different views on this matter because there has been research done to indicate that computer-mediated communication can be both good and bad. The question then arises, who is right? A closer look at the two sides of the matter should help shed light on a more concrete conclusion. There are many people who attribute anxiety to face-to-face communication. These same people often find it much easier to communicate by computer. According to research published in "Communication Research Reports," through computer-mediated communication, apprehensive communicators have an advantage in that it may nullify certain features of communication contexts that tend to heighten anxiety (Patterson). Research shows that computer-mediated communication acts as a mitigating variable with regard to status differentials and it reduces evaluation fears that lead to communication avoidance and withdrawal (Gojdycz). This means that CMC, computer-mediated communication, allows us to communicate with one another without placing specific labels on the people we are communicating with such as race, age, physique, or even the sound of their voice. Why is this important? These labels often act as barriers to our communication. Many people find it difficult to communicate with others unlike themselves and this barrier is removed during CMC. In CMC, people have the choice of what to reveal about their appearance and they are not bound to it as they often are in face-to-face communication. Others tend to feel very differently about computer-mediated communication. In an article in "Communication Education," researchers came to very different conclusions about computer-mediated communication and it's effects. These researchers point out that when using CMC we lose a lot of social interaction. For example, when chatting or e-mailing someone you do not get the benefit of seeing their body language or hearing their tone of voice. This is a concept known as "cues filtered out" and it plays a major role in the opposition of CMC. Computer-Mediated Versus Face To Face Communication :: Essays Papers Computer-Mediated Versus Face To Face Communication The invention of the computer changed the face of interpersonal communication forever. The Internet has contributed even further to this change. Through the Internet we can communicate with others online, through text, in almost any part of the world at any time. This is called computer-mediated communication and has become a major part of our lives. In many cases, people communicate by computer more than face to face or by phone. Is this a good thing and is communication in our society heading in the right direction via computer? Researchers have different views on this matter because there has been research done to indicate that computer-mediated communication can be both good and bad. The question then arises, who is right? A closer look at the two sides of the matter should help shed light on a more concrete conclusion. There are many people who attribute anxiety to face-to-face communication. These same people often find it much easier to communicate by computer. According to research published in "Communication Research Reports," through computer-mediated communication, apprehensive communicators have an advantage in that it may nullify certain features of communication contexts that tend to heighten anxiety (Patterson). Research shows that computer-mediated communication acts as a mitigating variable with regard to status differentials and it reduces evaluation fears that lead to communication avoidance and withdrawal (Gojdycz). This means that CMC, computer-mediated communication, allows us to communicate with one another without placing specific labels on the people we are communicating with such as race, age, physique, or even the sound of their voice. Why is this important? These labels often act as barriers to our communication. Many people find it difficult to communicate with others unlike themselves and this barrier is removed during CMC. In CMC, people have the choice of what to reveal about their appearance and they are not bound to it as they often are in face-to-face communication. Others tend to feel very differently about computer-mediated communication. In an article in "Communication Education," researchers came to very different conclusions about computer-mediated communication and it's effects. These researchers point out that when using CMC we lose a lot of social interaction. For example, when chatting or e-mailing someone you do not get the benefit of seeing their body language or hearing their tone of voice. This is a concept known as "cues filtered out" and it plays a major role in the opposition of CMC.

Shc 31

SHC 31: Promote communication in health, social care or children’s and young people’s settings. Understand why effective communication is important in the work setting. 1. 1: Identify the different reasons people communicate. We all communicate for many different reasons; it allows us to fully participate in society. Below is a spider diagram to show the key reasons to why we communicate: How these reasons relate to child care: We communicate to express our feelings, what we need and what we want. Without being able to do this at any age can make us frustrated. For younger children this frustration can lead to them also feeling isolated, so it is important that we try to understand what young children are trying to communicate and give them plenty of opportunities to do so. Sharing Information within any childcare setting is very important. Parents should be able to share information about their children’s likes, dislikes and any important information that a setting needs to know, regarding any known special needs, cultural beliefs, dietary requirements etc. Sharing this information with colleagues and other professionals will make sure that children are fully supported and allow the setting to work at its full potential. Children’s parents will also want to know how well their children are doing at the setting and if they are having any problems. Building and maintaining relationships are the underpinning factor in any childcare setting. Building relationships with parents, their children and colleagues ensure that the setting can run smoothly. Maintaining these relationships will account for much of our language and communication used throughout the day. As human beings we are creative and have our own thoughts and ideas that we need to share with others. Young children will often just come out with things that they are thinking, as they have not yet built up a thought process, where as adults generally tell their thoughts when they need to. Sharing thoughts and ideas about the setting you are in can be beneficial. Speaking up if you think something could be done in a different way or if you are not happy about something can be resolved. Not speaking out can cause tension. People like to be acknowledged, especially when you are speaking to them. Reassuring people that you are paying attention and listening to what they are saying can be as simple as giving them eye contact. With children and young people they may need a little more, praising them and taking an interest in what they are doing will reassure them that they are being heard and that they are important. The reassurance and acknowledgement of colleagues will also create an effective work setting. 1. 2 Explain how communication affects relationships in the work setting. Good working relationships are a crucial factor in any working environment Communication is a vital relationship-building skill. In childcare settings, it is essential to establish and maintain good relationships with children, their families and colleagues as well as other professionals that may be involved in the children’s care. Practitioners who have superior communication skills are more likely to have good relationships with everyone involved in the setting. Working relationships are influenced by the body language, tone of voice and the words that we use. For example good open body posture, calm facial expressions and a calm steady tone of voice will show that you are approachable, willing to help and open to communication. Crossed arms, stiff face and leaning against the wall will show that you are not open for communication and in turn may cause tension. Good communicators should also have good listening skills as people like to know that they are being heard, this can be shown through eye-contact, positioning of the body and a reassuring facial expression. Lack of communication skills can cause problems in the work place as it limits your ability to connect with people on any level. This can lead to tension and conflict. Below is a diagram of some of the ways working relationships are fundamental in child care. Being able to communicate well and form good working relationships is a massive part of the role of a child care practitioner. From the first moment a child steps into a setting on their first day, they are experiencing many different emotions due to the transition from being at home with parents or carers to starting a Pre-school or going from Primary to Secondary School. Children will feel apprehensive, scared and out of place. This can be made easier when the adults involved have good relationships with each other and share information effectively. Gaining information regarding the child like their full name and a little bit about them will make them feel more relaxed. Finding a way to communicate and build a relationship with the child will help them to settle in and feel comfortable with you and their surroundings. This also counts for the parents, they too will feel apprehensive about leaving their children unless they have trust that their child is in good hands. Building a good relationship with parents will ease their minds, in turn their children will settle in faster than if the parents and children are all worried. These relationships have to be maintained throughout the time the children are in the setting. This is to ensure that the children are able to reach their full potential. If they are happy and relaxed they are able to play and learn more effectively. Good communication from the adults around them will allow them to develop and build on vocabulary, develop concepts and express ideas. If you can communicate well and maintain working relationships you will become a valued member of staff and the children in your care will be able to reach their full potential as individuals learning form you and with your support. Here is a diagram of

buy custom Diagnostic Testing for Hypertension essay

buy custom Diagnostic Testing for Hypertension essay Hypertension, commonly referred to High Blood pressure, is a disease associated with the increased blood pressure on the arterial walls when the heart is pumping blood to the body parts (Black, 2007). The testing is done by analysing the reading on the individuals blood pressure scale. Normally, it is denoted by two numbers; systolic and diastolic. The top number is the systolic number which measures the pressure experienced by the arterial walls when there is a heart beat. The bottom number is the diastolic, which measures the blood pressure experienced by the arterial walls between successive beats; when the heart is resting. Under normal condition, the reading on the blood pressure measurement scale should denote 120/80mmHg but this is when other factors are held constant. In some instances, this reading may significantly change therefore the medical practitioners should take utmost care in ensuring that the results and there conclusions are free from adverse effects. Unless where the blood pressure shows a higher reading and immediate action need to be taken, the patient diagnosis should take several tests before an imminent decision is arrived at by the medical practitioner (Black, 2007). Normally it can take a couple of days with intense and critical analysis of te patients blood pressure. Patients with a consistent blood pressure of readings that are over 120/80mmHg are considered to be having a pre-hypertensive condition and this will lead to chronic hypertension if strict measures and guidelines are not followed to ensure that the blood pressure do not rise tremendously over a short duration of tim e (Mohler, 2006). According to scholars, Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Treatments for Hypertension is the most effective and efficient way of treating hypertension. In addition to diets which have low saturation of fats, regular practice and physical activities need to be incorporated to the daily activities. In the case of diets, the medical practitioners recommend that an individual needs to have a well balanced diet; for instance, the DASH diet. The patient should eat more dairy foods with low percentage of fats, vegetables and fruits. The consumption of fish, poultry, grain products and nuts are considered of imperative importance in blood pressure reduction. In addition, it is recommended that individuals should consume foods which are rich in calcium, potassium and magnesium (Mohler, 2006). Physical activity lowers the blood pressure of an individual. The resullts from multiple studies demonstrated that individuals in all the age groups, whether old or young, have developed tendency of reduced risk of hypertension development. People having moderate or mild hypertension and exercise between 40 to 50 minutes in a period of four to five days weekly (cycling, jogging, walking) may have a high preference in reducing hypertension (Mohler, 2006). Scientist and medical practitioners have proved that emotional tension and stress increases blood pressure. Stress management techniques have been implemented in order to curb its effects. These techniques include Qigong, Tai Chi and yoga. Individuals performing these in three or four months usually experience a reduced blood pressure as the stress hormones were mitigated making them less anxious. In addition, herbal therapy is considered important in blood pressure reduction. Contrary to this, the specialists do not recommend use of the herbal therapy in administering high blood pressure treatment without their consent as it has sides effect to the overall functioning of the patients body. The common herbal therapies include; Stephania tetrandra (tetrandrine), Rauwolfia serpentina (snakeroot), Crataegus species (hawthorn), and Panax notoginseng (ginseng). Buy custom Diagnostic Testing for Hypertension essay

Free Essays on Same-sex Marriages

Wrong Future Step. Same-sex marriage is a big issue in the United States and in some countries around the world. Nowadays, saying that someone is a â€Å"gay or lesbian† is like a familiar joke among people. It is known that in every country around the world there are â€Å"gay or lesbian† people. Hawaii is the only state that legalizes same-sex marriages, and many other states are considering legalizing it. This may occur in the US because of the high percentage of gays and lesbians. Same-sex marriages should not be legalized because it represents huge change and damage to society and to the essence and meaning of marriage. Legalizing same-sex marriages will change completely the whole society. It will cause sex confusion to young people who will not know if they are heterosexual or homosexual. The percentages of homosexual people will increase if same-sex marriages is allowed. If same-sex marriages is right, children from school will learn that is equally acceptable to marry a person with the same or different sex. This implies that it is completely right and recognized by the law that man can marry another man. Being taught that same-sex marriages is legal, students will freely choose for their partner a heterosexual or homosexual person. Many families will not accept that their child could be a homosexual person and that he can marry another with the same sex. For this reason, it is going to be a big war between the families who are for and against this point because most of the families in the United States are against this position. If a same-sex marriage is legal, young people will confuse which way -being homosexual or heterosexual- to take in life. Therefore, being a homosexual may be a role-model. Children adoption will be a big issue in same-sex couples who want to adopt children. The child adopted may be in the future the same as his/her parent. It may be better for a child to be raised by a heterosexual couple accordi... Free Essays on Same-sex Marriages Free Essays on Same-sex Marriages Wrong Future Step. Same-sex marriage is a big issue in the United States and in some countries around the world. Nowadays, saying that someone is a â€Å"gay or lesbian† is like a familiar joke among people. It is known that in every country around the world there are â€Å"gay or lesbian† people. Hawaii is the only state that legalizes same-sex marriages, and many other states are considering legalizing it. This may occur in the US because of the high percentage of gays and lesbians. Same-sex marriages should not be legalized because it represents huge change and damage to society and to the essence and meaning of marriage. Legalizing same-sex marriages will change completely the whole society. It will cause sex confusion to young people who will not know if they are heterosexual or homosexual. The percentages of homosexual people will increase if same-sex marriages is allowed. If same-sex marriages is right, children from school will learn that is equally acceptable to marry a person with the same or different sex. This implies that it is completely right and recognized by the law that man can marry another man. Being taught that same-sex marriages is legal, students will freely choose for their partner a heterosexual or homosexual person. Many families will not accept that their child could be a homosexual person and that he can marry another with the same sex. For this reason, it is going to be a big war between the families who are for and against this point because most of the families in the United States are against this position. If a same-sex marriage is legal, young people will confuse which way -being homosexual or heterosexual- to take in life. Therefore, being a homosexual may be a role-model. Children adoption will be a big issue in same-sex couples who want to adopt children. The child adopted may be in the future the same as his/her parent. It may be better for a child to be raised by a heterosexual couple accordi...

Racial Bias in the Media Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Racial Bias in the Media - Essay Example Some bias is expected. It can not be argued that children's networks have a bias towards showing children, that women's networks show women, and that African American networks show African Americans. As consumers, it is rare to question this phenomenon. But what about networks that are for everyone Is there still a bias in what they show, and who are they biased towards When it comes to mainstream media and news, there is a particular bias towards racial minorities, one that falsely creates stereotypes and undermines the fight for equality. Black men are often portrayed as aggressive, angry, and unwilling to compromise. Latino/Latinas are portrayed as unwilling to learn English, and as drug smugglers. Native Americans are portrayed as lazy, and alcoholics. Asians are portrayed as quiet and hardworking. Are these images real While all stereotypes are based loosely on some reality, the stereotypes created by the media are even more false then those created through actual human interaction. These images are created from the very small representations of minority available in the media, most of which are already negatively slanted to begin with. But how do we know the media is creating these images There is an easy answer. Turn on the television, or open a newspaper. The vast majority of what is being seen is white, heterosexual men. The next most common group White, heterosexual women. They are seen in percentages that far outweigh the actual race percentages in the United States. In a society so passionate about equality, how does racial bias remain so strong in the media Like most forms of equality, racial equality is a long, hard battle. While the need for equality is clear, most people feel a sense of ennui if the battle takes too long. Why keep trying, when the worst battles have already been fought Does the media bias really hurt anyone Yes. Racial bias, and racism, directly affect and hurt everyone. They hurt the people who are being ignored, or being portrayed only negatively, by creating unrealistic stereotypes which they have to fight, and also by limiting the positive role models young children of color have available. Racism affects the media majority, because those same stereotypes create an unnecessary fear and a separate between races. Racism that is so clear affects society, because it limits the exposure of different cultures and groups, making understanding each other and working together for equality that much harder. Racism creates an underlying fear and tension that the United States would be much better without. However, it is important to note that not all racism, at least portrayed racism, is intentional. Even today, what is shown on television and what is read in newspapers is controlled by a very small group of people. White, upper-class, middle aged, heterosexual men. There is no direct attempt to be racist in what they put out in the media, there are no manuals telling them how to be racist. But, like all groups, they are more comfortable with a familiar face. That face is a white man, not a black woman, or an Asian child. Some, however, is intentional. By using racially unequal language, a negative image can be portrayed, only by changing one or two words. Stanford Professor Geoffrey Nunberg points out the difference between using refugee and evacuee during the Katrina crisis. By using

Exploitation in the Social Structure of Civilizations Assignment

Exploitation in the Social Structure of Civilizations - Assignment Example Discussion Let us first take the recordings of Diego Duran regarding the Aztec civilization, its social structures and beliefs. Though these recordings were made from interviews taken from voyagers or their descendants at least fifty years after the Spaniards had encountered the Aztec empire, yet we find a compelling story that shows the interest that Duran must have had in recording them for posterity. They do not aspire to compare one civilization to another in terms of superiority or greatness; rather they are a faithful representation of the Aztec civilization as seen through Spanish eyes. Quite likely the Spaniards were taken aback at the elaborate social structure that existed in the Americas so far away from home, even though they felt revulsion at the human sacrifices that were made to the sun god Quetzalcoatl and other demigods. Contrarily speaking, the Spanish treatment of the Aztecs at the hands of Hernando Cortes was no less barbaric and demeaning, and leaves one with a b itter taste in the mouth. As Mel Gibson has so eloquently shown in Apocalypto, neither could aspire to be on the higher moral ground. What is clear is that religion and economics had a key role in separating society into classes. The upper class consisting of the king and nobles led an existence quite different from that of the lower social classes. There were three ways in which a man could aspire to move upwards in society, through distinguishing himself in battle, through entering the priesthood or through being a good trader and marketer (Stryker, 604). Quite consciously, hundreds of families would have aspired to rise in the annals of society but only a few would have achieved this feat. Imagine a normal Aztec not even being able to wear sandals on his feet, while this was a privilege given only to the nobles and leaders in society. The average Aztec would have led a life of subsistence and want. Indeed, circumstances could become so dire that a man could sell his wife and vice versa in times of economic distress. Or they could decide to sell the child that troubled them the most, claiming that he or she was a misfit and a troublemaker. The Aztecs treated their prisoners of war in brutal fashion, seeking no doubt upward social mobility by sacrificing their victims to the gods and after having torn their hearts out, would even take home the carcasses to feast upon like cannibals (Stryker, 603). Moving on to the account given by King Kangxi of the Qing Dynasty, he regards the supreme power of the King was to be able to pardon or condemn a subject, thereby ending his life or sparing it. It was of course necessary to make an example of dishonest men like Hu Chien-Ching, a corrupt official who terrorized his neighborhood and usurped their lands, for which the King recommended he be executed along with his family in his native place. At other times he made a careful review of appeals and spared people their lives. The King appears to be a practical man, and is disdainful of the practices that men use to gain favor with him. Quite often these men talk of principles and teaching that they themselves do not follow, but seek to impress by their knowledge. This kind of knowledge is empty and useless, much in the manner of