Tsarist system of government Essay Example for Free

Tsarist system of government Essay The Tsarist system of government underwent many changes throughout the years of 1881-1914. Both Alexander III and Nicholas II created several modifications, being both good and bad, to the government during these years. Alexander III created mostly negative changes, due to him being seen as a reactionary, whereas Nicholas II created mainly positive changes to the government as a result of the 1905 revolution. These changes can be categorised into political, economic and social modifications. Alexander III made a few political modifications to the Tsarist government. In 1851, he introduced Land Captains. These meant that people, sometimes locals, could be appointed to have more power over the people within their towns or cities, meaning power was seemingly being more wide spread. However, these lands captains were chosen by the Tsar himself, meaning he could manipulate who had extra power based on what he wanted. Therefore, some could argue that this was a negative modification made to the government. Alexander III also introduced the Manifesto of Unshakeable Autocracy in 1881. This showed the Tsars rejection of democracy and further reform, meaning he had further influence and power over everyone else. He also introduced the Statue of State Security in 1881, which allowed for the Okhrana to have more powers. For example, the Okhrana was now able to break into people’s houses without reason or their consent, meaning the government had further control over the population of Russia. Although Alexander III’s political reforms were mostly bad, the introduction of the Land Captains meant that his power was in fact becoming more widespread amongst the population of Russia, and not all of Russia’s power was given to one person. Therefore, the political reforms made by Alexander III showed a slight modification the government during his reign. Nicholas II also introduced several political reforms. These took place after the 1905 revolution. In 1905, Nicholas issued the October manifesto. This gave people a lot more freedom than they previously had. Freedom of speech, organisation and assembly was now made legal; allowing opposition groups to now be able to be more organised as they were allowed to meet in public. Nicholas also introduced the fundamental laws in 1906, which allowed for the government to become more democratic. Under the fundamental laws, Article 87 was introduced, giving the Tsar the complete right to exercise any policy that he wished, without having to gain permission from the Dumas beforehand. The first State Duma was also introduced under Nicholas II in April 1906, which allowed for the population of Russia to have more of a say in the governments decisions. It was believed that the Duma was a step forwards towards a democracy for Russia; however, the Tsar could change and manipulate the Dumas in whatever way he wished through the use of Article 87, mean they were only put in place to make Russia seem more democratic when in reality it was not. Nicholas II also introduced a pro-government terrorist group called the Black Hundreds in 1905, meaning the government had further control over Russia as they were willing to use violence to get what they wanted. All of these new policies introduced by Nicholas seemed like positive reforms, however Article 87 meant that the Tsar could still pass laws and policies without consulting the Dumas beforehand, so really the Tsar and his power still heavily remained in Russia. The modifications made by Nicholas II throughout the years of his reign drastically changed the Tsarist government, showing the fact that Nicholas’ modifications greatly impacted the Tsarist government. Both of the Tsars between the years 1881-1914 also introduced a range of economic reforms. Under Alexander III were Witte, Bunge and Vysknegradsky. Witte made several economic reforms, including the building of the Trans-Siberian railway in 1891, the increase of foreign loans, the gold standard and industrialisation. All of these meant that Russia was now becoming a much richer country, with more exports going to other countries. The production of coal, iron and oil was majorly increased, meaning the country had a lot more sources of income other than just agriculture. The building of the railway meant that trade was much easier, and therefore the countries income was increased as a result. Despite all of Witte’s efforts, Russia still lagged behind other great powers economically, and therefore the economic policies put in place did improve Russia but not as much as Witte intended. Also, Alexander III introduced the Peasants Land Bank in 1862, which meant that peasants would now find it easier to rent land. However, they still had a difficult time paying this back and not many peasants owned land after this was put in place, the majority of land was still owned by the major, richer landowners. As a result, this shows a major change to the government during Alexander’s reign as a wide range of economic policies were introduced by Witte which dramatically improved the countries overall income and as a result Russia was much better off as a country. Nicholas II also put various economic changes in place. These were under Stolypin, who changed a great deal for Russia and put a lot of policies in place. One economic policy which was put in place by Stolypin was the ending of redemption payments for peasants to pay to the Mir in 1907. This in turn meant that peasants had more money to put towards land and farms, meaning they could make more income and not lose any money due to having to make redemption payments. Stolypin also introduced loans for peasants which were easier for peasants to get hold of. This meant that they could own more land and were encouraged to own a farm, and therefore would have an increased income as a result of this. Also, the peasants easily would have been able to pay off these loans due to having an increased income, so as a result peasants were no longer as poor as before. This however can be counter-argued by saying that in 1906-14, only 25% of peasants owned lots of land/farms, showing that this policy did not fully do what was originally intended. Also, the richest 10% of landowners still owned majority of the land, meaning not much of it actually belonged to the peasants. Nicholas II therefore made several economic modifications to the government during his reign which attempted to benefit the peasants of Russia. However, although most of these changes were beneficial to Russia, some of them did not take the desired effect; for example Nicholas II tried to make peasants gain more land, but figures show that majority of the land was still owned by the richest land owners and not peasants. Finally, both Alexander and Nicholas introduced a range of social reforms. Alexander III introduced the policy of Russification in 1883. This meant that the official language of Russia was Russian, and all schools and documents had to be written in Russian; any other language was not allowed. This meant that other cultures and other languages were repressed, as someone could not speak the language of their home country within Russia. This then would have created a further breeding ground for more opposition to the Tsarist rule, so Russification had negative effects on Russia and on the Tsarist government. Alexander III also emancipated the serfs in 188. This was a major social reform for the serfs as it now meant that they had a lot more freedom and were no longer enslaved by serfdom. However, it can be argued that the serfs were no actually freed. The now ex-serfs were still tied to the land, meaning they still had to work on that land for the land owners and they therefore were not actually free. Also, ex-serfs had to pay redemption payments on the land they used to be tied to, so they are having to compensate the government. As a result of these modifications, the Tsarist government was modified in many ways based on Alexander’s social reforms, even if all of his reforms made were not as beneficial as originally thought. Nicholas II also introduced many social reforms. Under Stolypin, Nicholas introduced the policy of every head of each household inheriting some land. As a result, each family would then therefore have some land ownership within the family, meaning they had some source of income if no other sources of income are obtainable. This was a positive reform made by Nicholas II as not as many people faced poverty and poor living conditions and therefore they overall had a better life. Another reform made by Stolypin under Nicholas II was the demolition of the Mir. These meant that peasants had to live within a Mir and had a lot of restrictions based on where they could go and when they could leave. Stolypin got rid of Mir’s in 1908, which as a result gave peasants a lot more freedom than they previously had. The social reforms made by Nicholas II were overall positive as they greatly benefited the population of Russia; mainly the peasants. This then shows that the Tsarist government did face many modifications throughout the years 1881-1914 as Nicholas put in place many social reforms which greatly changed how Russian peasants lived. Overall, it is clearly evident that several modifications were made to the Tsarist government in the years 1881-1914, which were made by both Alexander III and Nicholas II. These took form in political, economic and social changes, and some had positive effects whereas others had negative effects. However, not all of the reforms put in place fully did what they were originally intended to do, and therefore the modifications were drastically made but not to the extent in which they were intended to do so.

Cubas Transformational Leader Fidel Castro Cultural Studies Essay

Cubas Transformational Leader Fidel Castro Cultural Studies Essay Inspirational Leader During my involvement with issues like leadership and management, I must admit that real leaders are the ones that implement their vision with efficiency and make people feel trusted and inspired. People can be inspired and find their meaning of life by align their needs and desires with the vision of their chosen leader. The history has shown that few individuals can be thought as real leaders. As Ronald Heifetz and Donald Laurie state , the leaders main responsibilities are to direct people by defining the problems of a situation and identify the adaptive challenge. In this way the leader can be considered as protector since he or she can shield people and organizations from external threads. Apart from this an inspirational leader must have self knowledge, must be authentic and devoted to his passion and vision. Great leaders as Goffee and Jones discovered, share unexpected qualities such as they empathize passionately and realistic with people. In addition th ey manage employees with something they call tough empathy. Early Life An important personality and an inspirational leader can be considered Fidel Castro. Fidel was born in Biran and he is connected with the revolution of Cuba for its independence. His father was an immigrant from Spain that succeeded in sugar industry. His mother was a household servant. It is said that Fidel was an intellectual student that was more interested in sports and spent many years of his life in private Catholic schools. He entered the University of Havana and he began his political careers by being a recognized figure in Cuban politics. It is important to mention that Castro was considered to be one of the primary leaders of Cuban Revolution. At that time Castro enrolled with the politics of the country by being the Prime Minister of Cuba in 1959-1976 and then he took over as the President of the Council of State of Cuba until 2008. By being a transformational leader Castro tried and manage to overthrow the dictator Batista, and led the transformation of Cuba into a one party socialist republic. Values Castro tried to pass the message to Cubans of social justice, honest government and political freedom. He believed that freedom and economic independence are two of the most important elements and principles that a person should fight for. His beliefs and his vision were highlighted by the Cuban Revolution, where he managed to make his followers believe in his thoughts and sustain their freedom and equality. He and his followers tried to attack Batistas government. Although this attack proved to be a disaster and caused the death to many people, Castro managed to escape. His people were totally devoted to him and he assured that freedom will arise. It is of great importance to mention that Castro believed that his failure came from the fact that his car encountered serious problems and that the operation was lost. This, tell us that he never gave up the fight and that nothing else could be a fine reason for his failure! Castro went to prison for fifteen years. During his trial he delivered his famous defense speech History will absolve me a speech that can be considered as the expression of the personality of the leader. Leaders Traits and Style According to this speech we can highlight some core concepts from the Rhetorical Tradition. Fidel had the ability to Adjust ideas to people and people to ideas. His speeches had ethos and character along with pathos. His listeners and audience were engaged in his ability for talking for hours, always remaining devoted to his words. He repeatedly made rhetorical questions to its audience making his speeches lively and enthusiastic. Fidel held totally and absolutely incommunicado, in violation of every human and legal right. He states, emotionally, that only one who has been so deeply wounded, who has seen his country so forsaken and its justice trampled so, can speak at a moment like this with words that spring from the blood of his heart and the truth of his very gut. He was very self confident of his competencies where he stated that: taking advantage of my professional rights as a lawyer, I would assume my own defense. In an interview in 1995 he express that Today, I feel I am more a revolutionary than ever because everyday I am more convinced that what we did was right. In an attempt to support his subordinates he said: The rest of the accused, the minority, were brave and determined, ready to proudly confirm their part in the battle for freedom, ready to offer an example of unprecedented self-sacrifice and to wrench from the jails claws those who in deliberate bad faith had been included in the trial. Fidel was proud of himself as we can see from his own word: to inform you that if to save my life I must take part in such deception (of being ill), I would a thousand times prefer to lose it. He seems to be ironic and sarcastic in some part of his speech: What unbelievable crimes this regime must have committed to so fear the voice of one accused man! This in fact tells us that he never lies and he expresses his feelings (negative or positive). A leader is important to have specific traits that will help him in his mission. According to Kirkpatrick and Locke traits alone are not sufficientà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Leaders who possess the requisite traits must take certain actions to be successful. Among these traits are certainly drive, leadership motivation, integrity, self confidence, and cognitive ability, traits that can be identified to Fidel Castro personality and leadership characteristics. Fidel Castro can be considered as an effective leader that combines a task-oriented behavior along with relations-oriented behavior. He is task oriented since he has the ability to plan and schedule his people, coordinate his subordinates activities. He tried to overthrow his enemies by setting high but realistic performance goals. In addition he can be though for his relations-oriented features due to the strong supportive and helpful role he maintained through his political career. At a point of his speech he addresses his people: my brave comrades, with unprecedented patriotism, did their duty to the utmost. Yes, we set out to fight for Cubas freedom and we are not ashamed of having done so,. Being a charismatic leader, Fidel was being change-oriented, possessing a compelling vision. According to Bycio behaviors associated with transformational leadership include giving a high degree of attention and support to individual followers and offering followers intellectual stimulation and engendering a high degree of respect from them. Fidel as we can see, was able enough to gain the respect of thousands of Cubans and thousands of people around the word. On the other side he respected them also. As he states: I am grateful for the polite and serious attention they give me. His vision was correlated with his followers needs, beliefs and values, and this was of extreme importance for the achievement of Fidels goals. His vision of freedom was aligned with his followers dreams! This can be seen from his own speech The fact is, when men carry the same ideals in their hearts, nothing can isolate them neither prison walls nor the sod of cemeteries. For a single memory, a single spiri t, a single idea, a single conscience, a single dignity will sustain them all. Fidel employed a range of change management styles. He can be considered an Effective Leader since he was totally committed to his believes and to the goods such as freedom, faith. As he states in an interview identity with the fatherland, with sovereignty, with independence, and with the Revolution save it, help to save it, among all of us. Many, many things can be done. I hope that you are convinced. Moreover he possessed a vigorous pursuit of a clear and compelling vision. In that sense it is important that he managed to stimulate his people with high standards as he tried to pass the message of freedom to its community and its country in general. Moreover we can distinguish in its face a competent manager and leader where he managed to organize people and resources toward its effective objectives. Fidel engaged in intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration and inspirational motivation, making himself being recognized as a transformational leader. He possessed the charisma in order to transform the whole society. It is clear that this variety of leadership styles had been used concurrently. According to trait approach, Fidel was intelligent and confident. Moreover he was sociable and this can be seen from the way that he handled his people in his speeches, his jokes etc. According to R.Duane Ireland and Michael A.Itt, Fidel managed to develop a great group that has accepted their responsibilities, which are fulfilled with involvement and commitment, understand the significance of their duties. As Fidel says: You must know your duty; I certainly know mine. Fidel can be seen as a visionary Leader with many characteristics of a strategic leader as these are described by Glenn Rowe. As a visionary leader Fidel Castro was proactive with shaped ideas. He had the ability to influence attitudes and opinions due to his strong character and personality. Moreover he was concerned about the future of his society and his people and he kept finding ways of ensuring the freedom and justice. He was making decisions based on values, such as freedom, justice, virtue, trust. Moreover we can find characteristics that justify the fact that Fidel is considered to be a strategic leader. He had strong positive expectations of the performance he expected from his subordinates and itself. His choices made a difference in the whole society. Can Fidel be considered as an authentic leader? I believe that Fidel managed to convince his people and his subordinates that he is capable of achieving great things for his country. His words where consistent with his deeds, as his vision of liberation of his society from the injustice and poverty became a reality. He never said that he was an authentic leader! As Goffee and Gareth assumes, authenticity is largely defined by what other people see in you and, as such, can to a great extent be controlled by you. For these reasons he can be considered authentic. Fidel maintained a helicopter view of his society with strategic thinking, strategic management and leadership. He was able of doing the right things for his people. The Alchemist The leaders voyage of development is not an easy one. Some people change little in their lifetimes; some change substantiallyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Few may become Alchemistsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ David Rooke and William R. Torbert In their survey on the Seven Transformations of Leadership, David Rooke and William R. Torbert, demonstrate seven ways of Leading. Fidel can be considered as a strategist since he generates societal and personal transformations. Apart from this we can justify that Fidel combines also characteristic of an Alchemist, where he generates social transformations, integrates material, spiritual and societal transformation, making himself one of his kind. As they state, alchemists are typically charismatic and extremely aware individuals who live by high moral standards, while they focus intensively on the truth. As Fidel says: I had nothing to hide, for the truth was: all this was accomplished through sacrifices without precedent in the history of our Republic. Moreover he as a leader had the ability to speak to peoples hearts and minds. Fidel ´s personality and paradigm could be extremely important in the todays globalizing world. Companies should be recruited with this kind of minds in order to sustain the competitive advantage and be more wealthy and profitable. Strategic alignment, agility and sustainability are the most important values in a business context. A transformational leader like Fidel can maintain the effectiveness of the performance of every business or society.

Asian Crisis Essay -- essays research papers fc

The beginning of the Asian financial crisis can be traced back to 2 July 1997. That was the day the Thai Government announced a managed float of the Baht and called on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for 'technical assistance'. That day the Baht fell around 20 per cent against the $US. This became the trigger for the Asian currency crisis. Within the week the Philippines and Malaysian Governments were heavily intervening to defend their currencies. While Indonesia intervened and also allowed the currency to move in a widened trading range a sort of a float but with a floor below which the monetary authority acts to defend the currency against further falls. By the end of the month there was a 'currency meltdown' during which the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir attacked 'rogue speculators' and named the notorious speculator and hedge fund manager, George Soros, as being personally responsible for the fall in value of the ringgit. Soon other East Asian economies became involved , Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore and others to varying degrees. Stock and property markets were also feeling the pressure though the declines in stock prices tended to show a less volatile but nevertheless downward trend over most of 1997. By 27 October the crisis had had a world wide impact, on that day provoking a massive response on Wall Street with the Dow Jones industrial average falling by 554.26 or 7.18 per cent, its biggest point fall in history, causing stock exchange officials to suspend trading. Countries such as Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines have embraced an unusual policy combination of liberalisation of controls on flows of financial capital on the one hand, and quasi-fixed/ heavily managed exchange rate systems on the other. These exchange rate systems have been operated largely through linkages with the United States (US) dollar as their anchor. (1) Such external policy mixes are only sustainable in the longer term if there is close harmonisation of economic/ financial policies and conditions with those of the anchor country (in this case, the United States). Otherwise, establishing capital flows will inevitably undermine the exchange rate. Rather than harmonisation, there seems to have actually been increased economic and financial divergence with the US, especially in terms of current account deficits, inflation and interest rates. The... ..., 'Crisis into Catastrophe?' Financial Times (London), 31 October 1997, p. 15. 8.Max Walsh, 'Aid Parcels to Japanese Banks', The New Zealand Herald, 18 November 1998, pp. 25-26; Max Walsh, 'Time for Japan to Save the World', The New Zealand Herald, 21 November 1998, pp. 29-30. 9.John McBeth, 'Big is Best: Indonesia's Rescue Package Draws on the Thai Experience', Far Eastern Economic Review, 13 November 1997, pp. 68-69; Greg Sheridan, 'The Asian Malaise is Curable', 28 November 1997, p. 13. National Business Review 10.Charles Lee, 'The Next Domino?' Far Eastern Economic Review, 20 November 1997, pp. 14-16. 11.Eric Ellis, 'Kim Inspects Mouth of IMF Gift Horse', Australian Financial Review, 24 November 1997, p. 12. 12.Teresa Wyszomierski and Christopher Lingle, "Fortress Japan Under Siege', Australian Financial Review, 19 November 1997, p. 20. 13.Ian MacFarlane, Forbes Magazine Business 1998, pp24-27. 14. Forecasts Lowered', The New Zealand Herald, 20 November 1998, pp. 29-30. 15.Reserve Bank of New Zealand, semi-annual Statement on Monetary Policy, November 1997, pp. 2-13. 16 A New Revolution by Peter Smith As published in NZBUSINESS, August 1998, PP

Mans Indominability in The Grapes of Wrath :: Free Essay Writer

Man's Indominability in The Grapes of Wrath A study of the characters in John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, reveals man’s indomitability and endurance. Steinbeck potently suggests that there is a distinct time in life where the choice must be made to either sacrifice one’s spirit, or to stay true to one’s self. In spite of their lack of food and without having a direct promise of a stable job, the Joad family perceptibly allow their spirit to lead them to obtain their individual goals. Evidently, the theme of spiritual survival ultimately determines whether one will succeed or fail. The Joad family maintain faith within themselves during the times when most become discouraged and defeated. Nowhere other than in The Book of Job, in The Old Testament, is spiritual survival better articulated. Both the Joad family and Job endure pain and suffering in its worst form. However, both conquer their hardships with undying strength and hope: â€Å"Then said his wife unto him, ‘Dost thou still retain thine integrity? Curse God, and die’. But he said unto her, ‘Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What! Shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?’†. In The Book of Job, as well as in The Grapes of Wrath, spirit and dignity guide the characters toward survival. Any individual may succeed in times of joy; however, to triumph over the most oppressing of life’s moments is the true measure of one’s spirit and faith. Although each survive in their own distinguishable manner, both Grandpa and Grandma Joad withstand against the tests of one’s faith. Grandpa Joad illustrates significant strength and optimism in his decision to stay on his land. After an oppressive drought storm demolishes their farming lands, many Oklahoman families are driven off their homes and toward the promised land of California; however, Grandpa Joad will not be subdued by the difficulties that aim to defeat him. The resemblance between a man and his farming land is made quite evident throughout the novel as it signifies one’s pride and dignity. In a sense, the remnant of the characters sacrifice their pride and home, in exchange for survival. Grandpa Joad is a patent exception, as he unremittingly decides to stay behind in Oklahoma. Grandpa Joad’s land symbolizes his pride. He will not relinquish his dignity regardless as to what is conniving against him: â€Å"If a man owns a little property, that property is him it’s a part of him, and it’s like him† (Steinbeck 50).

Just War and Pacifism Essay -- War Pacifism Peace Essays

The question "Can war be justified?" plagued mankind since the first war. The Just War Theory holds that war can be just. The theory has evolved for thousands of years and modern theorists, such as Michael Walzer, author of Just and Unjust Wars, puts forth criteria for a just war, such as jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Jus ad bellum includes reasons for going to war, and jus in bello deals with the people who wage war. The criteria in jus ad bellum include; just cause, declaration by a proper authority, right intention, a reasonable chance of success, the end proportional to the means, and war as a last resort. Jus in bello includes keeping innocents outside the field of war, and limiting the amount of force used. Just War Theorists hold that all of these criteria must be followed for a war to be just. I will analyze The Just War Theories most debated arguments, self-defense, pre-emptive strikes, and the killing of innocents. In the second half of this paper, I will briefly explain Pacifism, and provide a counter argument for each Just War argument. Walzer includes self-defense in the just cause section of jus ad bellum. Walzer holds that states have the right of self-defense by making an analogy to individual rights. He contends that individuals have the right to self-defense. From this he infers that states also have that right of self-defense. Walzer's inference is based on the logic that the state is a collection of individuals. He reasons that individuals cannot defend against an invading army, the military is a tool that the state uses to defend itself and it's way of life. The right of self-defense for states also is justified by the premise that it is the duty of the government to protect the people. John Locke'... ...ve for a more perfect world rather than give up and accept hatred and death. Works Consulted Clark, Mark. The Paradox of War and Pacifism. ULeadership. 7 Oct 2002. <www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/clark.html> Holmes, Robert. On War and Morality. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989. Moseley, Alex. Just War Theory. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 3 Oct. 2002. <www.utm.edu/research/iep/j/justwar.htm>. Moseley, Alex. Pacifism. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 3 Oct. 2002. <www.utm.edu/research/iep/p/pacifism.htm>. Orend, Brian. War. Stanford Enyclopedia of Philosophy. 5 Oct 2002. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/> Teichman, Jenny. Pacifism and the Just War. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986. Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books, 1977. Just War and Pacifism Essay -- War Pacifism Peace Essays The question "Can war be justified?" plagued mankind since the first war. The Just War Theory holds that war can be just. The theory has evolved for thousands of years and modern theorists, such as Michael Walzer, author of Just and Unjust Wars, puts forth criteria for a just war, such as jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Jus ad bellum includes reasons for going to war, and jus in bello deals with the people who wage war. The criteria in jus ad bellum include; just cause, declaration by a proper authority, right intention, a reasonable chance of success, the end proportional to the means, and war as a last resort. Jus in bello includes keeping innocents outside the field of war, and limiting the amount of force used. Just War Theorists hold that all of these criteria must be followed for a war to be just. I will analyze The Just War Theories most debated arguments, self-defense, pre-emptive strikes, and the killing of innocents. In the second half of this paper, I will briefly explain Pacifism, and provide a counter argument for each Just War argument. Walzer includes self-defense in the just cause section of jus ad bellum. Walzer holds that states have the right of self-defense by making an analogy to individual rights. He contends that individuals have the right to self-defense. From this he infers that states also have that right of self-defense. Walzer's inference is based on the logic that the state is a collection of individuals. He reasons that individuals cannot defend against an invading army, the military is a tool that the state uses to defend itself and it's way of life. The right of self-defense for states also is justified by the premise that it is the duty of the government to protect the people. John Locke'... ...ve for a more perfect world rather than give up and accept hatred and death. Works Consulted Clark, Mark. The Paradox of War and Pacifism. ULeadership. 7 Oct 2002. <www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/clark.html> Holmes, Robert. On War and Morality. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989. Moseley, Alex. Just War Theory. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 3 Oct. 2002. <www.utm.edu/research/iep/j/justwar.htm>. Moseley, Alex. Pacifism. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 3 Oct. 2002. <www.utm.edu/research/iep/p/pacifism.htm>. Orend, Brian. War. Stanford Enyclopedia of Philosophy. 5 Oct 2002. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/> Teichman, Jenny. Pacifism and the Just War. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986. Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books, 1977.

Nationalization over Privatization

The Process of taking an industry or assets into government ownership by a national government or slate is known as nationalization. A nationalized industry is one which produces output for sale to consumers and other producers by the way of markets but which are solely owned by and under the control of the government. On the other hand privatization is the process of moving from a government controlled system to a privately-run one. Nationalized industries are managed by a board of managers appointed by the state; a government minister is usually the person in charge.The implementation of nationalization in a country’s economy may have huge positive impacts in that country as consumers, government, and more importantly, the economy receive benefits. These state owned industries are funded by long-term loans, or subventions also known as subsidies, from government. It can occur through the transfer of company assets to the government or through the transfer of public shares, l eaving the company to run the business under government control (Khan). A Government can nationalize any firm in a country whether it is a water company, electricity, telecommunication and more popular, banks.Some firms are unable to manage their risks properly so the Government comes in to provide more positive externalities. Aims of state owned enterprises may not necessarily comprise of making a profit but rather to operate in the consumers’ interest while the gap between poor and rich is reduced in the process. Nationalization is mainly in favor of the public. â€Å"The State’s assessment of public purpose is accepted on the ground that the State is the best judge of whether or not the nationalization serves a public purpose† (Sornarajah).Nationalization of an industry may result in production costs being lowered therefore goods and services will be available to the nation’s consumers at low prices. In addition Nationalization entails that the distrib ution of wealth become uniform and just. It prevents exploitation of consumers whereas in private ownership the capitalists become richer while the poor laborers grow poorer. This results in a rise in inequalities, that’s where Nationalization comes in to reduce inequalities effectively.Moreover unhealthy competition and corruption between firms and capitalists is demolished. â€Å"Big and powerful capitalists try to crush their small rivals† (Chaterjee). This is also against national interest. Loans at lower rates are accessible to consumers in the case of bank nationalization. In favor of the government they are able to manage their country’s economy by controlling important industries, such as monopolies. They make their services more efficient even though it comes as a cost they benefit from this when good feedback is received from the population mass.Companies owned by the people for the people take social costs into account and the profit goes back to the people. The economy also receives a major boost as Nationalization involves a lot of government expenditures. Government expenditure includes all government consumption and investments made by state. It involves the acquisition of goods and services for use to directly satisfy individual or collective needs of the population in a country intended to create future benefits.Nationalized industries, also known as government owned corporations, state owned companies, state enterprises as well as state owned entities, charged with operating in the public interest, may be under strong political and social pressures to give much more attention to externalities. They may be obliged to operate some loss making activities where social benefits are clearly greater than social costs. For example: rural postal and transportation services. The Government recognizes social obligations and provides subsidies for such non-commercial operations in some cases.Moreover, since nationalized industries ar e state owned, the Government is responsible for meeting any debts stumbled upon by these industries. Nationalized industries don’t normally borrow from the domestic market other than for short-term borrowing and is in general a non-profit organization. However, if they are profitable, the profit is often used as a means to finance other state services, such as social programs and government research which can help lower the tax burden. An issue in nationalization is the payment of compensation to the former owner or owners.The most controversial nationalizations are known as expropriations, are those where no compensation, or an amount far below the likely market value of the nationalized assets, is paid. Much nationalization has come after revolutions through expropriation, mostly in revolutions led by communists. When nationalizing a large business, the cost of compensation is so great that much legal nationalization have occurred when important firms or industries run clo se to bankruptcy and are then acquired by the Government or little or free. Other times, Governments have seen it important to gain control of institutions of great economic value as well as citizen importance, such as banks or monopolistic service providers, or of important industries struggling economically. â€Å"State or local authorities have traditionally taken private property for such public purposes as the construction of roads, dams, or public buildings. Known as the right of eminent domain, this process is usually accompanied by the payment of compensation.By contrast, the concept of nationalization is a 20th century development that differs from eminent domain in motive and degree; it is done for the purpose of social and economic equality and is usually, although not always, applied as a principle of communistic or socialistic theories of society† (Margolis). Communism is defined as a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state (Dictionary. com). Moreover, there are principles which govern communism. One of the contradictions in communism most frequently highlighted is that between the theory and the practice. While this is to some extent justified, it also needs to be borne in mind that, as with most concepts, there is no single theory of communism, rather there are numerous theories and variations on a theme – and some versions of the theory are more compatible with the practice than others† (Holmes Chpt. 1). Principles such as: * The expropriation of landed property and the use of rent from land to cover state expenditure. A high and progressively graded income-tax. * An abolition of the right of inheritance. * The confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. * The centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by the establishment of a state bank with state capital and an exclusive monopo ly. * The centralization of transport in the hands of the state. * An increase in the state ownership of factories and instruments of production, and the redistribution and amelioration of agricultural land on a general plan. Universal obligation to work and creation of labour armies especially for agriculture. * The unification of agricultural with industrial labour, and the gradual abolition of the differences between town and country. * The public education of all children. Abolition of factory labour for children in its present form. Unification of education with economic production. (Karl Marx) On the other hand, socialism, an economic system, is characterized by social ownership and control of the means of production and cooperative management of an economy.Social ownership may refer to one or a combination of the following; Cooperative enterprises, common ownership, direct public ownership or autonomous state enterprises. There are many variations of socialism and as such the re is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism. They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets versus planning, how management is to be organized within economic enterprises, and the role of the state in constructing socialism. (Mr. Reasonable) State owned non-profit organizations generally work in the interest on the public.Nationalization tends to occur more often in the natural resources and utilities sectors. Nationalization of natural resource industries tend to happen when the price of the corresponding commodity is high. Privatized industries struggle with production costs, they tend to raise the bar on their prices thus the poor people’s pockets are hurt. Due to this exploitation is present, this is popular within monopolies. These enterprises do not experience competition from other firms as they are the sole suppliers of a good or service in an economy.They take advantage of this by raising their prices whenever they please knowing that their commodity’s demand will not drop but profit will rise considerably. â€Å"The monopolistic firm is a price maker and has some power over the setting of price or output. It cannot however, charge a price that the consumers in the market will not bear† (tutor2u. net). They significantly charge high prices on their goods and services and in some cases, fire workers in order to reduce cost of production. Moreover, workers who have mouths to feed and bills to pay.On the other hand, a monopoly owned, run and controlled by the government will stop consumers from being exploited. How, you may ask? Government expenditure and investment may cover all major production costs correspondingly reducing prices on goods and services provided by the monopoly. At the same time, employment is generated rather than depleted. The Government works in favor of the public, additionally in favor of its country’s economic wealth fare and increasing the employment rate and decreasing the unemployment rate is a plus as well as a good name for the state.According to Kabbani Construction Group (KCG), a nationalization program supporting the qualified national work force as developed. KCG plans to replace foreign labour with Saudi nationals in order to encourage and increase employment of young Saudi nationals through nationalization. So indeed, this is a strategy used by state to decrease the unemployment rate in respective economies. Furthermore, the presence of nationalization in an economy slightly reduces the gap between the rich and the poor people in society. We very often see the situation in an economy where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.The causes of this may include generally high prices for goods and services set by the rich business men only affordable to their fellow wealthy counterparts, the poor then suffer when they take the little that they have from their pockets and give it to the rich when they p urchase the certain goods or services offered. This is a result of poor redistribution of wealth. As defined by wisegeek. com, the redistribution of wealth is the orderly transfer of assets from one group of entities to a broader range of entities, usually by utilizing some sort of mechanisms put in place by a government.Sometimes known as progressive redistribution, the idea is to allocate available resources in a manner that a wider range of people receive some degree of benefit from those assets. Nationalization is often used in the process of the redistributing of wealth. It is a broad concept that may include strategies such as government offering funded health care plans to citizens qualified. With other methods the goal is to ensure that everyone, both rich and poor, in a given country has access to and receives benefits considered to be necessary for a respectable standard of living.The poor may not be able to fund those benefits but that is where the government comes in to play by reducing the costs on the backs of such citizens. An example of this may include the government providing a free health care program to the less fortunate. The elimination of price discrimination is also a strategy used by the government to reduce the gap between rich and poor. Price discrimination is a pricing strategy that is adopted by private firms where they charge customers different prices for the same product or service.In pure price discrimination, the seller will charge each customer the maximum price that he or she is willing to pay. In more common forms of price discrimination, the seller places customers in groups based on certain attributes and charges each group a different price. The poor could really be at a disadvantage according to how the firm conducts its price discrimination. This can be eliminated due to nationalization. The government then comes in to establish price control. They dictate ceiling on the prices of essential consumer goods to keep cost of living within a manageable range on behalf of the lower class.Additionally, the government lowers interest rates on loans to stimulate the economy, allowing people of the public to access it. When a bank is nationalized ownership or control of that bank is transferred from the shareholders to state. This usually takes place when the state sees it unfit the way the bank is operating under its shareholders, especially when it may be on the path of bankruptcy. In more recent times, the failure of major banks has highlighted the fact that, under national ownership and control, failing banks can be funded more quickly and for larger amounts than under private ownership.This enables the banking infrastructure to be rebuilt, as well as ensure the closer regulation of banks in the future. Douglas J. Elliot explains this in his book ‘Bank Nationalization: What is it? Should we do it? ’ Bank regulators have stood ready for decades to take over an insolvent bank, or one on the brink of insolvency, if it is not possible to neither find private capital to neither shore up the bank nor find a strong acquirer. Often applied to small banks, this practice has applied even to quite large banks in rare circumstances. Government can take 100% ownership or simply a commanding majority stake.This choice depends heavily on what purposes the nationalization is intended to achieve. It is feared that some banks receiving large quantities of government aid will never be able to support themselves independently again, bleeding taxpayer resources until they are eventually cut off by the government and taken over. In such a case, the cost to the taxpayer may be considerably smaller if a bank is taken over quickly. Through nationalization, the state can manage the economy more effectively by means of controlling the important industries in its respective country.In any economy, the state should exhibit some sort of control over the affairs taking place on a day-to-day basis. Price control and quantity control are two strategies of government intervention governments practice in managing an economy. Nationalization allows government or state to intervene in economic activity Government intervention is an action taken from the government that alter or change economic activeness, supply ability, and unconstrained decisions made through normal market trade is the definition given by webdynamic. com. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦government intervention through nationalization in the market/economy set out to attain two main goals: â€Å"Social efficiency and equity. Social efficiency is achieved at the point where the marginal benefits to society for wither production or consumption are equal to the marginal costs of either production or consumption. Issues of equity are difficult to judge due to the subjective assessment of what is, and what is not, a fair distribution of resources. † Externalities are spillover costs to society. Whenever ther e are external costs, the market will lead to a level of production and consumption above the socially efficient level.Whenever there are external benefits, the market will (ceteris paribus) lead to a level of production and consumption below the socially efficient level. † (John & Mark) At times, economies may respond sluggishly to changes in demand and supply. Time lags in adjustment can lead to a permanent state of disequilibrium and to problems of instability. With the government in charge of industries and firms, they ensure that changes in demand and supply are responded to in a timely and systematic fashion so that the market stays stable.Furthermore, the state reduces externalities, doing so with the use of taxes and subsidies. Externalities can be corrected by imposing tax rates equal to the size of the marginal external cost, and granting rates of subsidy equal to marginal external benefits. Extensions of property rights may allow individuals to impose unfair costs o n others. State takes charge of these properties and cut down on the costs thus influencing more customers to divulge in ongoing activities. Investment in economic theory is the amount of a good that is purchased, not to consume but to be used for future production.Nationalization involves a great deal of this as government primary source of capital in a nationalized firm is investment. State invests in raw materials, human capital, and inventory to name a few. Human capital includes costs of additional on-the-job training for employees. The investment of inventory is the accumulation of items which will be used in production such as machinery and vehicles. The government uses these investments to improve the efficiency of their goods and services to distribute to their consumers. Governments also make investments in raw materials. â€Å"1949 – Steel was first nationalised in 1949, and privatised a year later by the new Conservative government. It was re-nationalised in 1967 when over 90 of steel capacity was put under the control of the British Steel Corporation (BSC). Steel was returned to the private sector once more in 1988. † (economicsonline. co. uk) An example of raw materials being nationalized by use of investments in steal is presented above. * â€Å"In 1948 railways were nationalized to help rebuild the network infrastructure and re-equip the rolling stock after the destructive effects of the Second World War. This is an example of inventory investment. More Efficient goods result in more satisfied consumers and the government works towards that aim in ensuring that the public is vastly satisfied with the services and goods provided. Social costs are the costs to society as a whole for producing one additional unit, or taking one more measure in an economy. These cost of producing one extra unit of something is not simply the direct cost sustained by the producer alone, but also must include the costs to the external environment and o ther stakeholders thus effecting the people. A standard example of this is that of a factory the smoke from which has harmful effects on those occupying neighboring properties† (Coase 1). Other social costs could include other forms of pollution, which could arise from the advancements through additional units in production. Another form of pollution consists of excessive garbage pollution. Social costs might as well include solid waste from the garbage trucks on neighborhoods along the routes taken as well as the impacts of solid waste facilities themselves. Moreover, Adverse effects on roperty values, community image, and aesthetics, as well as the increase of noise, odor, and traffic all contribute to social costs. With this said, the state takes it as their responsibility to take these social costs into account so people get compensated, for companies owned and run by the people for the people take social costs into account and the profit goes back to the people. They are allowed to do so as they have the adequate funds and money in their possession in contrast to private owner firms who don’t have the monies available and leave the public to suffer due to social costs.It is also their duty that the public stays with a mutual feeling towards them. Lastly, nationalization in an economy can influence a rise in the economy. Injections into the economy from the government are the really the main sources. We have already covered the point that governments invest in newly nationalized industries in order to make their goods and services more efficient but that is not the only effect it has in a business and economic stand point.Investments not only serve an efficient purpose but these injections are represented in the national income formula as government expenditure and government spending, which when increased results in an increase to national income. The national income formula states that national income equals consumption plus gross private in vestment plus government consumption expenditure plus net exports (Y=C+I+G+X). Knowing this we could say that in a situation where, in a given year national income was five thousand dollars with government expenditure being one thousand dollars.In the following year, the government decides to take over the assets of a coconut products producing plant. The state invests two thousand dollars worth of capital into that firm; this includes investments in raw materials, human capital and inventory. This two thousand dollars goes into the national income equation as an addition to government consumption expenditure raising it from one thousand dollars to three thousand dollars. Hence, national income increases by two thousand dollars taking it to seven thousand dollars. Consumers, governments and economies all benefit from the positive that nationalization imposes when it is implemented.Governments are the main nationalization mechanisms as they are allowed to exhibit their control over t he affairs in an economy and also to represent the people and protect them from the stress bearers known as private owners. Governments can either fully take over an industry or only see that an industry is run under their supervision. Nationalizations are funded by loans and subsidies to help cover production costs without having to operate at a full loss as they do not aim to make maximum profits unlike the private owned firms and companies.At the same time lowering the costs of goods and services distributed to consumers. Out of all the firms which governments may choose to nationalize, national banks are the most popular corporations to be nationalized. Consequently, in doing so government provides the public, access to loans at lower rates. The gap between rich and poor is slightly reduced as exploitation of consumers is condensed. In conclusion, the implementation of nationalization in a country’s economy does have huge positive impacts as consumers, governments and eco nomies benefit.

What is Freedom? Essay

Freedom is something that is viewed in many ways. Freedom can be something you earn, something you experience, or it can be something you think. People long ago had to work very hard for their freedom. Slavery was one of the times that freedom was given to nobody, and played a major role in the United States history. Slavery began around 1619, when the first African slaves were brought to the United States, they were workers without rights. (Slavery in America, 2014) They were told that if they worked for seven years, they would earn land and freedom. Abraham Lincoln once said, â€Å"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.† (Lincoln) In 1641 slavery was legalized, and the U.S. was against itself. In 1660 King Charles II established the Royals African Company, calling them black gold, where more African Americans had their freedom taken away. In 1860 more than a million African Americans were taken from their homes and sold off. By 1865 slavery was final ly abolished and they had their freedom to read and write, and their behavior and movement was no longer restricted. Freedom is based off your view and thought of the value it has to you, no one definition can relate to everything that freedom can mean. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, freedom is â€Å"the quality of being free† but what exactly does that mean? Does it mean you can do whatever you wish? Or does it mean everything you need is free? Jim Morrison once said, â€Å"The most important kind of freedom is to be what you really are. You trade in your reality for a role. You trade in your sense for an act. You give up your ability to feel, and in exchange, put on a mask. There can’t be any large-scale revolution until there’s a personal revolution, on an individual level. It’s got to happen inside first.† (Morrison) Freedom within yourself can be to accept you for who you are, not be restricted on what you can do with yourself, let your imagination be free and soar outside the limits. Let your thoughts go where they wish and keep your mind set. Don Miguel Ruiz wrote in his book The Mastery of Love, â€Å"If you spend too much time judging yourself, you won’t have any time to love yourself or anyone else.† I believe this quote relates to freedom because like I said before, you need to let your mind be free to be able to live with freedom. Along with having internal freedom, you can experience and be rewarded with freedom. Experiencing freedom is not something everyone has. As a young kid, my parents always told me â€Å"Once you lose our trust it’s hard to gain it back.† And with this always being said to you, you learned to respect the freedom that you received, and wait until you are rewarded with more. As you get older and learn to drive you are given a whole new type of freedom. There are no words to explain the type of freedom you experience, and no emotion that is any greater. Someone once said â€Å"Never drive faster than your guardian angel can fly.† (teenage drivers, 1998- 2014) And this saying means to respect what freedom you have because some people have less and would give anything for your freedom. So what exactly is freedom? Well, Bubr (Bubr is someone who chose not to give their real name) once said start with the possibility to do whatever you want. You may want to share your freedom with other people, right? Then accept the fact that other people doing whatever they want are limiting your own freedom. Then, you come to the conclusion that you may not have freedom at all, if the freedom is a measure of the length of a leash. (Bubr) But, many other people have different views of freedom and it is not just what laws limit you too. Jarod Kintz said â€Å"Nothing, Everything, Anything, Something: If you have nothing, then you have everything, because you have the freedom to do anything, without the fear of losing something.† Freedom is not limited to just one person’s idea of it, their experiences, feelings, thoughts, and love towards freedom. â€Å"Freedom is the right to live as we wish. Nothing else.† (Epictetus, 2001-2014) It is not being limited with your rights and not being restricted with reading, writing, behavior and movement. It is not constantly being told what to do and limiting your mind to please others, first give yourself freedom then help others with theirs.