Us Constitution Essays - Constitutional Law, James Madison

Us Constitution The US Constitution The Constitution is the basis of all laws in the United States. This Constitution is a document written by outcasts of England. The Constitution of the United States sets forth the nation's fundamental laws. It establishes the form of the national government and defines the rights and liberties of the American people. It also lists the aims of the government and the methods of achieving them. The Constitution was written to organize a strong national government for the American states. Previously, the nation's leaders had established a national government under the Articles of Confederation. But the Articles granted independence to each state. They lacked the authority to make the states work together to solve national problems. After the states won independence in the Revolutionary War (1775-1783), they faced the problems of peacetime government. The states had to enforce law and order, collect taxes, pay a large public debt, and regulate trade among themselves. They also had to deal with Indian tribes and negotiate with other governments. Leading statesmen, such as George Washington and Alexander Hamilton, began to discuss the creation of a strong national government under a new constitution. The United States is a republic that operates under a federalist system. The national government had specific enumerated powers, and the fifty states retain law biding powers over their citizens and their residents. Both the national government and the state government are divided into three different branches, executive, legislative, and judicial. Written constitutions, both federal and state form a system of separated powers. Amendments to the Constitution of the United States may be proposed in two ways: (1) If two-thirds of both houses approve, Congress may propose an amendment. The amendment becomes a law when ratified either by legislatures or by conventions in three-fourths of the states. (2) If the legislatures of two-thirds of the states ask for an amendment, Congress must call a convention to propose it. The amendment becomes a law when ratified either by the legislatures or by conventions in three fourths of the states. This method has never been used. The Federal Government is comprised of three branches: Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch. The executive branch includes the President the vice President, the cabinet and all federal departments, and most governmental agencies. The President has the power to make treaties, but only with two-thirds of the US senate The President of the US has the power to nominate all Supreme Court Justices, all other federal juries, ambassadors, and all other officers of the United States. The President had the jurisdiction to veto legislation. The vice President is the President of the Senate. The President is the head of the thirteen government departments. These departments are not listed in the constitution and have varied in name and in number over the years. Currently they are the DEPARTMENTS OF STATE, TREASURY, DEFENSE, JUSTICE, INTERIOR, AGRICULTURE, COMMERCE, LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY, and EDUCATION. The heads of each department form the cabinet, which is the highest advisory group to the President. The executive branch also includes dozens of government agencies. There is a difference between departments and agencies. Agencies have a very specific purpose while the departments are broader. Heads of any governmental agencies are not members of the cabinet. All federal legislative powers are vested in the Congress of the United States, which contain two chambers, a Senate and a House of Representatives. There are one hundred Senators, two from each of the fifty states. Senators serve six-year terms. The House of Representatives has 435 members, the population of each state determines this number. Each state is granted minimum of one representative. Each representative serves a two-year term. The powers of Congress are specifically enumerated in the Constitution and include, among other things, the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, and tariffs. Congress also has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among several states, and with Indian tribes. To pass a law, a bill must be passed by both the House and the Senate, and signed by the President. The President has the option of vetoing the legislation, but the Congress can override the veto with

I love Life essays

I love Life essays I was supposed to be having the time of my life during my High School years. I started out in the Newtown Annex. I had many friends there, I also had a great schedule, from 12:00 until 4:00 PM, and it was great! You get to sleep late and not have to worry about being late to school. I knew many people; I am a real people person. Some of the people I met there I am still friends with like Kirsy, Jose, Joanna, and many more. I was only in Newtown for my freshman year then they told us that we had a choice, stay with Newtown or we would be able to stay in the annex for a new high school called High School for Arts and Business. So I decided to stay with Arts and Business. I thought it would be great, an art school, thats what I want to major in. So I stayed. Back then I did so well in school, I thought I could get a scholarship to my first choice, a college for art. I met so many new friends in Arts and Business, including teachers like Mrs. Contoveros, Mr. Drakes, and the principal wh o would do anything to help us. The teachers here made me feel at home and helped me through the hard times, and they shared the good times as well. They made an impact on my life and I will never forget them. The other students couldnt have been any nicer to me. For me being one out of a couple of white kids in the school I got along with everyone. The people I became close with have many different characteristics and personalities. For example, Veronica Galindo, she has a great personality and she always listened to my problems and she is one of the best dancers I have ever seen; Kirsy Duverge is full of excitement, and is always there to cheer someone up and has the most school spirit. Jose Liz, he is a cool guy, even though he bothers me, thats the little thing Ill always remember, and Denise Rosario, Denise and I always had class together and we always talked and we would always get in trouble especially in Mrs...

Being and Nothingness according to Jean-Paul Sartre Essay

Being and Nothingness according to Jean-Paul Sartre - Essay Example Sartre explains that our perception of the external world is absolute and pure. He also suggests that our perception of objects is of finite nature, and our self perceives them with the help of the senses. He is of the idea that what we see in the outside world is what we know and what we get. In his philosophical theory argues that the being – in –itself and being- for- itself are distinct aspects of this real world. Here being – in –itself are the unconscious beings and being- for -itself is the conscious being. As per Jean-Paul Sartre, being –in -itself is stable and isn’t aware of its existence, whereas being – for- itself is aware of its own consciousness. These both beings are distinct from each other and constitute the existence of the universe.Being – in– itself cannot change its form with its own will as it does not have will or consciousness. However being – for – itself has free will, awareness an d chooses to act right or wrong. Anyway, Jean-Paul Sartre sees the being – for –itself as incomplete and indefinite, as it can go to any limit with its dynamic consciousness. This is what makes a man undetermined, indefinable and conscious creature. Since for – itself or a man in other terms is absent of a predetermined essence, it is intimidated or forced to create itself from nothingness or voidness. According to Sartre voidness or nothingness is the very explainable characteristic of a human being.For example, a rock is a rock and can do nothing to change its shape or form. But in case of being – for – itself can change its shape, form and even decide what he wants to do or not do. A man has the power to act in this world, and also can interact with physical objects which are being – in – itself. We can see that a man is not simply being here in this world, but also is actuating himself with the power of consciousness and awareness . A man or a self can create a whole dynamic world of himself by perceiving the objects of the universe. His consciousness is of infinite power and this gives him the ability to perceive being – in – itself in a dynamic way.

Q8 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Q8 - Essay Example e effective in achieving the desired objectives of effectiveness; rather resolving a conflict at the organizational level where the knowledge to address the conflict is available, is likely to be more effective. In order to address the performance issues and large costs associated with reforming and refining systems development projects, a study carried out by Patnayakuni et al (2006) proposes a knowledge management system perspective in order to manage both tacit and explicit knowledge in the process of systems development. Supply chain management and inter-organisational system development techniques have also been used by large companies in order to develop their efficiency. Assessing the same techniques in the case of small and medium sized enterprises however, Morrell and Ezingeard (2002) have concluded that while such enterprises may gain significant benefits through the application of supply chain management and inter-organizational system development techniques, in practice they do not do so because there is a culturally rooted lack of vision and awareness, which are limiting the extent to which such techniques are applied and benefits realized. These methods may nevertheless offer excellent opportunities to develop efficient methods to improve inter organizational performance. The most important aspect however, would be to develop effective systems of knowledge management. The major objective would be to keep department leaders apprised of developments occurring within the organization. As Patnayukuni et al (2006) have highlighted, this would involve the effective use of both tacit and explicit knowledge, but more importantly, ensuring that department heads are able to gain access to and be aware of such knowledge through the development of an effective system to communicate information to all department heads. It is effective integration within an organization that is therefore likely to be beneficial in the adoption of a corporate wide system for

Chronic Risk Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Chronic Risk - Essay Example Patterns of gene expressions were then determined using DNA microarrays (Moore, 2003). In all cases there were common responses and different responses. Chromium, nickel and cadmium were found to induce oxidative stress that had unique and similar pathways and genes that responded to the stress. All of them were found to be genotoxic. However, DNA damage was found to occur in chromium responses only. It was found that Nickel resulted to hypoxic response induction and chromatin structure gene induction. It did this by replacing the iron in key proteins (Allan, 2007). On the other hand, Cadmium resulted to genes that were perturbed distinctly. These genes related to stress from the endoplasmic reticulum. It also invoked unfolded protein response and led to apoptosis. It is evident that the only biological process that was perturbed to all these metals is the oxidative stress (Gurjar, 2010). This is an effect that is well of these metals. However, the difference that is very notable is the gene modulation involved in anti-oxidant protein glutathione production. This is as a response to nickel. It is also as a result of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress that is ROS-induced in response to cadmium (Moore, 2003). Moore, C. E. (2003).  The spectra of chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, gallium, germanium, arsenic, selenium, bromine, krypton, rubidium, strontium, yttrium, zirconium, and

America and Multilateralism: A History

America and Multilateralism: A History Perhaps it is safe to surmise from the very beginning that there does not appear to be a country in the world that is not affected or has not been affected in one way or the other by the United States of America. Short of this, there most certainly does not remain in existence a country, people or society which has no knowledge, however limited, of the United States of America. No single day passes without the American power being addressed or diagnosed in one capacity or the other by the global media. Over time, but in particular, in more recent times, no other country’s political, domestic, economic defence or capabilities and abilities have been more studied or discussed than the extent at which America has been. In actual fact, it is safe to surmise that very few political issues today provoke such strong and diverse responses as the role of the United States of America in its attempt to re-shape world affairs.[1] The recent terrorist attack on America of grave consequence s, its reaction to it and the wars in Afghanistan as well as Iraq have intensified the debate about the nature and prospects of American super power. There remains a school of thought that continues to celebrate the United States’ achievements in proclaiming as well as bringing liberty, democracy and prosperity to every corner of the world. Others are more inclined towards condemnation of America’s pursuit of hegemonic status and its attempt to impose a single economic system and a narrow set of moral belief on other nations around the world. Whichever school of thought one belongs to re America’s performance on the international podium, most have arrived at the conclusion that the history of the twenty-first century will be determined to a large extent by the way American power is used, and by the way in which other major political players on the international front react to it. The nation has often been referred to as an imperial, an empire or hegemony. Most p eople still continue to perceive America as that democratic land of roses where ‘anything can happen’. Some still believe in, especially those outside the shores of the country and straining to one day be admitted into the great country, what they call the ‘American Dream’. It is supposedly a country where ‘anything is possible’. Often times however, America is no longer beheld with rose tinted spectacles. Given its recent history world over, this is hardly a surprise of any significance. The word which best comes to mind when America, that great nation is under discussion as it constantly is for diverse reasons, is hegemony. What, it might be useful to enquire at this juncture, is hegemony? In lay man’s terms, hegemony, succinctly put, is leadership by predominance (some might even say aggression) of smaller and weaker states or nations by naturally bigger nations in an effort to achieve world domination. Does America therefore stand ri ghtly accused of attempting to dominate the world through its conceptualisation of global politics, foreign policies and armed forces, or at least to dominate those nations which are considered smaller and weaker? It is common knowledge that while some countries practice communism or socialism, America was and remains a capitalist country where the motto right after ‘In God We Trust’ is a universally accepted but unspoken ‘survival of the fittest’. In the introductory words of G. John Ikenberry in his book ‘America Unrivalled’, â€Å"The pr-eminence of American power today is unprecedented in modern history. No other great power has enjoyed such formidable advantages in military, economic, technological, cultural or political capabilities. We live in a one-super power world, and there is no serious competition in sight†[2] These words immediately bring to mind perhaps the most controversial wars of all times and America’s gargantuan contribution or one might even dare say blatant single minded orchestration of the same, the Iraqi invasion (and on-going war till date) in 2003. It is worth reminiscing at this juncture how the world watched and waited with bated breath while the United Nations deliberated on whether or not the United States should be granted the authorisation to invade Iraq based on its reports about the so-called axis of evil and the weapons of mass destruction they supposedly had in the making which it further claimed posed un-foretold threats to the international world. It is yet another point in favour of the argument that America is fast becoming or indeed has all but attained the status of an hegemonic state that President George W. Bush announced to the world that regardless of the UN’s decision and that of its Member States, America will forge ahead in war against Ir aq and Afghanistan, alone if they had to. In his exact words, â€Å"†¦when it comes to our security, we really do not need anyone’s permission†[3] It was later argued that it would appear that even the United Nations, a so-called world moderator and international emblem of peace, is nothing but yet another tool in America’s already brimming tool box. Although at the time, this announcement from the Bush Administration sounded as arrogant and ‘above the law’ as it really was, there were many who felt America would be justified in its decision in the wake of the September 11 attack. September 11 2001 (hereafter referred to as 9/11) brought about the turning point in history, international law and the use of force against terrorism. The words of an American man considered very patriotic indeed comes to mind at this controversial stance of George W. Bush re brushing off the world’s opinion and/approval to its use of force in the name of figh ting terrorism. The man, none other than Richard Holbrooke, former United States ambassador to the United Nations, who once stated after careful observation, one should imagine, that the Bush administration threatens to make a â€Å"radical break with 55 years of a bipartisan tradition that sought international agreements and regimes of benefit to us†[4] Many years, loss of lives both civilian and military, reports of horrible treatments meted out to prisoners of war (PWO) by the American soldiers against every rule of Humanitarian Law and the Geneva Convention, America’s refusal to withdraw its troops even after the fall of Saddam Hussein (its greatest enemy) the question on everyone’s lips is whether the war was indeed for all the altruistic reasons quoted by America in its rather fabricated reports or for more reasons closer to home. The question can even be posed all the way back to Operation Desert Storm in the same Iraq in 1993. Did America invade Iraq on both occasions for economic gain and ultimately to place itself as the world’s super power. Although it appears now to the world that the Bush administration is the one responsible for dramatically drawing America away from multilateralism, a look back into the Clinton administration will confirm that this is not remotely true. Under the Clinton administration, America neither waited for the United Nation’s approval/authorisation before deploying the North Atlantic Treaty Operation (NATO) to Serbia in 1999 nor prior to its bomb attack on Iraq in 1998. There were also other Conventions, Acts and Treaties America rather conspicuously refrained from signing or ratifying such as the banning of further use of Land Mines (the Ottawa Convention of 1997). The difference perhaps would be where the Clinton administration adopted diplomacy in its delivery of such unilateral decisions; the Bush administration simply forges ahead with no regard for the world’s opinion, appro val or in most cases disapproval. In the era immediately after the World War (II), America’s strength was not only viewed during the war with the deployment of its armed forces, which later formed an alliance with the United Kingdom amongst others (the allied forces) but also after the war in its attempt to rebuild Germany as well as other war torn countries in the war aftermath. In this, America had strategised and was apparently successful in ensuring that the world did not revert to its closed regional dealings of the 1930s prior to the war. The founding of the United Nations on 24 October 1945 also saw to it that the beginning of what is now known as globalisation was established. A post war era of multilateral character and significance was thus built around economic and security agreements such as the Bretton Woods Agreement on monetary as well as trade relations among nations. The American-led NATO security pact followed much later. This international order which came into existence after the war (World War II) was effectively one which was multilateral in character. A more open system of trade and investments began to emerge, largely encouraged by America. Economic and security matters as well as political relations became indistinguishable and indivisible among nations in what is best described as an open world market or globalisation. This is evident in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) as well as the Bretton Woods agreement earlier mentioned. An alliance tie emerged between the United States and the Great Britain in particular and the European continent in general in a scenario one could simply put in lay man’s terms ‘rub my back and I will rub yours’. America’s economic as well as security assistance to the Asian region is also worth mentioning. America ensured and continues so to do, that weaker and smaller states are afforded security assistance, protection and granted access to its markets, technology and country in general. In th e wake of America’s Green Card Lottery scheme, the support and admiration of other smaller states for which the scheme was intended and who continues to benefit from the same was firmly secured. In a similar vein after the world war, citizens of many nations flocked in their thousands to America from world over and started life over again after the war. In what is not unlike the stone age ‘trade by barter’ arrangement, the participating states in turn continue to ensure that political stability is maintained in their relationship with the United States, making available to America their diplomatic, economic and logistical support in return. For instance, America has training grounds in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, perhaps as a lasting result of Operation Desert Storm. Going back in history however, it remains indelible that there were 5 world super powers including America itself. How then can Ikenberry infer that America has no competition in sight in its steady climb to the top in the international hemisphere? Who were the other four super powers and what became of them? The five major contenders when the United Nations was founded in 1945 were Russia, Great Britain, China, and France. It is accurate to say that the cold war put paid to Russia’s contention with America. The Great Britain, as exhibited more recently under the Tony Blair administration is more or less a lap-dog to American’s policies and remains a rather very friendly ally than a potential contender. Yet it will be nothing short of fallacious argument to say that America has no contender or is without competition in one form or the other. Worth remembering as well is Germany and France’s initial reluctance as well as refusal to throw their weight behind the Ir aqi invasion in 2003. America’s hegemonic state is therefore not without challenges as well as challengers, it is however the multifaceted character of America’s power that makes the country so far reaching, daunting, provocative and formidable to less equipped and smaller countries. The collapse of the Soviet Union in the Cold War saw an acute decline in rival ideologies and even tighter alliances formed between the United States and other regions. Following the Cold War, America continued to grow from strength to strength. In the 1990s its economy was commendably and successfully restructured. Also growing in significant progression alongside its economy is its armed forces and global recognition as a state to reckon with. By the turn of the millennium, America’s economic and military growth had wedged a seemingly insurmountable gulf between itself and other major players in world politics. While the late 90s saw Japan’s economy grow by 9 per cent, the European Union altogether by 15 per cent, American economy grew by a significant 27 per cent, nearly doubling and tripling that of the other regions.[5] This did not go unnoticed by the rest of the world. In fact literally doffing his hat to the United States in a speech in Paris (1999), the French Foreign Minister, Hubert Vedrine, observed that the growth witnessed by the world in America â€Å"is not comparable in terms of power and influence to anything known in modern history†[6] America’s devotion to its armed forces can by no means be ignored. America boasts an army that is better equipped and out numbers the armed troops of well over 14 countries put together. There are training grounds for the United States army in well over 40 locations world wide. This automatically means that when another weaker or slightly less advantageous state envisages itself in trouble, the first point of call for protection and assistance, when and if necessary is the United States of America. In its usual confidential, bordering on arrogant manner America’s National Security Strategy declared to the world that their forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries/would-be challengers from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or even remotely equalling, the power of the United States.[7] It is not impossible or even unthinkable for America to utilise its military capacity to impose its policies on other states in different regions of the world. It has been observed already that America spends on its armed forces more than the next fourteen countries combined and that the U.S. military expenditures will shortly be equal to the rest of the world combined.[8] Another scholar of repute, Paul Kennedy, also surmised that it is already the case that all the other navies in the world combined could not dent American maritime supremacy.[9] Still on the issue of security, expressing his own opinion and an opinion apparently shared by many others world over, Barry Possen has suggested that the United States’ command of the sea, space, and air forces is the ‘key military enabler of the U.S. global power position’.[10] Assuming its economic growth remains as healthy as it has been since the 90s, the concentration of world military power may continue for several decades yet. Even at the current level of U.S. capabilities, it is the general view that ‘the United States can shoulder the burden of maint aining global security without much help from Europe’ or the rest of the world for that matter.[11] It begins to appear obvious that perhaps America’s initial support for multilateralism in international trade and globalisation was borne of a grander strategic move to acquire and retain more power while legitimately promoting international reliance of one state on the other, one region on others for support, growth and assistance. A quick glimpse at major historical turning points such as 1919, the end of World War II in 1945 and the period immediately after the Cold War all but confirms this logic. It would appear that America promoted multilateralism in such a strategic way so as to signal restraint and commitment from other states.[12] This precipitated the acquisition of support, if not actual trust, acquiescence and cooperation of other weaker states. But surely when one country is placed so much higher than others in the case of all animals are equal but some more than others, there naturally arises the problem of balance of power or even equality before the law. What the majority of member states may attempt with the United Nations and come out facing adverse repercussions for is the same thing the United States will not only attempt but carry out and come out smelling of roses. For the sake of this discussion, should one be given to a flight of fancy however fleetingly and imagine or a moment that a member state such as Ghana or Nigeria threatens the use of force against Cameroon and declares to the world that the same will be effected whether or not the United Nations and indeed the world approves of its actions. At the very least, economic sanctions will immediately be placed on such a country. However in the name and under the umbrella of 9/11 it would appear that America is permitted to do and undo whatever catches its fancy and of course promotes its economic as well as military growth. How else can one begin to explain the issue of thousands held prisoner at the US military operated prison and indeed a recreation of Camp Delta, Guantanamo Bay, for years with neither charges nor trial in the name of fighting terrorism? America claims not to have jurisdiction in Cuba to try these prisoners yet it has the power and the authority to imprison them in Guantanamo Bay. What, one is right to ask, happened to the universal (at least in democratic states) ‘writ of habeas corpus’? Another example of America’s marked shift from multilateralism to unilateralism and establishing itself as a super power above the rest of the world is again glimpsed shortly after the controversial invasion of Iraq in 2003, when America was quick to submit allegations against North Korea as well as Iran for also becoming threats to the international community as they were manufacturing nuclear weapons. In an ironical twist however, in 1998, Japan, perhaps once one of America’s closest allies, was reportedly furious with America when its officials unilaterally decided that funding for North Korean Nuclear reactors was to con tinue despite Japan’s complaints that North Korea was firing missile over its territory.[13] What then can possibly put an end to America’s domination of the international stage and its rise towards a super power of hegemonic characteristics? It has been established that the two most important factors in the growth of any nation; its economy and defence, remain the two areas where America continues to excel and prosper rendering it even more of a force to reckon with by other nations of the world. Is it then any wonder that many are of the school of thought that it is only a matter of time before America seeks to completely dominate the world and by so doing, simply crush out weaker states of the world. It is enough to alert the world that more than any other administration before it, the Bush administration is significantly departing from materialism especially on agreements dealing with arms control and proliferation. Multilateralism, as Ikenberry’s book posed the debate, does indeed seem to be on the decline in America’s policy and political stance. I t has become to America a selective game where multilateralism is embraced when it adds to the muscles in its already bulky biceps and unilateralism at every other turn. As America continues to systematically depart from multilateralism and promote more unilateralism in its foreign policies and decisions on security affairs affecting not only its boundaries (assuming such a word as ‘boundary’ exists in the American dictionary) but also spread ashore to other nations of the world, the world may very well be moving rather rapidly towards the final unravelling of America as a hegemonic nation. What and who in the world can then possibly challenge America’s hegemony? Surely it would take a large scale war or a crucial global economic crisis to challenge or even come close to threatening America’s hegemony. While this might be very well put and even precise in theory, surely either option will definitely have grave repercussions on the international community. However, Ikenberry argues in his book, ‘America Unrivalled’, that there are limits to the United States’ hegemony such as it stands at the moment. He is of the opinion that a complete hegemonic order would require not just preponderant capabilities but also some significant degree of acquiescence on the part of other states, especially the other major players in world politics for the maintenance of such order. Following the Cold war, America acquired the support and cooperation of one of the major players in that region, Japan. Japan was once America’s closest ally as a result of this, however even Japan is becoming resentful, as presumably are the rest of the world, at America’s increased unilateralism (as in the North Korean case mentioned above) and the selective choice of multilateralism only when it favours the nation in one form of economic or security purpose or the other. It is therefore not impossible that other major players in the world, on examining their alternatives on how to best rid America of its hegemonic status and by so doing release the unsuspecting world from American domination, may very well challenge its hegemonic position. Capitalising on the regional and international relationships once promoted by America, the other major super powers in the Asian Region and the European Union could orchestrate an over throw of America’s position as an hegemonic state or at the very least challenge the same. Not ignoring the power and importance of smaller or weaker states however, they would quite naturally also have to be involved. This however would be an all scale war, the magnitude, repercussion and significance of which will tremble the world perhaps more than every previous wars put together! Any would-be hegemonic challenger would most naturally have already arrived at the very same conclusion. Apart from the fact that every single one of these would-be challengers rely on the United States for one as pect of its sustenance or the other, it would take a lot of consideration, meetings, strategising and concrete persuasion to convince every member state of the necessity of such a global war. With its present and ever growing resources both at home and abroad, it is therefore only a matter of time before America, at whom the war is intended, becomes aware of the plans and builds up enough or adequate defence against the same. While it is not impossible that several nations of the world may come together and challenge America’s build up to hegemony, to say that the world may never recover from such a large scale war may perhaps be the understatement of the existence of mankind. In a brief state of fantasy, were one to assume that this large scale war does take place and does remove America from the pinnacle of power it currently occupies, there is no telling how many decades or even centuries it would take to rebuild a world of international trade and globalisation. Another da nger in that is another country seizing the opportunity and rising very rapidly to the throne of hegemony, in this instance however, a country not so democratically inclined as America, for instance, China. The world as we know it now may cease to exist as a result of such a war. It is now 2008 yet traces of the Second World War still remain evident in some areas in the Eastern part of Germany as one imagines it does in other affected parts of the world. If the argument here is then that a full blown war against America’s hegemony may do the world greater harm than good, what then can possibly stop America’s climb to the top of the world? As mentioned earlier, the strength of any nation lies in its economic as well as military growth. One, quite naturally, is not devoid of the other however as training camps, gears and facilities will be difficult to procure without a booming economy. Should the world then experience a global economic crisis, the like of which it is yet to ever experience, perhaps this will in a way also bring America to the same level as other countries or at least less dominant? In this present day, at least the European Union and America are experiencing an economic crisis that has been likened to the worst in many decades till date. The Great Britain’s Royal Bank of Scotland recently announced that the country is indeed in recession. China and Japan have also reported major decline in sales and poor performances on their Wall Street equivalent. Japan has actually announced to the world, like Great Britain, that it is indeed in the middle of a torrid recession. While this economic crisis may very well be unpleasant and indeed wrecking a lot of harm on the economy of the countries involved, it will take much more than this to cripple America or to reduce its hegemonic status. Even at this point in time, the US Dollar continues to rise against the British Pound and the Euro. Should the world experience an economic crisis of such negative significance that all the major states as well as even the ones considered smaller and weaker are effectively affected, America’s hegemony, in my humble opinion, will most certainly be thoroughly challenged. This will be brought about by the fact that the international community in a bid to survive and revert to some semblance of normality will be forced to depend one on the other for that means to survival, America included. Such a scenario will almost take the world back in history to the early days when the advantages of globalisation and inter dependence of nations on one another was first discovered. Such an economic crisis w ill render it almost impossible for states to continue to concentrate on military training and equipments. One should imagine that nations will be more concerned with the immediate welfare of their people such as housing, medical care and social services as undoubtedly unemployment will rise astronomically in the face of an economic crisis of any significant magnitude. From everything hereinabove appearing and the examination of different (learned) opinions as well as scenarios, it is therefore perhaps appropriate to conclude by agreeing with the debate that should a full blown war orchestrated by would-be challengers of America’s hegemonic state fail, surely an economic crisis of significant global scale will not only challenge but also probably, however temporarily, bring an end to America’s hegemony. America will be forced to revert to the multilateralism way of international politics and to abandon unilateralism in a bid to promote globalisation and a closer knit international community. Bibliography John, G. Ikenberry, ‘America Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power’ (Cornell University Press, 2002) John, Ikenberry, ‘Is American Multilateralism in Decline?’ Perspectives on Politics 1:3 (2003) ‘Hegemony or Empire’ The Redefinition of US Power under George W. Bush, Edited by Charles-Philippe David and David Grondin (2006) Richard Little, Michael Smith, ‘Perspectives on World Politics’ Ikenberry, G. John, ‘Liberalism and Empire: Logics of Order In The American Unipolar Age’, Review of International Studies (2004) Stephen M. Walt, ‘Keeping the World â€Å"Off-Balance†: Self-Restraint and U.S. Foreign Policy’, in Ikenberry, America Unrivalled, pp. 121-154. Charles A. Kupchan, ‘Hollow Hegemony or Stable Multipolarity?’, in G. John Ikenberry (ed.), America Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002), p. 72. According to Kupchan, the European Union is emerging as the main competitor of the United States in a future multipolar international system. Whither American Power? David Held and Mathias Koenig-Archibugi Published in: American Power in the Twentieth-First Century, edited by David Held and Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004. Kennedy, Paul, ‘The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers’ 1987 Footnotes [1] David Held and Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, ‘Whither American Power?’ In American Power in the Twentieth-First Century [2] G. John, Ikenberry ‘America Unrivalled’ Pp 1 [3] Quoted in Balz 2003, A1 [4] Purdum 2002., 1 [5] Ikenberry [6] Quoted in Craig R. Whitney, ‘NATO at 50’ With Nations at Odds, Is It A Misalliance? New York Times 2, 1999 [7] President of the United States, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington D.C.: White House, September 2002), p. 30. [8] G. John Ikenberry [9] Paul Kennedy, ‘The Greatest Superpower Ever’, New Perspectives Quarterly, 19 (2002). [10] Barry R. Posen, ‘Command of the Commons: The Military Foundation of U.S. Hegemony’, International Security, 28 (2003), pp. 5-46, p. 8. [11] On the durability of U.S. supremacy see William C. Wohlforth, ‘The Stability of a Unipolar World’, International Security, 24 (1999), pp. 5–41. [12] Argument was developed by Ikenberry 2001 [13] Marshall and Mann, ‘Goodwill Towards the United States is Dwindling Globally’

The Branding of IKEA Essay -- Business Management Studies Essays Paper

The Branding of IKEA Company background The first catalogue was introduced in 1951 and with this the founder saw his chance to expand his business on a larger scale, and this was the year he decided to completely focus on low-price furniture, as from the beginning IKEA sold mainly matches, watches, Christmas decorations, picture frames and jewellery. In 1956 the company came up with the concept of 'flat-pack' self-assembly furniture. The first international IKEA store was introduced in Norway in 1963, and was soon followed by the opening of stores in Denmark, Germany, Australia, Canada, and Austria. In 1987 the first IKEA opened in the UK, and in 2001 the company had 143 stores in 22 countries. Today we are the leading furniture retailer in the UK with a 12.1% before MFI and DFS. Our Brand - an introduction The brand name is associated with feelings, attitudes or different meanings, and in our minds it is connected with a certain image. All inspired by the logo, design or colour. Branding is a way to differentiate one company, its service or product, from competitors. But also to provide it with a personality which is both appealing and unique to their potential customers. It is a multifaceted, disciplined and multilayered process. IKEA is seen as friendly, quirky, trendy, social, young, independent, witty and relaxed. Usually the personality of a brand is described as a person, with its different characteristics. The importance of branding In the past decade companies are starting to see their brand assets, and with this branding has taken on a greater significance. So today brands are more than just marketing slogans and logos. All businesses are building their brands through certain actions and in their actual presence they find a 'position' in the mind of consumer and prospects. This is based on experience and exposure of the brand in the competitive marketplace. There are certain advantages to take into account in a Brand Strategy; Financial Advantages, Strategic Advantages and Management Advantages. The financial advantages may be higher sales, and for the companies with more market shares; higher margins. IKEA is one of the leaders in its market place, and therefore many other brands in that particular sector may be 'hitchhiker' brands following us and other leaders (such as MFI and DFS). Strategic Advantages... ...ours, and the name written across in bold letters. It is very much a trademark and this same logo has been used from a very early stage. Conclusion I hope this will help you understand the importance of branding within IKEA. Our company has been a worldwide success for so many years, and this has already created an image in most peoples minds, they associate the name IKEA and the logo with purchase or from one of the award winning advertising campaigns which have been run throughout the world. It is incredibly important to build brand awareness when introducing a new product onto the market, and our company has already achieved this, but there is still the need to maintain customer and market. Bibliography * Mintel (2002) * Internet * San Juan de la Pena website * Rieboviz, Rik * De Chernatony, Leslie (2001) From Brand Vision to Brand Evaluation, Butterworth-Heinemann * Brassington, Frances, Pettitt, Stephen (2000) Principles of Marketing, Prentice Hall * Butterfield, Leslie (1999) Excellence in Advertising, 2nd edition, Butterworth-Heinemann * Nilson, Torsten H (1998) Competitive Branding, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Is the Law Fault Based?

A2 AQA LAW Is the law fault based? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, Fault is defined as â€Å"error† or â€Å"blame†, the wrongdoing and extent of which the defendant is responsible for his actions. The law should only punish those who are at fault and impose punishments which are deserved, whilst being more lenient to those who are not at fault and did not foresee the consequences. In criminal law, fault is proven by the prosecution where people are found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt. In civil law, people are found liable, on a balance of probability.In order to discuss and evaluate the definition of fault as a basis of crime, it must first be understood and identified where fault can exist. Offences in law are often graded accordingly depending on how much fault they reflect. E. g. indictable offences such as rape and murder are the most serious of crimes and therefore receive the mandatory life sentence in order to reflect this. They cause the most seri ous damage to the victim and require more intention. However, summary offences such as â€Å"common† assault only receive minimal prison sentences, but normally fines up to ? 000. This is because the fault is deemed far less as the victim does not suffer as much and there is less intention to commit such a crime. Sentences also reflect to what extent the defendant was at fault. Aggravated factors, like a racially motivated attack or using a weapon indicates a higher level of intention and fault whilst mitigating factors like pleading guilty somewhat lessens the defendants fault in the eyes of the law. The severity of the crime depends on the level of fault. This can be found in the actus reus of a crime- the guilty physical act.Murder, for example is a voluntary act which demonstrates a higher degree of fault and blame (Smith- where a solider stabbed another solider with a bayonet. ) A voluntary act is normally a deliberate act and therefore seems fair to greater level of bla me. An omission is defined as the failure to act and shows a lower amount of fault as there is no physical act. For example, in the case of R v Dytham, a policeman witnessed a fight take place, but did not stop it and the victim was seriously injured. An ordinary passerby would not be regarded as at fault in this way but because a police officer has a public duty, he was deemed at greater fault.Causation is another aspect which is very fault-based in both criminal and civil law. There are tests to prove causation: factual, the â€Å"but for† test- But for defendant’s actions, would the outcome still be the same? legal causation- was the defendants actions the substantial and operating cause in victims injuries? and novus actus intervenes- was there a break in causation? Was there other factors that could of contributed? So if the defendant did cause the injury suffered by the victim then the defendant should be held at fault, vise versa if the defendant did not cause t he injury then he is not at fault.In Jordan, the defendant had shot the victim however the victim was completely recovered in hospital when he received a wrong injection which killed him. The defendant did not cause the death of the victim as the hospital treatment was an intervening factor and the substantial cause of death, therefore not fault. In comparison, in R v Smith, a solider was stabbed and was in hospital when he died from loss of blood from the stab wound. Unlike Jordan, Smith was found guilty of causing the defendants death as it was the original stab wound which was the operating cause of death proving he was at fault.Fault can also be shown through mens rea- the guilty mind. There are specific intent crimes such as murder or GBH s. 18, which can only be committed intentionally, where it was the defendant’s main aim or purpose indicating a higher level of fault. On the other hand, crimes of a less serious nature can be committed either intentionally or recklessl y- basic intent crimes like assault or battery. Recklessness shows less fault and blame than intention (although some fault is given due to subjective recklessness e. g.Cunningham- the defendant realises there is a risk of harm but acts anyway) because the outcome is only a possibility and sometimes is not foreseen. Similarly, Gross negligence manslaughter depicts how civil negligence can become criminal liability as a result of a death. This offence allows businesses to be liable and found at fault even though it is impossible to prove their mens rea. The use of defences in the legal system can also indicate how the defendant may possess both the actus reus and mens rea of a crime, but still not completely at fault.Insanity is a full defence which means the defendant is unable to form the mens rea of the crime in question due to a disease of the mind. Also, Automatism removes all fault on the defendants behalf as he is suffering from an external factor or influence. Intoxication (o nly applicable to specific intent crimes) shows an appropriate mens rea could not be formed due to the use of drink or drugs. However, other defences such as Diminished responsibility used as a defence in murder situations, only partially removes the defendants fault as he is suffering with an abnormality of the mind.This shows fault is lower than that of an intentional killing. Certain areas of criminal law where there are offences do not require any fault to be proved such as speeding offences. These are called strict liability crimes, where no mens rea is needed just the pure act of doing it makes you guilty whether you intended to or not. These offences are imposed throughout society in order to uphold social policies, but some people feel that no fault offences are unfair because they impose liability on people who did not necessary foresee any consequences. In Shah v DPP, a lottery ticket was sold to a member of the public under the age of 16.Although there were many signs and notices about checking ID of those looking underage, the ticket was still sold and the defendant was found guilty. This case had led to a requirement for an evaluation of the need for fault, as Shah, could be seen as not at fault as the child had used fake identity. These no-fault arguments are based on the public’s interest that it is better to protect the innocent public and compensate them than to prove an individuals fault, applicable for businesses that have to accept the risks and benefits of funning a company.Smedleys v Breed, a manufacturer defendant who was found guilty when a caterpillar was found in a tin of peas, where it is obvious that it was this manufacturers fault and responsibility to take blame. On the other hand, this can encourage higher standards amongst employers to encourage them to know the law and avoid injury and take care of themselves. It is believed that we should be accountable for our own actions, no matter whether fault can be proved or not- based on the principle â€Å"we reap what we sow†.This is was shown in R v Howells where the defendant failed to obtain a certificate for the gun he was possessing unwittingly, but will still guilty of this offence. Another argument is that imposing strict liability crimes helps that of deterrence on society to encourage better diligence. However, despite these no-fault arguments, many people believe there is a necessity for a proof of fault. Fairness is at the heart of the legal system and would seem unfair not to require a person to be proven at fault in order for them to be guilty.Having a no-fault system was implicate distrust for the public and would reflect poor values of society. It would also result in serious consequences for the sentenced defendant with a conviction. In conclusion, it has become clear that proving fault is already an essential element of criminal liability in the English legal system already and no fault only exists in a small number of offences, bu t can still have serious repercussions. In order for justice to continue to be served, criminal offences and their combined penalty should be limited to those who are evidently guilty and at fault and who truly deserve the punishments.

San Lorenzo - Olmec Civilization in Veracruz

San Lorenzo - Olmec Civilization in Veracruz San Lorenzo is an Olmec period site located in the state of Veracruz, Mexico. San Lorenzo is the name of the central place in the larger San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan archaeological region. It is located on a steep plateau above the Coatzacoalcos floodplain. The site was first settled in the second millennium BC and had its heyday between 1200-900 BC. Temples, plazas, roadways and kingly residences are included in an area of about a half acre, where about 1,000 people resided. Chronology Ojochi phase (1800-1600 BC)Bajio phase (1600-1500 BC)Chicharras (1500-1400 BC)San Lorenzo A (1400-1200 BC)San Lorenzo B (1000-1200 BC) Architecture at San Lorenzo Ten colossal stone heads representing heads of past and present rulers have been found at San Lorenzo. Evidence suggests that these heads were plastered and painted in bright colors. They were arranged in ensembles and set in a plaza paved with red sand and yellow gravel. Sarcophagus-shaped thrones linked living kings with their ancestors. A royal processional aligned to the north-south axis of the plateau led the way to the center. At the center of the site are two palaces: the San Lorenzo Red Palace and the Stirling Acropolis. The Red Palace was a royal residence with a platform substructure, red floors, basalt roof support, steps and drain. The Stirling Acropolis may have been the sacred residence, and is surrounded by a pyramid, E-group and a ballcourt. Chocolate at San Lorenzo Recent analysis of 156 potsherds were collected from stratified deposits at San Lorenzo, and reported in an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in May of 2011. Residues of the pottery were collected and analyzed at the University of California, Davis Department of Nutrition. Of the 156 potsherds examined, 17% contained conclusive evidence of theobromine, the active incredient in chocolate. Vessel types exhibiting multiple occurrences of theobromine included open bowls, cups and bottles; the vessels date throughout the chronology at San Lorenzo. This represents the earliest evidence of chocolate use. Read more about the history of chocolate Excavators of San Lorenzo include Matthew Stirling, Michael Coe and Ann Cyphers Guillen. Sources This glossary entry is a part of the About.com Guide to the Olmec Civilization, and part of the Dictionary of Archaeology. Blomster JP, Neff H, and Glascock MD. 2005. Olmec Pottery Production and Export in Ancient Mexico Determined Through Elemental Analysis. Science 307:1068-1072. Cyphers A. 1999. From Stone to Symbols: Olmec Art in Social Context at San Lorenzo Tenochtitln. In: Grove DC, and Joyce RA, editors. Social Patterns in Pre-Classic Mesoamerica. Washington DC: Dumbarton Oaks. p 155-181. Neff H, Blomster J, Glascock MD, Bishop RL, Blackman MJ, Coe MD, Cowgill GL, Diehl RA, Houston S, Joyce AA et al. 2006. Methodological Issues In The Provenance Investigation Of Early Formative Mesoamerican Ceramics. Latin American Antiquity 17(1):54-57. Neff H, Blomster J, Glascock MD, Bishop RL, Blackman MJ, Coe MD, Cowgill GLC, Ann, Diehl RA, Houston S, Joyce AA et al. 2006. Smokescreens in the Provenance Investigation of Early Formative Mesoamerican Ceramics. Latin American Antiquity 17(1):104-118. Pohl MD, and von Nagy C. 2008. The Olmec and their contemporaries. In: Pearsall DM, editor. Encyclopedia of Archaeology. London: Elsevier Inc. p 217-230. Pool CA, Ceballos PO, del Carmen Rodrà ­guez Martà ­nez M, and Loughlin ML. 2010. The early horizon at Tres Zapotes: implications for Olmec interaction. Ancient Mesoamerica 21(01):95-105. Powis TG, Cyphers A, Gaikwad NW, Grivetti L, and Cheong K. 2011. Cacao use and the San Lorenzo Olmec. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(21):8595-8600. Wendt CJ, and Cyphers A. 2008. How the Olmec used bitumen in ancient Mesoamerica. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 27(2):175-191.

The Beatles Nightmare in the Phillipines essays

The Beatles Nightmare in the Phillipines essays The summer of 1966 was a high point in the world of pop music. Here in the Bay Area, flower power was in full swing in San Franciscos Haight-Ashbury. The Beatles had just released Revolver, their most musically innovative album to date (and arguably the most innovative rock album of all time up to that point). The Beatles had been touring practically nonstop for four years and were considering becoming a studio only (non-touring) band. Their experience in the Philippines was perhaps the pivotal catalyst ultimately leading to their decision to play their last concert in Candlestick Park, San Francisco, in August of 1966. The Beatles had left Tokyo amid a controversy over their performing at the legendary Budokan Sumo Wrestling Hall and were in no mood for more trouble. They were exhausted from their constant touring schedule and were savoring a rare day off. When Madame Imelda Marcos, First Lady of the Philippines, invited them to dinner, they all decided that they were too tired to go and politely declined. Relieved that they could finally relax, they decided to lounge by the pool. After about an hour, they were alerted to a televised image of an outraged Madame Marcos publicly denouncing them on television.The Beatles have let me down! she cried. The camera panned over the faces of hundreds of forlorn children who had been promised a meal with the Beatles. The Beatles were told that in the interest of their personal safety, they should leave the Philippines immediately. They began to pack their belongings as their road managers attempted to locate cars to transport them to the airport. But mysteriously, no cars were available. Were the Beatles being trapped in the Philippines in order to be punished for their affront to the presidential family? Finally, two cars were located and they piled in and sped off to the Manila Airport. On the way to the airport, they became ens...

System Security for Department of Human and Health Services Essay

System Security for Department of Human and Health Services - Essay Example The SSP works in accordance to the guidelines provided under the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-53 Rev 4 Guide for Assessing Security Controls in Federal Information Systems and Organizations, Building Effective Security Assessment Plans The purpose of this Cybersecurity profile is to provide an overview of the cybersecurity requirements for the HHS (Department of Human and Health Sciences) with a succinct description of how the management, operational, and technical controls in place and those planned for the future, meet NIST’s requirements. Security categorization defines categories of information systems in relation to impact loss. It involves the classification of information and information systems in accordance with the potential effect on an organization. The analysis also depends on the occurrence of events that might jeopardize the information and information systems required by the organization for the accomplishment of its mission, protection of its assets, fulfilment of its legal duties and protection of individuals. Security categorization is based on the vulnerability and threat information in evaluating an organization’s risk. The HHS management evaluates systems and assigns a level (low, moderate, high) in relation to the risk to HSS in case of breach of security. The level depends on risks of confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information (Barker, 2004). It is the responsibility of HHS (System Owner) and its stakeholders to identify and establish the information system type. The security concern of HHS is to ensure that shared resources such as networks, communications and physical access within the whole general support system or major application are sufficiently protected. Therefore, it can be said that the information type held by HHS is mission-based (Barker, 2004). By virtue of the personal information of individuals held by HSS (HHS Cyber Security Program, 2014), the type of information system can be said to be Personally Identifiable Information.  

Phantom of the opera Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Phantom of the opera - Essay Example In the book, the Phantom is described as a ghostly figure that did not have a nose and had a dressing resembling that of an undertaker. In addition, in the book, he is described as a very thin person, in fact a comparison is made to a skeleton. The Phantom possesses an ugly yellow skin, together with deep set eyes that glow in the dark (Leroux 13). The book denotes the Phantom to have been having 3-4 long black hairs which hung down from his forehead. In addition, the books describe the Phantom as having a head that constantly changed at will. In comparison to the movie, the Phantom is seen as a seemingly genuine and caring person. In contrast to the book, the movie brings out the Phantom as not that scaring and demon like (Joel). In addition, instead of a disfigured person, in the movie, the Phantom is seen as handsome shaped man that wore a beautiful white mask. In regard to the lair, in the book, it is described as being a dark area except for some area on the floor which had a shaded lantern. The lantern in the book shines on a gushing fountain set positioned in the wall (Leroux 19). The wall had water splashing down it, and the water disappeared under the floor. Furthermore, it also had black demons that stirred fires in the book. It is described as having a nightmarish darkness, including tapestries on furniture, walls, vases, candlesticks and flowers (Leroux 21). In the book, Daae is seen as seen to be in a chaise lounge, which is a simple bedroom that contained a mahogany bed plus cretonne hangings existing on its walls. In the book, the room basically looked like a funeral room. In comparison to the lair in the movie, it is portrayed as a beautiful place. The walls of the lair in the movie are seen as gray, though had candles placed everywhere that cast glow on the existing brick (Joel). In addition, the antique candlesticks plus the candelabras had been placed everywhere, books placed all around, silk curtains draped about, plus also had the art