How Experience of Colonialism Affected Latin American Development And Essay

How Experience of Colonialism Affected Latin American Development And Post-independence - Essay Example This report stresses that Tte wars for independence led to fragmentation of the existing political order, militarization and mobilization of war resources that ultimately continued the civil wars even after independence. The independence was not immediately accompanied by economic and social growth since there were not property rights protection and enough structures that could guarantee trade flows. Haiti was one of the lucrative countries due to exports of sugar and French colonizers forced the country to pay reparations after its independence in 1804 thus shelling out more than 80 percent of the nation’s budget. This paper makes a conclusion that colonisation of Latin America led to different economic, political and social changes such as new languages, Christianity, and new cultures. The colonial period was marked by economic exploitation of raw materials and political oppression of the natives. The Haiti revolution and subsequent French revolution inspired Latin American movements for independence and led to new nations that faced numerous governance challenges due to lack of constitution and struggles for economic success by the elite natives. The post-independence period was marked by export-led economy, military coups, internal conflicts and clamor for political revolution. However, the current Latin American society has integrated in to world markets and is currently experiencing political stability due to democratic governance and social welfare policies.

Opposition to Capital Punishment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Opposition to Capital Punishment - Essay Example This trend not only reflects the rise in criminal behavior in society but also underscores the government's intolerance to it. In addition, it also highlights the fact that capital punishment is no deterrent to criminal behavior. Though the statistics are alarmingly high they do not reveal the true extent of executions as many are carried out in secret, directly contravening United Nations standards. Every country has its own laws in convicting and sentencing criminals. With human rights organizations like the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and Amnesty International striving towards the goal of encouraging all countries to recognize the fundamental right for a human not to be executed, the death penalty issue is slowly changing laws worldwide. More and more countries have relaxed their capital punishment laws and established a moratorium on executions. As of 2003 all countries in the European Union who signed the Second Optional Protocol - established in 1991 - have abolished the death penalty (NSWCCL 2006). This protocol is one of the five international human rights treaties that make up the International Bill of Human Rights. Last year, five countries ratified it - Bhutan, Greece, Samoa, Senegal and Turkey have abolished the death penalty for all crimes bringing the total number of nations to have eradicated the practice to 120, outnumbering those that retain it. For countries that sustain the death penalty, the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) contains article 6 which stipulates minimum standards needed to be adopted in capital punishment cases (NSWCCL 2006). Those standards are: a) Death penalty should be imposed for the most serious crimes where there is clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for doubt as to the persons guilty of it. b) A mandatory process of appeal and clemency to higher jurisdictional courts should be allowed. c) Pregnant women, new mothers and the insane should not be executed. d) Juveniles (under 18) should not be executed. e) In all capital punishment cases those sentenced to death should have the right to seek pardon or commutation of sentence and any or both may be granted (OHCHR). While proponents say that the death penalty is the only way to keep society in check, there is little evidence that supports the view that capital punishment is a deterrent to criminal behavior. As of 2005, the rate of recidivism (the act of repeating an offence after experiencing a negative consequence - like prison time), in the US continues to be over 60% whereas in Britain it is 50% (Wikipedia 2006). While the US focuses on punishment and deterrence to keep potentially harmful persons out of society, Britain rehabilitates and educates its prisoners - thus the lower recidivism rate. A previous 1994 statistic suggests out of the 272,111 persons released from prison that year in 15 states in the US, over 67% were re-arrested for a crime within 3 years. 47% were reconvicted and 25% were re-sentenced to prison for a new crime (Bureau of Justice Statistics 2005). Clearly, prison time is no deterrent to offenders. When Canada abolished the dea

Education, Teaching and Curriculum Essay Example for Free

Education, Teaching and Curriculum Essay Education has always been an important aspect in the course of personal and societal development as a whole. Every individual has an urge and personal willingness to learn valuable information that varies from either practical knowledge o scientific ones. However, all of these relevant informations are very much needed by every individual to be able to develop their own self and become self-sufficient and productive members of the society. Education has many methodologies from which one individual can attain it in a scientifically formulated pattern. This is actually the main pattern accepted and utilized by all educational institution in their formal learning process and even implemented by those who implement informal ones. Gradual and progressive pattern is the most effective and easiest way used in learning process because it mainly accommodates normal brain development and innate learning abilities of the person. In this learning process, the main methodology commonly used in the per curriculum basis encompassing teaching instructions for learning individuals. Curriculum is literally defined in education as a set of courses regarding different classes or subjects offered in different educational institutions such as a school or a university. Embedded in its process are different specific classes for minor and major aspects that are all conjoined in adherence to the course objective of the entire curriculum. This is actually formulated and expressed in terms of its learning outcomes and for the development of the students taking up the said curriculum. Curriculums in general, whatever its subject or class is, are all created to envelope the learning process of individuals learning their specific course to develop and acquire valuable and relevant skills in that specific field. The main learning approach commonly used in the curriculum teaching is based on a set of instruction, which are all directed to guide the students in the gradually process of learning in the curriculum. Instructions are a basic aspect of the learning process. They are all formulated to guide students in their gradual learning process in their respective fields. In educational curriculum, instructions serve as a form of communicated information that has a command and explanation nature. Thus, instructions are descriptive explanations for how an action, behavior, method, or task is to be begun, completed, conducted, or executed. Because of their significant relevance to the learning process of individuals, instructions are explicitly used in the approach system and learning process in a curriculum. Learning instructions are generally formulated and given to students to guide them in discovering and thus learning the different specific informations and processes that are significant in the execution and completion of their respective subjects that are enveloped in their curriculum. With consideration of the definition and significant or the two main aspects in the learning process, curriculum and instruction have a direct relationship with each other. In the education aspect, curriculums are generally composed of specific set of instructions in specific subjects based on its respective course. Instruction are formulated and applied by the educational institutions to guide and educate explain to their students the knowledge and information in the different subjects encompassed in the gradual learning process of their different curriculums in every courses or fields. Thus, curriculum and instructions go side-by-side in systematically developing and directing the educational system to better address the normal mental development and innate learning process of the students thus encouraging more productive and efficient learning approach for the society. In terms of the higher level of educational set up, the curriculums offered as well as the regulations are diversely changed to apply to the demands required for the learners. Obviously, the requirements of concentration and focus from the students are heightened. However, this does not add the directly instructional as compared to that of the lower levels of learning. Obviously, this is primarily because of the fact that the students in this level are already matured enough to be still instructed on what they are supposed to do. The students are rather expected to place higher concentration and intend to pursue in a better level of focus on the proper learning attitude needed for them to survive this particular stage of learning. The instance of being able to survive the scholastic challenges presented by the higher and more demanding environment of education is a primary achievement among those who are concentrating to attain the best out of their learning in this level of educational state. Most of the time, the students are known to be pressured in this set up, but all these procedures are strongly applied to actually help in the process of making the students see the real implications of their lessons in actual life.

Defining And Analysing Freedom Of Expression Philosophy Essay

Defining And Analysing Freedom Of Expression Philosophy Essay The freedom to communicate ideas, thoughts or any form of message through any type of medium freely without any censorship or limitations Freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. Freedom of expression is the right of an individual to express his/her feelings and thoughts in any manner what so ever through any medium. Introduction Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democratic rights and freedoms. In its very first session in 1946, before any human rights declarations or treaties had been adopted, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 59(I) stating Freedom of information is a fundamental human right and the touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated. Freedom of expression is essential in enabling democracy to work and public participation in decision-making. Citizens cannot exercise their right to vote effectively or take part in public decision-making if they do not have free access to information and ideas and are not able to express their views freely. Freedom of expression is thus not only important for individual dignity but also to participation, accountability and democracy. Violations of freedom of expression often go hand in hand with other violations, in particular the right to freedom of association and assembly. Progress has been made in recent years in terms of securing respect for the right to freedom of expression. Efforts have been made to implement this right through specially constructed regional mechanisms. New opportunities are emerging for greater freedom of expression with the internet and worldwide satellite broadcasting. New threats are emerging too, for example with global media monopolies and pressures on independent media outlets. A Means of Speaking Out Freedom has provided a forum to countless other individuals and groups in the interest of justice and reform. Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democratic rights and freedoms. In its very first session in 1946, before any human rights declarations or treaties had been adopted, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 59(I) stating Freedom of information is a fundamental human right and à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ the touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated. Freedom of expression is essential in enabling democracy to work and public participation in decision-making. Citizens cannot exercise their right to vote effectively or take part in public decision-making if they do not have free access to information and ideas and are not able to express their views freely. Freedom of expression is thus not only important for individual dignity but also to participation, accountability and democracy. Violations of freedom of expression often go hand in hand with other violations, in particular the right to freedom of association and assembly. Progress has been made in recent years in terms of securing respect for the right to freedom of expression. Efforts have been made to implement this right through specially constructed regional mechanisms. New opportunities are emerging for greater freedom of expression with the internet and worldwide satellite broadcasting. New threats are emerging too, for example with global media monopolies and pressures on independent media outlets. Free Expression and the Internet Aside from supporting freedom of expression for others, Freedom has been in the forefront of reporting on issues which directly concern the freedom itself. During the 1990s, freedom of expression has extended to include the computerization of the way we live, work, and conduct our day to day affairs. Due to its capability for instantaneous global communication, the Internet has provided a new frontier for free speech and its protection within the parameters of responsibility and lawfulness. For the same reason, it has also put freedom of speech to its most crucial test. The right to ones own thoughts and their disposition is a fundamental human right. Authors, artists, designers, and the myriad of others in creative and intellectual fields have the right to share their words or ideas with others or not. If they choose to share them, they also have the right to control the way in which they may be shared. In this way, intellectual property rights and free expression are inextricably linked. Freedom has championed the application of existing laws regarding intellectual property rights to the Internet, and supported responsible self-restraint by individual users. Self-policing by Internet users is ultimately the means by which to ensure continued freedom from over-regulation. However, Freedom has expressed the view that some regulation may become necessary if free speech is abused, thus has also presented the view that existing intellectual property laws be applied where necessary to those who violate the rights of others. Freedom of speech means neither the freedom to steal, nor the right to claim anothers speech as ones own, nor to copy anothers writing and sell it or give it away without the authors permission. Freedom has also informed officials, community leaders, and the media on copyright issues pertaining to the Internet, including its in-depth coverage of court cases that are setting precedents for the protection of intellectual property rights on the Internet. Due to continued support and dedication to the freedom of expression, Freedom has been able to provide a wide variety of views and accounts of news over the past 30 years. In a world where the public is majorly informed by means of fragmentary day-to-day news processed through a few news media who, because of their size, dominate the flow of information, accounts by other media such as Freedom who can provide different views-are increasingly important to a free society. Pros and cons Freedom of expression is a double edged sword in that it has its positive side as well as a negative aspect. Freedom of expression does not give any person, group, institution or a nation to abuse, degrade and mock other peoples religion, culture or their beliefs. Freedom of expression has to be used entails that exceptional care is to be taken when dealing with such sensitive matters where emotions run high. It does not give anybody the license to make a mockery of other peoples beliefs and cultures just because it is different from their own. Where as in purely democratic sense this is considered to be a very good thing, it carries its own responsibilities. The sign of a civilized and educated nation is that everybody is free to express whatever they like as long as it is within certain limits of decency and ethics and is not considered to be beyond a certain legal boundary. Whereas there are laws in a proper democratic society that protects the individuals right to freedom of expression. There are also laws to protect individuals from grief and loss incurred as a result of another persons actions taken in the name of freedom of expression. In other words one person cannot go beyond the law and cite his right to freedom of expression to insult, degrade and defame any another person, group and institution. Freedom of expression without responsibility is no freedom what so ever and can be termed as sheer arrogance. Origins Of Freedom Of Expression The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR recognizes the right to freedom of speech as the right to hold opinions without interference. It is different from and not to be confused with the concept of freedom of thought. Conclusion: Freedom of speech and Ethics: Every individual has their own personal space, within which they have freedom of doing anything. But this freedom remains only till the time it doesnt interfere with the personal space of some any other individual other than you. Now days this term has gained a lot of popularity, individuals and groups either separately or collectively have started abusing each others or a set of peoples rights in the name of so called Freedom of Speech. We know what and where our boundaries are but give the least consideration about it when it comes to others, we have forgotten that where our limits end someone elses boundaries might begin from just there. Freedom of Speech and Media: Media is a very powerful tool, if used appropriately it can do miracles, but if misused it can cause harm like no other thing can. Tools as we know are not harmful or useful, it is their use that categorizes them in a certain way, and so same is the case with media be it of any form, print media or electronic media. The purpose that it fulfills is what makes it either good or bad; freedom of speech is one such issue that came into limelight by medias propagation regarding this issue. Medias approach is very wide and is followed by a large number of populations anywhere, so whatever is portrayed regarding any issue gains hype instantly and leaves a deep impact on the minds of masses. With such powers come great responsibilities as well, and to make sure these responsibilities are met some laws had to be laid down to keep a proper check. Freedom of Speech and Laws: Laws hold a great importance to maintain a balance and a sound society and are mainly responsible for maintaining the attained freedom. Laws are made to protect the rights of individuals, or groups living in a society. Rules and regulations help set a boundary to an extent till which individuals or groups prevailing in the society can interfere others freedom, be it freedom of speech, expression or any other kind of freedom that an individual or a group of people can possibly have. Freedom has always has its price, be it in any form, responsibility is the price that is and should be paid to maintain its true essence. Everyone should be responsible for their actions, implied or not and words either spoken or written, only then we will have nearly idealistic societies.

Reinhold Niebuhr :: essays research papers

Niebuhr, Reinhold (1892-1971), American Protestant theologian, whose social doctrines profoundly influenced American theological and political thought. Born in Wright City, Missouri, June 21, 1892, he was educated at Elmhurst College, Elmhurst, Illinois; Eden Theological Seminary, Webster Groves, Missouri; and Yale Divinity School. In 1915 he was ordained in the ministry of the Evangelical Synod of North America and made pastor of the Bethel Evangelical Church of Detroit. He held that post until 1928, at which time he joined the faculty of the Union Theological Seminary, New York City, where he taught for 30 years. At the time of his retirement (1960) he held a chair of ethics and theology; he also served as dean (1950-55) and vice president (1955-60). After retiring he continued at Union as a lecturer. An outstanding, although not a systematic, theologian, Niebuhr was notable primarily for his examination of the interrelationships between religion, individuals, and modern society. Outside the field of theology, he took a keen interest in trade union and political affairs. He was an active member of the Socialist Party in the 1930s, waged a vigorous fight against isolationism and pacifism before and during World War II, and in 1944 helped to found the Liberal Party in New York State. He received the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1964 and was made a member of the American Academy of Arts and Letters. He died on June 1, 1971. Niebuhr indicated his overriding interest in what has been called theological anthropology, a concern with the nature of man as a contact point for religion and society, in such major works as Moral Man and Immoral Society (1932), Interpretation of

1960s Counter Culture and its Saga Essay -- Sixties Culture USA Histo

1960's Counter Culture and its Saga After the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, America's hope for Camelot fades and life began to look a little more complicated. Congress deemed President Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" implausible as Johnson backed the country into a war that was not ours. Then, while many Americans began to realize that the War in Vietnam could not be won, there was major public outcry about ending our involvement in a war for the first time in the country's history. The liberals in the country failed to reach the working class, and President Richard Nixon, a conservative, ascended to the Office as a champion of the "silent majority." While the government was slogging our country through devastating affairs, the culture of the times was reinventing itself. Due to various movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement in the South, the Feminist Movement, and the Anti-Vietnam War Movement, Americans, especially energetic young citizens, began to learn that there was ground to be gained f rom being pro-active. Out of this feeling of possibility and need of young adults to be recognized by the government came the 1960s counter culture. Too many factors figure into society to pinpoint one as the reason for the counter cultural revolution. Still, one of the major factors that contributed to the counter culture was the folk, rock, and "acid" music of the 1960s. The music also serves as a way to illustrate and explain the 1960's counter cultural phenomenon. Each variation of the music genre contributed to the way that Americans felt about themselves, their government and their society. As "mindless drivel," according to noted historian John McMillian, bombarded the airwaves and rose to number... ...al rebellion. Instead, they took the movement out of the counter culture and made the struggle about telling the government to basically leave them alone. If they wanted to do drugs, the government should let them since it is their own bodies. If Jim Morrison wanted to masturbate onstage, he is affecting nothing besides his body, counter culturalists would argue. Therefore, in contrast to descriptions of the counter culture as a movement, it was really an outpouring of emotions of a group of people who wanted to either have their rights recognized or left alone. The counter culture decided that if the government cared little enough about them to send their peers into the Vietnam War, they should not have a say in how each person treats their mind and body. Musicians of the time helped clarify their message and reflected the message in their lyrics and actions.

David Hume, John Locke and John Rawls on Property Essay

All the three philosophers, whose work I am going to scrutinize on, have very specific, yet in most cases common views on property. First of all, let me define what the term property means. Property, as I see it, is an object of legal rights that is possessed by an individual or a group of individuals who are directly responsible for this it. In his work Of Justice, David Hume puts great emphasis on distribution of property in society. Hume believes that only the conception of property gives society such social virtue as justice. Justice, according to Hume, is an important social virtue the sole purpose of which is public utility. To prove his point of view about how property distribution defines the existence of justice in society, David Hume gives several examples. Take an example of utopian society where nature supplies human beings with every convenience in great abundance. It is a state where everyone has anything he/she desires in great amounts. Consequently, there is no any conception of property, because there is no need for it ? you can have everything without putting labor on it. Of course, in such a state, Hume argues, every virtue will flourish, except justice. Why make separation of property, if everyone has more than enough; where there is no need to label objects â€Å"mine† or â€Å"yours†, because both of us can have these objects in great amount without any physical or mental exercise? Hume also gives real life examples, of water and air; because of their great amount, no one is trying to control over them, separate them. According to Hume, in such cases justice is no longer exists in the list of virtues. For property, Hume thinks, plays an essential role in making justice useful for people. OK ? but you quote yourself from a previous paper John Locke, in his work Second Treatise of Government, writes about his views on the conception of property. In the chapter which is titled â€Å"Of Property† Locke makes significant points about private property. He, first of all, tells how the right to private property originated. Being a true protestant, Locke believes that the right for the private property is given to human beings from God or as Locke himself writes â€Å"that God has given the earth to the children of men; given to mankind in common. † Since God gave earth (and creatures and plants living and growing on it) in common, there should be some regulations what exactly and when can be called someone’s private ownership. For instance, there is a great territory of uncultivated land. When can it (or part of it) be called one’s private property? When one comes and says the area is his/her, or when one draws borders and claims for ownership? Locke proposes the idea of labor. That only a labor puts a distinction between common and private. And he gives examples of apples picked up from the common apple tree. The apples become private right after they are picked up by their owner, because the owner put labor on making them private property. Then, very just question arises: what if others will not give their consent in making common resources private? Locke thinks that in this case mankind would starve despite the abundance of resources God gave them. OK There may be an objection to this that if putting labor is the only thing required turning common into private, why not people take advantage of it and put great efforts to gain more private ownership. The answer that Locke gives is very simple ? ?as much as one can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils, so much he may by labor fix a property in: whatever is beyond this, is more than his share, and belongs to others. ‘ Therefore, the property is whatever one puts his/her labor in and can possess it for his/her convenience, but if some part of this property spoils or perishes, it is great injustice towards other members of society. Locke’s view on property very much resembles Hume’s thought of justice and property. Just like as Hume believes, Lock says that if there is a great deal of some natural resource, let it be land, the inhabitant of land do not value it. Hume would say that if certain convenience is given in abundance by nature, there is no property, hence no justice. Locke thinks the same that in such cases, the inhabitant do value the land until there is no room enough for them in that space ? problems with this sentence. Only in this case, people start, all in consent, distinguishing the property. So Locke says that one should not possess more than he can afford to possess, i. e. conveniences that will be enough for his comfort. And he says that if a person gains more, and as a consequence, some part of property perishes, then it is a crime towards others. It is very interesting that Locke says â€Å"perishes† or â€Å"spoils. † If it does not perish or spoil, then it is not a crime, as ? the exceeding of bounds of his just property not lying in the largeness of his possession, but the perishing of any thing uselessly in it. And then comes money, being the only mean by which a person can exceed property without spoiling it. Locke thinks that only money made it possible to a person to enlarge his/her possessions without hurting others. And only existence of money make people lust for more, as it was said, it never perishes. Locke makes a reader imagine of a place, where one has a big fertile land with a lot of conveniences. It is so big that it may perish as it is more than he/she needs. If there is no chance to sell it for money, this person goes back to the common law of nature that is using of conveniences what is enough for one. According to Locke, money, i. e. imperishable matter, is a key factor in peoples act for gaining private property. In explaining social order, John Rawls also gives special emphasis on property as being a part of economic arrangements. In his work Theory of Justice, Rawls says that everyone is equal in the politico-economic sphere of life. A right for private property is also included to this. Rawls justifies this right on the basis of individual autonomy and integrity, which are also basics of social justice. Rawls’s famous ? two principle of justice’ dictate that everyone must have an access to the basic liberties. Among basic liberties, Rawls include the right to hold personal liberty. He also argues about the economic inequality among those who possess private property. Rawls, in general, is against some kinds inequalities in possessing property. However, he writes that as long as such inequalities are mutually advantageous and do not exclude on party from benefits, then economic inequality is consistent to what he calls â€Å"justice as fairness. † Summing all the views on property and justice, which, as Hume writes, inseparably bound two each other, I would like to say that the fair distribution of wealth, which is justice, is very important in making the socio-economic life of a state healthy. Once there is no fair access to property, the society is apt to collapse, as it happened with socialist society of USSR, where all conveniences were common, even those on which a person put his/her labor. This, in contrast to capitalism, does not lead to competition or in other words ? to putting labor on objects to make them property. In such cases, there is no any justice, because those who work and input their labor and those who do not work get the welfare in the same quantities. The idea of property and justice, in general, is closely attached to the capitalist thought. Capitalism says that everyone has equal access to propertyopportunity? But not outcome?. It is fair to have property more than others if it doesn’t undermine others rights. However, unlike to other philosophers, Rawls in his works debates on capitalism. As an counter argument, he gives the idea of liberal democracy that seeks equality in the distribution of property-owning rights. The equal property distribution (by equal I mean what a person deserves), which is basis of democracy, is essential in building healthy society where all virtues, especially justice, will flourish. Property is what world progress. Hence, I think, the access to property and rights to equal distribution of property are essential in every society. References: 1. Reading materials of the course â€Å"Approaches and Issues in Political Theory† 2. http://www. bu. edu/wcp/Papers/Poli/PoliJung. htm 3. http://www. independent. org/pdf/tir/tir_08_3_taylor. pdf 4. http://links. jstor. org/sici? sici=0748-0814(1992)9%3A2%3C347%3AJLJATS%3E2. 0. CO%3B2-J 5. http://spectrum. troy. edu/~sltaylor/theory/hume-selection. html.