Impact of Religion on Contemporary Politics Essay

Amongst countless issues of the decade, an appealing dispute, that is persistent, is the significant impact of religion on contemporary politics and its perpetual distinction between the positive and negative influences that is associated with the effect. Religion has consistently been a resilient drive of change, development and settlement. Religion has been the core of several systems of human affairs that co-exist today including economics, welfare, law, philosophy, art and most importantly, politics.[1] However, according to historian Farhang Mehr, â€Å"†¦ a realistic appraisal of the current impact of religion on the official policy and governmental structure of each country can only be made in its historical context: the record of the colonial rule in that country, indigenous conditions, cultural background, and people’s real and perceived grievances.†[2] Relevant examples consisting of the attitude of religion in the political affairs of Israel[3], the infl uence of the Roman Catholic Church in shaping the entirety of politics in Quebec[4] and the emergence of Islam as a political force in many countries like Iran[5], reveal that these events and many others throughout history are substantial catalysts in determining the intensity of the religious impact on modern-day politics.[6] The impact of religion on politics cannot be seen with all its fierceness and intensity anywhere else in the world but in the Middle East as it highlights the Arab-Jewish wars in the region that have been going on and off for almost the past 60 years.[7] Religion is of utmost importance in the Holy Land (Israel) and hence, religious disputes are a commonality to the Israeli crowd which is a combination of religious (observant) and non-religious (secular) Jews.[8] The arrangement creates an environment where either party has harsh demands and even though, neither group ends up winning; it always leads to frustration on either side.[9] The role of state-supported religion is usually studied as the issue that is responsible for the problem in the relationship between religion and politics.[10] Despite the fact that the major monotheistic religions namely Judaism, Christianity and Islam take pride in originating in the Holy Land of Israel, the population of Israel comprises of 80% Jews; of which approximately one-fifth consider themselves to be â€Å"religious† or in other words, wholly or partially observant of Jewish law.[11] The vast remainder of the Jews still pursue the path of their ancestors by practicing the traditions and sacraments of Judaism but persevere to maintain a ‘Jewish state’ by standing on secular ground.[12] All be it, whilst the virtually divided Jews were found surviving the disputes between the two groups, the aspiration of a Jewish state led to the encouragement that public policies of the nation should replicate its Jewish nature and be a stronghold for Jews all around the world.[13] From religious texts and proven findings, it is well recognized that the land that is called ‘Israel’, currently, is considered the ‘Promised Land’ – the land that they have always been promised by God. Due to various historical incidents that included invasions, battles and conquests, the Jews were spread across different parts of the Middle East and some parts of Europe. The followers of the Zionist movement (support of establishment of independent, separ ate Jewish State in Palestine)[14] pressed for a Jewish State and after plenty of bruises and broken bones, Israel was recognized and formed in 1948.[15] The very purpose of the formation of a Jewish state alone shows that it has more to do with the religion than with simply a group of people wanting a country and therefore, it is clearly evident that religion has played a major role in the shaping of the politics of Israel. The only essential conclusion is that decisions in modern-day politics in Israel usually comes down to two religious groups than two political groups due to diverse interpretations of the religious teachings and traditions, and the excessive popularity of secularism in most parts of the world. The fundamental religious values ‘affect the complex of power and search for national goals that shape the contemporary Israeli political horizon.'[16] Similarly, the dominant presence of the role of the ‘Church’ in aligning communities to live in peace and harmony and to be subject to law and order through the aspect of politics is extremely evident as is seen in the case of the Roman Catholic church in Quebec, Canada. The province of Quebec is fashioned upon religious intentions and till date, these ideals uphold grand authority in organizational decision making of the government’s law and regulations. Two major factors indicate the impact of the Church in the making of Quebec, of which includes primarily, the assistance offered by the government (comprised of passionate Roman Catholic, French officials) in the settlement of French Roman Catholic immigrants that arrived in Canada post-1639.[17] During this period, a member of the royal council of Louis XIII of France, Cardinal Richlieu,[18] vigorously promoted the emigration of Roman Catholics to France’s colony, ‘New France’ (Quebec) becaus e he believed that Quebec, like France, was destined to be a purely homogeneous group of people – the idea of ‘one religion, one language, and loyalty to one monarch.'[19] Quebec is spectacularly distinctive in the ‘North American continent’ as it stands as the only ‘political unit’ that comprises of, simultaneously, a predominant French and Roman Catholic combination of people.[20] Unlike other French Catholic countries like France or Italy, the Catholic approach of Quebeckers is more intense in that that a French Canadian’s entire thought process, his/her value system, lifestyle and government, is massively influenced by the ‘doctrines and social philosophy of Roman Catholicism.'[21] This religious standpoint in administration is a result of the occurrences in history that Quebec underwent during the times of the French dominion in North America. The early settlers in New France (Quebec) were dependant for leadership upon two distinct authorities – the Governor and the Bishop of Quebec. When the British subdued the French, the French settlers in Quebec paid minimal regard to the legitimate English civil authority as a colonial administration but instead, subjected themselves to the effective guidance and leadership of the Catholic church which was the only, other viable option available to them.[22] The circumstance not only led to the Church’s impact on politics but highlights the Church’s responsibility in replicating its values and philosophy in not alone moral and religious affairs, but also, ‘economic, social, educational, and largely political matters.'[23] Secondly, the endorsement of measures by the authority composed of clergy of the Church of Quebec in regards to encouraging the natural increase in populace, particularly referred to as ‘revenge of the cradle’, highlights the influence of the Church in long-standing Quebec while working towards building a state that is able to maintain its identity and not be pacified by other dominant parties.[24] With the British conquest of Quebec from the French, it was generally perceived that the British administration would eradicate the identity of the French-speaking, Roman Catholic community by imposing rules like mandatory speaking of English at all levels of the state, by excessively populating the colony with English Protestants that are loyal to the British crown or through other fiercer means. In order to protect the identity of the French people of Quebec, the Church’s leaders initiated steps to increase the population. For instance, fathers (considered heads of families) were offered compensation that included a ‘family allowance bonus’ if they had at least ten children while on the other hand, they would be fined if they did not arrange for their sons and daughters to be married off at an early age. To persuade young men to get married, they were forbidden from the right to hunt, fish or trade with the indigenous people in the land or even go into the woods, as the experience was considered a form of pleasure.[25] These occurrences aid in vividly understanding the concept of the ‘revenge of the cradle’ which in its broadest sense refers to the state at which the birthrate of a minority group (French-speaking population, Quebec in Canada) is higher than that of the majority, principal group (English-speaking population, remainder of Canada) from fear of oppression or dominion.[26] Even though the Church’s role had a major effect in the politics of Quebec, the influence of the Church gradually declined long after due to the developing ideas of secularism. However, that does not prove fatal to the case in that the foundation of the politics of Quebec will always have been founded upon the philosophies of the Church. As perfectly laid out by a scholar, â€Å"Although the leading role of the clergy in political affairs was to be challenged by the slow growth of a new lay leadership after 1800, the Church has been able to retain its pre-eminent position in most of the other fiel ds up to the present time.†[27] Likewise, the impact of religion on politics is well portrayed as in the case of the Islamic drive in the development of Iran. Historian, Fahrang Mehr wrote about the connection between religion and politics in the shaping of Iran, â€Å"In the last three decades, Islam has emerged as a political force in many countries, including Iran. It has been a driving power behind revolution, assassinations, seizure of holy places and terrorism.†[28] It is apparent that modern-day surroundings allow for the identification of drivers of change like Islam to allot power towards political and social agendas. Mehr further adds, † Iran requires careful evaluation of the extent to which post-revolutionary Islamic regime has infused religiosity in the Iranian polity. The study should also take into account the credibility of clergies and the religious laymen who rule the country, bearing in mind that change is an organic process.†[29] Rich historical data supports the fact that religion, liberalism, nationalism and monarchism were intertwined to Iranian politics which led to the shaping of the Islamic dominion in Iran.[30] In 651 CE, the Arab invasion of Iran led to the elimination of nationalism due to the influence of Islamic principles but eventually (in around 1502 CE) studies recognized that nationalism and religion particularly Shiaism, again intermingled and safeguarded Iran’s independence from the invasion of the Ottoman Empire (which demanded loyalty of all Muslims).[31] Above all, the Iranian Revolution in 1978-79 proved to be an important manipulator of law and governance in Iran including the state’s internal policy which in turn mainly affected educational systems and the kind of learning imparted to the students based on Islamic fundamentalism.[32] That being told, Islamic fundamentalism is often misjudged. The term is usually represented on a level of faith and while giving it meaning it could turn out to be profusely ‘negative rather than positive.'[33] One analysis reveals that, ‘In relation to Islam, it is important to recognize that the term fundamentalism (usiliyyah) is not self-descriptive but has been applied by others in their attempts to describe and understand contemporary Islamic history and politics.'[34] In correspondence to Iran, fundamentalism has a profound stance unlike in other Islamic nations. The Iranian government has steadily been involved in competition with Saudi Arabia (the epicenter of the Muslim world) to stay up to par in procuring the attention of the Islamic world and gaining significance; thus, offering home and harbor to the world’s Islamic fundamentalists which include leaders, activists, thinkers and others. This is done on the watch of the Iranian Foreign Ministry by hosting events, seminars, conferences and so on for increasing awareness.[35] The Iranian government is motivated by Islamic principles and continues to be a mark of strength in the Muslim sphere and thus, it is evident how effectively a religion can influence the politics of a nation. There exists several other countries that have undergone certain historical incidents generated by the influence of one or even more religions leading to transformations in contemporary political models and structures that are quite similar to the impact of the Zionist Movement (Jewish group) that led to the whole new formation of a nation – Israel, the significant role of the Catholic Church in the polity of Quebec and also, the foundation of the Iranian polity on the concept of Islamic fundamentalism. As much as this research justifies the argument that the historical background of a religion’s doing has a part to play in figuring out the style of modern-day argument, it is also manifest that contemporary politics might not be entirely continuing in the path set by past occurrences. For instance, present-day Israel, has a law that is influenced by the Jewish traditions and customs which would include that ‘all glory belongs to God for He protects His people as in the days of Moses’ but then comes a trend tending towards ‘self consciousness’ where the people of the nation are exhorted by their leaders to prepare for their enemies by training in self defense and learning to protect one’s self.[36] Similarly, in Quebec, the public realize that there is a need for secularization and so, have advocated the limitation on the rights of the Church in the involvement in politics. However, there are some nations like Iran and Saudi Arabia that are unable to divulge from the law given to them and thus, maintain the relationship between religion and politics quite effectively; the results there of be positive or negative. The relevance of the impact of religions on politics is very significant in understanding why countries, nations and their leaders interact with each other the way they do and how the pathway of politics can be predicted based on past occurrences; thus, the issue of this research appeals to historians, politicians, religious leaders and educationalists all alike. Works Cited Blumberg, Arnold. The History of Israel. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. http://www.questia.com/read/98623170. Knowles, Valerie. Strangers at our Gates. Toronto, ON: Dundurn Press, 2007. Liebman, Charles S., and Asher Cohen. â€Å"Synagogue and State: Religion and Politics in Modern Israel.† Harvard International Review 20, no. 2 (1998): 70. http://www.questia.com/read/1G1-30308720. Merriam-Webster, â€Å"Zionism.† Last modified 2012. Accessed November 15, 2012. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/zionism. Milton-Edwards, Beverly. Islamic Fundamentalism since 1945. New York: Routledge, 2004. http://www.questia.com/read/108858736. Quinn, Herbert F. The Union Nationale: A Study in Quebec Nationalism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963. http://www.questia.com/read/2983146. Rubenstein, Richard L., ed. Spirit Matters: The Worldwide Impact of Religion on Contemporary Politics. New York: Paragon House Publishers, 1987. http://www.questia.com/read/94614328. Sharkansky, Ira. Politics and Policymaking: In Search of Simplicity. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2002. http://www.questia.com/read/105768998. Suyama, Nobuaki. â€Å"Quebec: Populate or Perish.† New Zealand International Review 22, no. 3 (1997): 15+. http://www.questia.com/read/1G1-20059576.

Hobbes’ And Locke’s Political Philosophy Essay

On Hobbes’ Political Philosophy Hobbes’ scientistic philosophy presupposed that man is the self-sufficient interpreter of the facts of life and that man can correctly define what the facts of life are. Similar to the Sophists, Hobbes asserted that the knowable facts of life are only particular empirical things. Thus, Hobbes asserted that universal words, such as good and evil, are incomprehensible to man in the objective sense as rooted in reality. Because they are non-empirical and universal, they are mere names. Like the Sophists, Hobbes was also a nominalist. Moreover, Hobbes asserted that metaphysical essences and metaphysical forms do not exist. God’s attributes are merely names that man thinks would honor Him. Thus, like the Sophists, there is no natural hierarchy tied to the essences or purposes of things, but only a realm of natural causes. For Hobbes, man existed individually in a state of nature before civil government was formed. He asserted that human equality is based upon an empirical condition, namely power. Man in the state of nature was obligated only to seek Peace by self-preservation. Hobbes embraced a negative theory of freedom. There was really no law in the state of nature because the obligation to seek peace was not declared from a higher power; no one had a Bible in the state of nature to proclaim to him the will of almighty God. As one who believed in God’s existence, Hobbes’ scientistic epistemology and ontology forced him to embrace theological voluntarism. Ultimately, morals are grounded in the arbitrary will of God rather than His character. Hobbes postulated that the superior will and power are the only legitimate grounds of law.[1] In terms of what is good and evil, just and unjust, the natural man in a state of nature did whatever he reasonably thought was right in his own eyes to preserve his life. If killing another person was deemed necessary to preserve his life, then it was good and just in the sense that it preserved the peace. Thus, because good and evil, just and unjust are mere names whose meanings no one can agree on, the state of nature is a state of war, every man against every man. And because man naturally avoids the risk of harm, he arms himself to preserve the peace.[2] For Hobbes, only civil society has a supreme sovereign to give the citizens the standard they so desperately need to judge between good and evil, virtue and vice. For Hobbes, good and evil are not objective ideas rooted in reality that man can conceive and understand with his own mind. Therein is the fountain from which springs forth the conflict of individual man in a state of nature. Man, as a risk avoider, contracts with his fellow man to leave the state of nature and create an artificial civil society in which a third party will act as the supreme power. Hobbes pointed, the will of the parties in their social contract create their duties to each other and to the third party. The third party, the king, must define for the society what is good and evil, just and unjust so that the natural war of all against all will cease. The king, however, is not a party to the contract. The king has no contractual duty to the citizens, but only a natural duty to God to seek peace. The king seeks peace by deterring evildoers (the king defines who is evil) by wielding the sword and restricting free speech. Thus, any punishment meted out by the government is for the purpose of deterring wrongdoing, not retribution. That is, the â€Å"evildoer† is neither punished because he necessarily deserves it nor punished proportionally to his just desert, but because the punishment is an example to others how seriously the king takes his duty to preserve the peace. Thus, logically, the king could â€Å"rightly† punish an innocent citizen. The only inalienable right the citizens have is the natural right to preserve their life. Thus, they contracted to obey the king; they did not contract not to resist the king when being punished. In the state of nature, no man is obligated to heed another person’s opinion or power. Every person has a right to all things, to define what is good and what is evil, even to kill a person if one does not trust him. For Hobbes, the primary means of achieving peace is by creating an â€Å"artificial† society through individual covenantal relationships (Ibid, 66). In De Cive, Hobbes defined a contract as â€Å"the act of two, or more, mutually conveying their rights† and a covenant as that which involves promises that bind one to perform in the future (Ibid, 35-36). Hobbes’ political theory involves more of a social covenant idea than a social contract. But he does tend to use the two terms interchangeably, as is evidenced below, perhaps signifying both that rights are given up and that one is bound to perform in the future with the creation of civil society out of the state of nature.[3] Most assuredly, Hobbes’ political philosophy is a recipe for a tyrannical and oppressive government Similar to the Sophists, Hobbes’ scientistic philosophy supports the argument that any philosophy that has scientific presuppositions and begins with physical particulars produces a negative view of freedom, a simple view of human equality based upon power, authority that is equated with mere power and sanction, a deterrence theory of punishment, a natural law that can only be known in selfish generalities, natural rights that are grounded in man’s self-interests, nominalism, and theological voluntarism. In addition, because the social contract or covenant is made with each other and not with the sovereign, the sovereign has no obligation to the people that arises from the social contract. The only obligation the absolute sovereign king has is to God. In Leviathan, Hobbes discusses why a king with such absolute power â€Å"will not take all, spoil all, kill all†. Hobbes states: â€Å"[T]hough by right, that is, without injury to them, he may do it, yet can he not do it justly, that is, without breach of the natural laws, and injury against God. And therefore there is some security for subjects in the oaths which princes take†.[4] Hobbes seems to say that the king would not be seeking peace, the one obligation of the natural law, if he sought to â€Å"take all, spoil all, and kill all†. But if the king does abuse his power, the citizens have an inalienable right to resist death. For Hobbes, the citizens contracted or covenanted away their natural right to all things, but one: the preservation of life. According to Hobbes, that is the one inalienable right that men have. In essence, men contract or covenant with each other that the king may kill them if they do not perform their contractual duty, not that they will not resist when then king attempts to kill them. Although the king can â€Å"sin †¦ against God,† in no situation â€Å"is the right taken away from him, of slaying those who shall refuse to obey him†.[5] Moreover, the king has the right â€Å"to judge what opinions and doctrines are enemies unto peace, and also that he forbid them to be taught†.[6] Hence, it is the sole purpose of having a civic government. On Locke’s Political Philosophy The state of nature refers to the natural pre-political state of man. Except for the fact that Locke believed man naturally is a social person in a family, he agreed with Hobbes that man is not naturally a social being. Similar to Hobbes, civil society is not natural, but artificial. In a state of nature, man was free within the bounds of the natural law and was equal in power in relation to everyone else to act as judge in his own case and controversy with anyone else. The natural law obligates man to preserve himself: to do no harm, and to preserve the community in the absence of competition.[7] Similar to Hobbes, Locke equated human equality with power. Although Locke believed in a positive view of freedom whereby man is free only within law, Locke failed to show that man could know the specifics of the natural law code and thus, he failed to show that man really possessed a positive freedom in the state of nature. Do no harm does not provide much moral guidance. In reality, like Hobbes, for Locke man possessed a negative freedom. Locke stated â€Å"state all men are naturally in†¦ is a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions, and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man. A state also of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another†.[8] Similar to the Sophists and Hobbes, Locke believed man began his existence in a state of nature. For Locke, the state of nature is divided into two historical stages. In the first stage, man had a natural property right over his own body. Everything else was naturally held in common. When a man labored over something that was held in common, he acquired property in it. Moreover, man had a natural right of subsistence, which was regulated by spoilage. In other words, what man possessed as property by mixing his labor with it was limited by what he could consume before spoiling. The second stage of the state of nature was initiated in by the invention and use of money. With the invention of money, man could enlarge his possessions way beyond what he could consume before spoiling. Money does not spoil. Although the use of money produced the unequal division of the earth, overall, Locke argues everyone is better off: For Locke, mankind socially compacted to form civil society for several reasons: first, some in the state of nature were ignorant of the law of nature, second some were biased by the amount of property they had, third, there was no impartial judge to resolve disputes, and fourth, there was no third power to execute the law of nature. Underlying all of these reasons to form civil society is, similar to the Sophists and Hobbes, man’s self-interested passion to preserve himself. Because not one theoretical or practical principle is written on man’s heart, the natural law is not written on man’s heart. Because the natural law can be known only from a lawmaker, those who are ignorant of God’s existence because they fail to apply their reason are ignorant of the natural law. For those who do apply their reason and come to know of God’s existence and the natural law, Locke claimed that they could know the natural law code as they could know the specifics of mathematics. But Locke never came close to showing that the specific moral code is capable of mathematical demonstration. Locke extremely overestimated how much moral knowledge his empiricist epistemology could deliver. Locke’s empiricist epistemology could not demonstrate in detail what was good or evil, just or unjust For Locke, man’s conscience is nothing other than his own opinion of what is right and wrong. Thus, similar to the Sophists and Hobbes, Locke was essentially a skeptic. God’s natural law governs his creatures. Although Locke wrote of God’s right and authority to rule over his creatures, Locke never justifies his assertion. Locke never demonstrated that God was anything except the most powerful being that could compel obedience through rewards and punishments. Locke’s empiricist epistemology does not allow him to draw the distinction between authority and mere power. Thus, like Hobbes, punishment for Locke was merely deterrence. Moreover, because Locke was so consumed with, and analyzed so thoroughly, the empiricist epistemology of natural law, Locke demonstrates clearer than Hobbes that scientism coupled with a belief in God leads to nothing but theological voluntarism, i.e., the law is ultimately grounded in God’s almighty will, not His unchanging character, such that God can will anything to be moral. Thus, whoever embraces an empiricist epistemology and at the same time, acknowledges God as the ultimate lawgiver, will be left with nothing but theological voluntarism. Thus, scientistic modernism destroyed the firm and unchanging foundation of civil law and the only real restraint to civil tyranny, namely, a natural law grounded in God’s eternal and unchanging character. Similar to Hobbes, the source of civil governmental power for Locke is the consent of the people. There are two natural powers that are given to civil society, the legislative and executive. The legislative power in any civil government is superior over the executive because it gives the laws to the executive. Some of man’s natural executive power is retained. This is so because man’s natural right of self-preservation is inalienable, i.e., it cannot be given over to civil government. Thus, men in civil society have a right to resist the civil government if, after a long train of abuses, their opinion on the basis of their feelings grounded in their experience is that the civil government has violated the natural law. The civil governmental authority puts itself into a state of war with the people when it repeatedly violates the natural law. Tyranny occurs when the civil government acts out of its own self-interest and does not protect the property of the people. Locke’s theory of civil resistance is weak, however, because he failed to demonstrate that the specific code of the natural law is knowable.[9] Similar to Hobbes, Locke’s empiricist epistemology made the end of civil government empirical, i.e., the self-preservation of the people. Locke’s theory of civil resistance is based upon the personal opinions of the people. Thus, Locke could support that notion that the civil government should tolerate every religious opinion that does not threaten the people’s physical property.[10] Moreover, Locke placed most religious beliefs in the realm of mere opinions. For Locke, only a few religious propositions were within the realm of demonstrative knowledge. Overall, Locke’s theory of religious toleration is a two-edged sword. In a sense, it encouraged theological relativism. In another sense, it allowed religious liberty, albeit seemingly equating toleration with liberty (negative freedom). Finally, if Hobbes’ political philosophy described how a society of skeptics could live together under one sovereign power, then Locke’s political philosophy described how a society of skeptics could live together by balancing their opinions with the civil government’s. Thus, contrary to Hobbes, Locke believed that a little civil resistance now and then is a good thing. Although Locke’s political philosophy guard’s against tyranny better than the political philosophy of the Sophists and Hobbes, similar to the Sophists and Hobbes, Locke’s scientistic philosophy supports the argument that any philosophy that has scientific presuppositions and begins with physical particulars produces a negative view of freedom, a simple view of human equality based upon power, authority that is equated with mere power and sanction, a deterrence theory of punishment, a natural law that can only be known in selfish generalities, natural rights that are grounded in man’s self-interests, nominalism, and theological voluntarism. BIBILIOGRAPHY Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, ed. Michael Oakeshott. New York: Simon &. Schuster, Inc., 1997. Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government, ed. Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. [1]   Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil (New York: Simon &. Schuster, Inc., 1997), 54-63) [2] Ibid, 72-77. [3] Ibid, 11-21. [4] Ibid, 77. [5] Ibid, 79. [6] Ibid, 76. [7] Locke, John, Two Treatises of Government (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988) 283-290. [8] Ibid, 263. [9] Ibid, 290-292. [10] Ibid.

Current Events-Native American Communites Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Current Events-Native American Communites - Essay Example This essay analyzes this auction as part of the enduring fights against modern forms of colonization. Evidently, Native Americans continue to be bullied in and displaced from their original lands, as some people use the law to violate existing treaties and rulings that give property rights to the former. History repeats itself, as the Lakotas fight for what is theirs because they are under siege from the same forces that ejected them from their lands more than five hundred years ago. In Chapter 2 â€Å"The Invasions of America† of the book First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History, Calloway (2012) described the centuries of land grabbing and extermination that Native Americans endured, since Columbus first stepped on the New World. The European settlers created laws and waged wars that aimed to take away the lands from the natives. Up to now, the same strategy persists. The descendants of these settlers continue the practice of using the law to dispossess the natives of their lands. Black Hills is a sacred site that the United States government and its Supreme Court recognize as the property of the Lakota people. The Reynolds family, however, â€Å"owns† it too, and so they can do as they please with it. At present, the Lakota tribes are accumulati ng funds to buy at least Pe’ Sla, which is quite saddening, because they are raising so much money to buy land that belongs to them. Hence, even in the twenty-first century, the natives continue to battle the settlers, who want to take fundamental signifiers of their culture- their sacred ancestral lands. The century has turned but the fight against colonization continues. This time, no blades, cannons, and guns are used, and instead, property rights laws are used. The victims have the same faces, the faces of the native tribes of America. Black Hills is a sacred site. More than that, it belongs to the Lakota. They do not even use it to make money. They need it to

Teaching and Learning Strategies Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

Teaching and Learning Strategies - Essay Example Minority ethnic pupils are admitted more frequently than the past. In interviews with children from different minority ethnic groups there were some principal findings, the most important features of their self characterisation stemmed from their families. Most parents teach their children about their ethnic culture, home language and religion, making them to contact with the net work of the relatives or friends from the same ethnic background. Another factor that is influencing how they their ethnic identity is how they are perceived and treated outside home. Two thirds of the children had some exposure to community language within their household; regular attendance posed considerable challenges to the children who were at a distance from the centre of religious life, a number of alternative individual and private arrangements were made by the parents. Mixed heritage children formed a significant group among the minority ethnic groups; it was the common belief of many parents that this heritage posed additional problems of their child's development of the clear sense of identity. Sometimes there is a chance that these mixed heritage children are not accepted into the community and the teachers are rarely aware about this fact, moreover the uncertainty in dealing with the minority ethnic groups particularly with reference to the heritage group is acute. The majority of the children who had been at their school for a significant time were well integrated socially and enjoyed the same pattern of friendship with their peer group. Very few were harassed physically in the racist incidents, and the verbal abuse or hurtful calling in the school or during the school journey is

Working with the nurse in charge Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Working with the nurse in charge - Essay Example The attitude of this nurse led me to the realization that just like the patients, the nurses that I will be working with in the future will have different characters and dispositions that I will also need to learn to adjust to if I am to have a successful working relationship with my nurses in order to ensure the proper treatment and overseeing of my patients assigned to them. We only had one patient to take care of so I assisted the nurse with the feeding and performed a head to to assessment of the patient while also doing my part in helping to medicate the patient.   The patient was a 94-year old female who was quite nice to the nurses. Prior to my approaching her, I was warned that she was having trouble distinguishing between persons, places, and the time. However, I did not pick up on any of those traits while I was interviewing her. Rather, I found her to be quite open and entertaining as she spent some time on her phone talking to her 73 year old son who was her primary car e taker. She asked me once to assist her in increasing the volume on her phone while she was using it. She was basically a very nice and cooperative patient who, at the end of my time with her asked me to do only one thing when I asked if there was anything else I could do for her. She replied, â€Å"Yes, just leave me alone.† She asked so nicely that I found myself smiling at her as I accomodated her request.   Basically, the 94 year old patient made what could have been the worst duty day of my life one of the best.  

Mercedes Benz Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Mercedes Benz - Essay Example Innovation of new ideas, which brings forth new products, is a factor behind this success. However, global companies have failed due to lack of customer satisfaction. Mercedes Benz is a company that for years has realized its goals by providing best automobile products to clients although critics argue that the price is unfriendly. 2. Background of the company The Mercedes Benz is a leading German automobile manufacturer with global presence through subsidiaries in various parts of the world. It deals with production of a wide range of vehicles including luxurious cars, buses, coaches, and trucks. The world’s leader in luxury cars has its origin traced back to German citizens in the name of Karl Benz and Gottlieb Daimler. Over the years, the company has brought in diverse hi-tech and safety improvement that other vehicle manufacturers have borrowed (Kristin 112). Today, brand name is among the most popular brands in the world. The company grew over the years to become one of t he leading suppliers of automobiles around the world. 3. Products offered Since the formation of the company, it has preserved a global repute of quality and resilience, winning various quality awards around the world. ... However, as more companies ventured in the production of similarly deluxe, elegant and cheaper cars, its popularity started to exhibit a slowed growth and losing its grip as the leading supplier of quality and durable cars. Major competitors include the Audi, BMW, Toyota, Lexus, Land Rovers, Fox wagon, the Cadillac model, and the prestigious Porsche among others. The company prides in the production of the lavish Mercedes Benz models including cars buses, trucks and buses as well (Koichi 111). At some point, the company produced sport cars, but has since then withdrawn from it. 4. Related industries and competitors The year 1958 saw the company enter into a distribution treaty with Studebaker- Packard, a marketing company of Indiana in the United States of America, which marked the beginning of its numerous subsidiaries around the states as well as other countries around the world. At present, the company has many outlets in several countries for assembling or full manufacture of the luxurious brand automobiles. These subsidiaries are now operational in several countries in South America, Africa, Asia; especially south eastern parts, parts of Europe and North America, giving the company a global representation. The company has close relation with tyre industries including companies like Michelin, Dunlop, Ferari, Bridgestone, and Firestone among others, leather companies, paint and adhesive companies as well as several marketing industry players. 5. Marketing strategy The company’s marketing strategy has traditionally focused on the luxury, precise engineering, and safety of the cars it produces. However, more recently owing to increased competition from other manufacturers of luxury cars, increasing cost of production and changing consumer preferences, the

Physics Speech or Presentation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Physics - Speech or Presentation Example (6 marks) Where h1 and h2 refer to elevation of fluid, P1 and P2 pertain to pressures experienced by the fluid which vary inversely as the speed of the fluid given either by v1 or v2. Ï  stands for the density of the fluid and Bernoulli’s equation is basically a statement of conservation of energy (relating the pressure energy, PE, and KE of a perfect fluid) that applies to conditions along a streamline. (b) An aircraft has a mass of 4.0 Ãâ€" 104 kg and is in steady level flight. The area of each wing is 25 m2 and the speed of the air just below the wing is 280 m s−1. Calculate the speed of the air just above the wing. The density of air is 1.2 kg m−3. (5 ½ marks) A toboggan (A) of mass 35 kg slides down an icy slope which makes an angle of 20 ° with the horizontal (Figure 2). The toboggan starts from rest, travels a distance of 15 m down the slope after which the slope levels out to horizontal and the toboggan immediately collides with a second toboggan (B) of mass 25 kg. The coefficient of sliding friction between a toboggan and the icy surface is 0.24 and air resistance is negligible. c) After the collision both toboggans are moving with velocities that are in the same direction that toboggan A was moving immediately before the collision, and the speed of toboggan A is 1.4 m s−1. Calculate the speed of toboggan B immediately after the collision. (3 marks) A trainee pilot is on a flour-bombing exercise. He is aiming to hit a target on the ground which is 15 m in diameter whilst he is flying at a speed of 45 m s−1 at a height of 98 m. Air resistance is negligible and the pilot maintains a steady speed in a straight line that passes directly over the target. Obviously, the time it takes for the flour bomb to hit the ground would be lessened since the height is in direct proportion to the square of time. Similarly, the distance from the point above the target would be