Globalization Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Globalization - Essay Example While such benefits either maintain or heighten the status of globalization, globalized progress occurs at the cost of the distribution of gains. Where considerable gains are obtained by rich nations or individuals, greater inequalities result, further causing potential conflicts within local settings and abroad. Another probable cost is perceived in the control of national economies which could shift from sovereign governments to other entities, typically leading to extreme nationalism or the rise to fundamentalist political movements (Intriligator). By examining an article about Fiat, written by Jorn Madslien, one may view and better understand a concrete scenario of how costs and benefits work under globalization. According to the article, Fiat’s intention to adapt to flexibility by splitting group to develop a division on non-car assets and merge economies upon integration with Chrysler and other huge manufacturing firms altogether reflect the author’s agreement to the position that places globalization on the necessity of interdependence.

Evaluate the impact of three-strikes laws on jails and prisons Essay

Evaluate the impact of three-strikes laws on jails and prisons - Essay Example The provisions enshrined in the three-strike laws have resulted in a considerable increase in the prison populations in the states that have adhered to these laws (Jacobson 217). Not only the prisoners penalized under the three-strike provisions constitute a major chunk of the prison populations, these laws have also assured that even those accused who are guilty of repeatedly engaging in serious crimes of non-violent nature do tend to serve prolonged prison sentences. For instance, in the year 2004 alone, the prisoners serving sentences affiliated to the three-strike laws constituted almost twenty six percent of California’s prison population (Jacobson 217). The three-strike laws also had an impact on the length of time that the prisoners tended to spend in the prisons and jails. Going by the fact that the three-strike laws tend to enhance the prison terms of the repeat offenders, this has resulted in an increase in the average time that the prisoners happened to stay in the prisons (Jacobson 2118). The actual ramifications of the three-strike laws have also led to an increase in the average age of the prison populations. As the prisoners serving sentences as per the three-strike laws happen to stay longer in prisons, this has expanded the average age of the inmates (Redburn & McNamara 217). Thereby, going by the three-strike laws, one could certainly expect older and aging prison populations in the times to come. The other thing is that the racial minorities, especially the African-Americans and the Hispanics tend to constitute the largest groups of prisoners serving sentences under the three-strike laws (Russell-Brown 16). There is no denying the fact that the three-strike laws had serious financial implications for the prisons and jails. With the prisoners serving longer sentences and the consequent increase in the prison populations, the prisons and jails are becoming financially more

Choose a crisis and discuss how the Chinese government handled it Essay

Choose a crisis and discuss how the Chinese government handled it - Essay Example Food became a problem to feed the growing population. This was followed by intervention of the government through acceptance of importation of world food crops such as maize and potatoes to eradicate the problem. The government decided to come up with certain strategies to counter the high growth rate situation in the country. This was evident through family planning strategy. This policy was established in 1980 and stated that each family should give rise to one child. This was applicable in reducing the large growth rate. In return, there was a balance in the population compared to the previous years. Though some people were against the policy, it has reduced the cost of living of the people of China. The latest statistics shows that this policy has cut down the growth rate which was standing at 1.34 billion by 0.57 percent, which was below the replacement rate (Greenhalgh & Winckler, p, 287). In conclusion, it is evident that the Chinese government has adopted the right policy and strategy of controlling the high population. That is why there is perfect regulation of birth and population in

Social Service Essay Example for Free

Social Service Essay Man is primarily a member of a social community. He should not only be concerned about himself but also for the welfare and development of society as a whole. It is truly said that â€Å"Jana-Seva† is â€Å"Janardhana-Seva†. The feeling of self-satisfaction that comes when one sees the unshed tears of joy in the eyes of one whose hunger has been appeased, whose thirst has been allayed and whose needs are fulfilled is indeed heavenly. The service rendered by an individual or an institution to improve the social conditions of society is called ‘social service’. This service is rendered on humanitarian considerations and without any motive of profit. Only those people to whom the interests of society are more important than their personal interests come forward to render social service. Social service is based on the ideal of brotherhood of man. It is a natural impulse to help men in distress. It is a noble impulse. It cannot be rendered without an element of self-sacrifice. One has to spend time and energy for it. Nowadays man is concerned only about his own welfare. Obligations, noble thoughts, duties towards society have been pushed to the background as the centre-stage is occupied by a rat-race for materialistic trifles. In a country like India, social service occupies an important place. It is specifically stated in Article 38 of our Constitution that â€Å"the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may, a social order in which justice-social, economic and political-shall include all the institutions of the national life†. In five decades of planning, the social welfare services were aimed at the welfare and the development of children, women and the physically and socially handicapped of the society. Social service is not confined to isolated deeds and words of charity towards the disabled, helpless or the poverty stricken. Doctors can serve by attending to the ailing without being influenced by thoughts of pecuniary gains. Engineers and contractors can serve humanity by doing their jobs efficiently and diligently, without being clouded by greed. Businessmen can do social service if they pursue their work honestly as a vocation. Public servants will be of great service to humanity if the evils of corruption and aimless drift are rooted out and replaced with the seeds of the true spirit of service nurtured by good ethics and strong human values. Politicians can serve by substituting integrity and patriotism for acts of self- preservation. So, for doing social service the only thing which is important is the strong will to do something for the betterment of the society. The social services cover for children includes integrated development of children, care and protection to abandoned, neglected, unwanted, destitute children, setting up creches for working and ailing mothers’ children, nutrition programmes etc. A National Children’s Fund was constituted by the Government during the International Year of the Child in 1979. India has also been associated with United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) since 1949. Programmes are being implemented for the early detection and treatment, education, training and rehabilitation of disabled persons, namely, the blind, the deaf, the orthopedically handicapped, the mentally retarded, spastics and the leprosy cured persons. Social welfare measures at the Government level touch only a fringe of the problem. It is not possible for the Government to reach out to every person who needs help. Therefore, voluntary organisations can and should supplement the Government’s efforts in a big way in this noble task. In view of the illiteracy, ignorance, superstitions and social evils prevalent in our country, the need for social service has assumed a certain urgency. Of course, social service cannot be a whole time activity. It is indeed enough if people with missionary zeal devote 2 or 3 hours a day for social service. Students can take to social service during their summer vacations. Similarly, retired persons can be of great help. Housewives are normally free from their day’s work by 12 P. M. They too can volunteer for social service. There are a number of areas in which social service is called for on a mass scale. First of all, groups of educated people can go out to villages and educate the illiterate. In India about 35% of the people are illiterate. Even our modest efforts can contribute to the removal of illiteracy from our country. Our villages lack sanitation. Social workers can meet the villagers and educate them about the need for sanitation and cleanliness. Nearly 72. 2 per cent of India’s population lives in villages. If our villages look neat and clean, our country will acquire a new look. The death rate is much higher in villages because of the lack of medical facilities. Villagers need to be enlightened and encouraged to protect their children from deadly diseases by having them inoculated. Inoculations give unmunity from diseases like typhoid, whooping cough, diphtheria, leprosy, T. B. , polio etc. When Government officials approach villagers, the villagers distrust their claims. Social workers can create a better psychological effect on villagers and explain to them the advantages of inoculations. India’s population is growing at an alarming rate. It has already crossed the 1,027 million mark and India has become the second- most populous country in the world. Social workers can do great service by putting across to villagers the message of family planning. In cities and towns, slums are coming up due to large scale migration of people from villages to cities. These slums lack sanitation. There are no civic amenities at all. Life in slums is miserable. People living in the slums indulge in distillation of illicit liquor, sale of narcotic drugs and other criminal or antisocial activities. There is a dire need to launch cleanliness drives in these slums. Special programmes should also be undertaken in these areas so that people who have gone astray can be brought back to the right track. In our country, Mother Teresa rendered great social service by serving thousands of poor, needy and destitute people. She set an example of what social service can do for the suffering humanity. Voluntary organisations like the Bharat Sewak Samaj, Sadhu Sewak Samaj, Servants of the People Society, Ramakrishna Mission, Arya Samaj and many other social welfare and voluntary organisations are doing a lot of good work for people in different spheres of life. Let each man uphold the ideal of â€Å"Help ever, hurt never† as his motto and contribute his bit to make the world order politically powerful, socially stable, economically efficient and spiritually strong.

Animal Crueltys Effect to Society Essay Example for Free

Animal Crueltys Effect to Society Essay People often think that animals are just unconscious creatures that don’t care about their daily lives. But they are actually just like us, they are living breathing creatures with simple lives and priorities. They prioritize more important things like, food, shelter and caring for their young and not like unimportant things like what they’re going to wear, who’ll look better and the like. But since we are the dominant species, then we are the ones who are supposed to help them when they are in need and care for them if they need medical care. But sometimes people just underestimate them and abuse them for fun, money , scientific experiments, etc. But they don’t see that they’re actually causing harm to them and to the society, they just think that they’re only here for food and entertainment. But that’s where they’re wrong, they’re actually the ones that should be the dominant species since they’re here first and we’re the ones that are supposed to help them know more about the world. So we should also help while they’re alive so we’ll have more use to them and we should spend our lives, sharing the world with them and not trying to wipe them out of the face of the earth. Some people say, â€Å"We help them, they help us. † That is true because if you’re kind enough to them then they’ll help you when you’re in trouble but some people misunderstood that, they think that we should help them by feeding them and they should help us by letting us kill them for profit. But that’s not how it should be, we should treat them as our own, help them as if they’re humans. Because without them, then we wouldn’t exist right now because all life begins from animals from the sea and they evolved to be available to be on land until they evolved to turn into us. Also if some animals disappeared from existence, it may have some chaotic results If the bees, butterflies, bats and other animals that can pollinate disappear then plants will not bear flowers, other plants might get extinct and lower the oxygen from our planet. If frogs, lizards, chameleons and the like disappeared then flies, locusts and possibly mosquitoes would be everywhere causing food contamination, damaged crops, dengue fever and more catastrophic things. But in some cases when animals attack people, they still shouldn’t kill them because it’s just in their instinct to attack if hey feel threatened or if their territory has been crossed. But people could still defend theirselves by tranquilizing them and sending them for check up after because in some instances they are sick and confused which causes them to attack. Sometimes they might not understand us but we should also learn understand them. Animals help humans, humans must also help animals. You can tell a lot about a person by the way they treat animals. If you treat them nicely then people would know that you can do the same to other people. But if you treat them violently then that means you have the ability to harm or kill people. Anyone who has accustomed himself to regard the life of any living creature as worthless is in danger of arriving also at the idea of worthless human lives, wrote humanitarian Dr. Albert Schweitzer. And according to Robert K. Ressler, who developed profiles of serial killers for the FBI, Murderers †¦ very often start out by killing and torturing animals as kids. This proves some murderers start out as an animal abuser which then would make them curious on if killing animals is just as â€Å"fun† as killing people. Animal cruelty is not just caused by the abusers’ curiosity, it’s also a symptom of a mental disturbance. Some researches in psychology and criminology shows that people who commit animal cruelty rarely stop there, many of them later moves on to abusing or killing their fellow humans. Most of the records of the FBI shows a history of animal cruelty to many murderers and other criminals. There was a study in Northeastern University and the SPCA of the Massachusetts(USA) which shows that people who commit animal cruelty are five times more likely commit violent crimes against humans. The majority of the inmates at San Quentin penitinary who are sentenced to be executed for committing murder, â€Å"practiced† their crimes on animals before committing their crimes according to the warden. Some people who are cruel to animals are also cruel to children and their family. People who often neglect the needs of their pets often also neglect their children’s needs. Animal abuse is also an important indicator of child abuse, sometimes when children witness their parents abusing animals they can get influenced by their parents to do so too because of reacting to anger and frustration. Their violence might be directed at the only individuals in the family who are more vulnerable than they are: animal companions. One expert says, Children in violent homes are characterized by †¦ frequently participating in pecking-order battering, in which they might maim or kill an animal. Childhood cruelty to animals is indeed in the history of domestic violence. But in some cases animal cruelty is often discovered before the child abuse because it is more obvious to the neighbours that often hear the cries and howls of the animals because children are often threatened not to scream by their parents or else they’ll get hurt even more. Because of that, animal control agents which are possibly called by the neighbours are allowed to go into the house to investigate and then later possibly see the children with their scars and bruises which leads to being reported to social workers. This means that both the most vulnerable creatures in the house (the children and the pets) are abused by the adults. This proves that discrimination is present in the house. Some organizations such as the Baltimore police, The New Jersey Coalition of Battered Women and The Guelph Humane Society(Canada) work with animal control. Working with other agencies is called Cross Reporting which helps solve multiple cases. A study shows that 40% of battered women delayed seeking refuge from their abuser if their animal companion is included. This could possibly mean that the animals are also being abused along with the women since they find comfort from each other. These studies have led to a collaboration among social services and government agencies to develop a program for foster care of those animals. There are currently 100 programs in the US. Violence begins early specially for boys, some adults consider their children’s abusive behaviour to animal to the saying that â€Å"Boys will be boys. † Children who abuse animals should be treated with special care or else it might lead to a horrible way of life. Animal cruelty also proves the fact that most people don’t think before they do stuff because they don’t think of the consequences of their actions. Everyone should treat animals, children and women fairly because we are all here to help each other on going through our daily lives. People should stop discrimination and learn how to live peacefully together.

The Myth Of The Clash Of Civilizations

The Myth Of The Clash Of Civilizations It is a lecture by Edward saids, held in the University of Massachusetts, it is about clash of civilization and how people think about it. He is mainly responding back to what Samuel Huntingtons and Bernard Lewis said about the clash of civilization. Edward had his MA in 1960 and a doctorate from Harvard University in 1964. The most important work of him was the Orientalism, which was a part of postcolonial studies. In this video, Said argues that Lewis and Huntingtons had the wrong idea and thoughts about the clash of civilization. In this lecture, Edward is responding back to what Huntington and Lewis said about clash of civilization and he critic their ideas. Huntington believes that in the future, there will be clash between countries; this clash will be mainly a clash of religions. Huntington said that the West should be strong and keep others weak. It is clear here that he wants the West to attack other countries and occupy them by using force against them, which consider colonization. In his argument, he focused on the Islamic religion and he says that it is the main reason of the clash. He said that Islam is anti-Western, and Muslims are using violence against non-Muslim and the government and other Muslim organizations are encouraging violence against them. Moreover, Huntingtons ideas and thoughts were mainly based on what Lewis Bernard said in his book Islam and the West. He compares religion not to a religion but to geographical political countries suggesting that Muslims and Arabs are backward uncivilized people and they are savage without any manner; according to the Western culture. According to what he said, the West will find an excuse to attack and invade other countries, just what the UK did to India and they called it, we want to bring advancement and teach them how to be modernized just like the West, but instant they take over their country and stayed there for two centuries. Taking whatever they want from there and do whatever they want. Edward criticism is more on the fact that Huntington book is for the policy makers in the US, thus is a main danger when the policy maker takes what Huntington said seriously; these people will misunderstand the views of the Muslim world. Lewis and his book Islam and the West shows that the all the problem around the world is because of the Muslims and to solve this problem they have to deal with them. Lewis mentioned that there are billions of Muslims in the West and they want to take over the country and he called it rage on the West (Lewis, 1993). What he meant is that before they take over our country lets invade them first. As we say in Arabic, lunch on him before he dine on you. This excuse is really baseless. He just wants to start a religious war. He also saied that Islam is not modernize and never speared between church and state. Bernard must know one thing that in Islam the State rules are made by the religion rules, which can not be separated from each other. One example of that is when the US had the economic crisis, all the banks got affected and most of them did not have any money, but because Muslim banks used the Islamic rules in the banks they have not been affected like the Western banks. And about modernize, Islam is modernize but they can not see it, because to the West it is not matching the Western standers. As the West see it, you have to be like them to be modernize which is wrong. In his book Islam and the West, He wrote: It should be clear that we are facing a mood and a movement in Islam for transcending, the level of issues and polices and the government that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilization. The perhaps irrational, but surely historic receptions, of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the world-wide expression of both, it is crucially important that we, on our side, should not be provoked into equally historic, but also equally irrational reaction against our arrival. (p.78). It is clear from Lewis statement that he is saying that clash is religion and it is between Islam and Christianity. And Islam is spreading all over the world and they the West must do something to stop it. He thinks the Western religion is more superior than the others and it should not be equalized with other religions. What he is trying to say that in the past Islam used violence to spread all over the world and now after more than 1200 years they are trying to do the same thing with the West. Lewis also said in his book that Islam can not understand other civilization, which is wrong. Muslim people travelled around the world before Marco Polo did. They went to Spain and China. They lived over there and took from their knowledge and become a part of them. Islam can understand any civilization but their always be a limit what to take and what not to take from other civilizations. Saieds belief that there is no part of Islam, which is fundamentally against the West. Over the last decade, we have seen numerous cowardly attacks on Western countries, for example, the Swedish-Iraqi attack in Stockholm and the 9/11 attacks. The US governments do not have any clear evidence that the attacks were done my Muslims. Do not believe the idea that Muslim extremists are driven by a justifiable rage, they are driven by the political issues that they are having from the West. It is never related to the religion. Islam and Western cultures are inherently different, and this is why we have conflict. Moreover, that does not mean Edward is anti-Western. He was very critical about some of the ways Western hegemonic thought has used to describe Arab societies and to design political relations with this part of the world. He is not bias because he was educated by British, on British-Egyptian Christian schools. Furthermore, Said mentioned that, some civilization that has power and technology advancement gave to them self the right to colonize other in the name of Nobel idea, which is to civilize them but in fact, they want something else. Competing imperial power invent their own theory of cultural destiny in order to justify their action aboard. I just want to know who gave them the right to judge on people and the way they live. You can not change something that is related to culture. Examples of these countries, USA, Germany, and UK. Which the real purpose is to have more power, conquest, and unrestraint self pride. The West believes that each raise has a special destiny or job to do. For Example, the Chinese raise is to serve, the black raise must be the labor, because they are strong and they can work hard. Here we can see that the West had the wrong idea about people, they thing that they are the superior raise because they are white and other people are below them so they must serve them. Edward said that for a country to have it truly independent. They must speak their own Language, Which he meant nationalism. You have to be proud of your language and used it to have truly independence. For instance, in India conquers party, only by supporting Indian language the political independence can accrue. Only by supporting their word against the West, they will be able to stand on their feet. Edward said that the Culture and civilization is spread then each other. The core of Islam is to be separated from everything else, and the core of the West is to be separated from all the other. Also that, it is not a clash of civilization, but clash of definition. Defining the culture is hard; each culture defines its enemy. People are fighting over us vs. them, ideas of good and evil, belonging or not belonging. Islam like the West is not a single or uniform thing(Edward,1998). Islam is different in Indonesia, different in Egypt. For example, in Egypt, there is a conflict in the Isl amic movements. In the lecture, Saied has quoted from Aime Cesasre, which he wrote: But the work of man is only just beginning, and it remains to conquer all the violence entrenched in the recesses of our passion and no race possesses the monopoly of beauty, of intelligence, of force. And there is a place for all at rendezvous of victory. (p.48). Cesasre meant that there are no boundaries or block between cultures. Anyone can take whatever he wants form other culture. And there is no standers for civilization or beauty or intelligence. Every people or culture has their own stander, which differs from one culture to another and all of them are right. At the end of the lecture Edward discussed the Palestinian Israelian conflict and how it is a good example of colonization. The Israelian uses the excuse that plastain is the promise land for them, so they keep killing people and force them to leave their houses. It seems this clash between them is related to religion but in fact, they just want a place to live and a country. Edward said that you can not victimize others because you were victim yourself, there has to be limit. It is not a reason to invade other people and take over their country. Additionally, Edward said it was a clash of ignorance. That Huntington had a monolithic view of Islam and he over generalized the situation and did not understand the complexity of the conflicts and the people involved in them. He is touching on the growing influence of those who advocate tensions and clashes, and subsequently benefit from this sort of contaminated atmosphere to prepare the people, particularly of the USA, to engage in war, such as the case now. The media à ¯Ã‚ »Ã‚ ¿has become nothing more than a blowing horn for such a paradigm of tension and hate. The West mainly sees Islam through distorted,à ¯Ã‚ »Ã‚ ¿ Orientalist, lenses. Also, correlation alone is not sufficient to prove that what you said must mean there is a cultural clash. There could be a clash in some areas, but this is created by powerful people to make Islam seem threatening so regions, like Iran, can be dominated for oil. More people should be aware, that it is never about religion. He covers the topic s of how Muslim/Arab people have more to do than to think about the West with hatred, how Huntington is not a student of Arab/Muslim cultures but wants to prolong and depend the conflict. Saidà ¯Ã‚ »Ã‚ ¿ observes how the French used the notion of a civilizing mission to justify brute force against the nations whose land and resources they wanted. This imperialist mission gives rise to wars of national liberation among the colonized. What Huntington and Lewis predicted that in the future there would be a clash between religions and that what happened, but it is not true. People think that nowadays there is a clash between religions. When US invaded Iraq, people thought that it is a Holy War and because they think Muslims are behind the 9/11 attacks. What happened is that US invaded Iraq for a political issues, which was that Saddam had a mass distraction weapons but they did not find anything over there. It was mainly about oil and recourses. US media are showing to people that US are in a religious war in Iraq and they are trying to bring freedom and democracy to Iraqi people. I cannot understand how the 9/11 attacks is related to Iraq. They just wanted an excuse to invade Iraq in the name of freedom. West media showed the stereo type of Muslim and how they are angry all the time, they just misrepresent the Islam. What Edward said is completely true there is no clash between religions, but the US government want s the people to think that what is happening. As I see it, the history is repeating itself. When the British went to Africa, they said we are here for a Nobel cause, but in reality they are here to take over the country. The same scenario is happening in Iraq, but in this case, their excuse is religion, which is completely wrong. To solve this dilemma, the West should solve their political issues with the East and not to connected with the religion. Another Example is the current crises that US facing with North Korea. North Korea has a clash with the West and they are not Muslims. This support my point that the clash is not about religion, it is about politics. I found another articles which discusses the clash of civilizations, In Rami G. Khouri article rescuing Europes failed middle east policy he is saying that the Europes policy is failing in Middle East. So they dont add anything to solve this problem and their policy dont have the power to change anything and solve this issue. Morover, Khouri thinks that they cant change anything because the Europes are following what US and Israel policy. Without saying their own opinion. So they become with Israel in this conflict between East representing by Palestine and West which is representing by Israel in this conflict. His advice for Europe is to stop following US and Israel policy. Because it will lead to a clash between the East and Europe, like the West and the East. Furthermore, he wrote an article Rewinding the reel to root causes and he said that the root for the conflict between East and West is the Israel- Palestinian conflict. If the root of the conflict between East and West is the Israel- Palestinian conflict, what do you think if you see some countries like America or Europe countries, which support Israel? They will feel same as Samuel Huntington idea that the clash between East and West is about religion. All the people who study the history and read about the crusades will know that the conflict between the Israel and Palestine will take him back in time of the crusades period because the two situations are same in a lot of sides. The Israelian are doing the same thing that Crusades had done, which is invading the country and killing people and turn it to a religious war. But in the other hand, Amartya Sen in her article What clash of civilization? Why religious identity isnt destiny? strongly disagree with Samuel Huntington argument, because she think that Huntington make civilization too simple and equalite with religion. Amartya think that human has so many aspects that make him what he is. You should not judge on a book based on its cover. What she meant that there is another reasons of clash which is not related to religion. Kofi Annan mentioned in his article Annan says politics, not religion, at heart of Muslim-West divide. He thinks that there is no relation between politics and religion and he believes that the religion is not the root for any conflict in this world. I agree with him the root of conflict is related to the political issues that the country have against each other. It was never about religion. I agree with him that the Israel- Palestine conflict is the root of the conflict between East and West and this conflict is the main cause of the clash between the two sides. Moreover, Mohsin Hamid and his article why do they hate us he says that Muslims hates West because of the America policy. In this point I might agree with Mohsin Hamid, because Muslims sees that America foreign policy is always unfair with Muslims in different issues and different places all over the world. Muslims dont have any problem with America, if their policies change not with what Muslims want, but with the justice even if it was against the interests of Muslims. Therefore, this is another point that supports my argument that the clash is about politics not religion. Another Article wrote by John L. Esposito, which is Its the policy stupid. Its an interesting article, because John L. Esposito think that the root of the problem started from America policy. Because they did a lot of mistakes in their foreign policy toward the East and when they try to solve their first mistakes, they made new mistakes, which made the situation even worse than before. Another political issue, which is not related to religion. In Fawaz Gerges article which is titled America and political Islam. He believes that there is no clash between civilization and the clash is between benefits. Any Western countries who are against the west will be Terror. I agree with him that it is really a clash of benefits and interests. We see that some countries policy change from day to day. They change their policy because their interest change and they change their allies depending on their interests. For example, Saddam was a friend of the US government, but when the interests changed they just removed him. An article wrote by Edward said which is Imperial Perspectives. He is saying that after World War 2 the US goal is to control the oil supply in the Middle East and make sure that Israel is the dominate power in the Middle East. He said that US claim to educate people and liberate them but in reality they just want to control and rule. The US want to see Arabs and Muslim in the way they like, not with the way Arabs and Muslims are which an imperialist perspective is. He also said that US think Arabs and Muslims are anit-democratic and anti-Semitic. These are enough reasons for US to invade another country in the name of democracy and freedom. All in all, The west uses the clash of civilizations myth as a means of western intervention and expansion, and that western culture is dominant, which presents a Eurocentric dichotomy. What Huntington and Lewis predicted came true but in reality, the US government uses the religion as an excuse to invade other countries. What Edward said it is true that the clash is not about religion. US media want people to think that it is about religion, which will make their job easier. In the past when a powerful country invade another country their excuse was to modernize and educate them, now they are using the democracy and freedom excuse to invade other countries. Different excuses but they have the same goal, which is to colonize.

Teen Romanance is Not Smart Essay -- Argumentative Persuasive Essays Y

Teen Romanance is Not Smart      Ã‚  Ã‚   Do teenagers today have their priorities in the correct order when it comes to dating?   More and more often, it does not seem they do.   Some teenagers these days spend too much time focusing on their "romantic" relationships instead of the things that should be more important.   Teenagers who are in serious relationships do not care as much about school, their families, or their jobs.   These teenagers seem to forget everything that should be important to them.     Ã‚  Ã‚   School should be a very important priority for teenagers.   In high school, teachers try to prepare young people for what lies ahead in life.   That includes going off to college and entering the working world.  Ã‚   But many teenagers in serious relationships begin putting off doing their homework and studying for tests.   Their grades begin to drop, and sooner than they know it, they are failing their classes.   Most times when these lovesick teenagers begin failing, they do not care.   In some cases the teenagers even drop out.   In today's world it is nearly impossible to find a decent job without at least a high school diploma.   Without a job, a person can't get very far or have an interesting life.   Is one boy or girl really worth it?   Ã‚  Ã‚   Just graduating from high school this past June, I saw a lot of my friends go down this road.   Many of my friends were honor students through most of their years of school.   Then some of these friends met significant others their junior and senior years, and that was the end of them being honor students.   Whenever I asked my friends about their relationships, they would each give me the same story, that this was the person they wanted to spend the rest of their lives ... ... keep a 4.2 grade point average and graduated fifth in my class.   This was because I kept my priorities in order.   My boyfriend came last in most situations.   He understood and accepted this.   At that point in my life I had more important things to deal with.   I managed to work, go to school, and hold down a serious relationship without getting my priorities mixed up.   So for the people who say it is impossible to do all of these things, I know from personal experience that it is not.   Ã‚  Ã‚   I am not saying that it is wrong to date as a teenager.   Just remember what is important.   The teenage years are to be used as a time to grow and experience new things, but not at the expense of what is important in life.   Just keep a level head and do not get too involved with that significant other right now.   It is important to remember what it important in life.