what is human security_10

3 word format

Language : english

political science

presentation

date published

14/07/2008

review : not yet assessed

level : General public

requested 0 times

Summary

James Earl “Jimmy” Carter was the thirty-ninth President of the United States from 1977 to 1981. Before becoming president, he was the Governor of Georgia, and served two terms at the senate. He was regarded as an outcast to traditional party politics. The start of his presidency was marked by caution, conservatism, frustrations, and disappointments. Economic stagnation together with inflation, energy crisis, war in Afghanistan, and Iran hostage crisis were the events that besieged his presidency.Jimmy Carter desired to have an administration capable of providing the needs of his people. He promised to reform the tax system, reduce the number of useless agencies in the federal bureaucracy, but created two cabinet-level departments: the Department of Energy and the Department of Education, initiated a national energy policy to remove price controls from domestic petroleum production, introduced a staggered increase in the payroll tax by strengthening the Social Security system, and openly recognized the basic human rights considerations as an integral component of American foreign policy.

$2.95

3 word format

Language : english

psychology

school essay

date published

02/10/2007

review : not yet assessed

level : Advanced

requested 0 times

Summary

The enigma that is the essence of consciousness in modern society can be readily explained and analyzed by anyone with the ability to do so and does not necessitate the so-called authoritative citations that we so emphatically consider reliable sources. It doesn’t really take a Ph.D. to write an insightful paper about it and the perceived implications that such topic poses on our sense of reality. We all possess a very individualized consciousness limited to our own individual perspective- a consciousness that at its very core relies not on external merit, but more so on the fundamental disposition of the person in question.

The enigma that is the essence of consciousness in modern society can be readily explained and analyzed by anyone with the ability to do so and does not necessitate the so-called authoritative citations that we so emphatically consider reliable sources.
Surely we can all agree that we live in a world of turmoil and suffering is as certain as death
Considering how sensitive ancient civilization were to higher systems of understanding, it doesn't seem far-fetched to assume that we, as a modern civilization, have deviated from the more effective track under the pretense of our booming technology
In fact, it's a reality that such a make-up is wholly psychological and an illusion, where as the essence conveyed in most genuine mystical processes benefit our health, our minds, and most importantly our spiritual vision, the goal of such processes being enlightenment
Enlightenment threatens the vices of modern man, the likes of which opposes a large percentage of what has become part of our mainstream subculture through expensive justifications by the collective

$5.95

6 word format

Language : english

international law

presentation

date published

18/04/2006

review : not yet assessed

level : General public

requested 6 times

Summary

Humanitarian intervention deals with two academic fields: political philosophy and international law. The question of intervention depends on the morality and on the legality of the intervention. Is humanitarian intervention a moral duty for states? Is humanitarian intervention a right for states? Those two questions will be the core of our argument in this essay.

Traditional Approaches about humanitarian interventions
1. Theoretical objections to humanitarian interventions
2. Theoretical approaches in favour of humanitarian intervention: Solidarist international society theory
3. The ambiguous case of the United Nations
A renewal of approaches since the end of the Cold War: practice and theory
1. 'NATO's humanitarian intervention in Kosovo: making or breaking international law?'
2. The effects of globalization and the arising of non- forcible intervention

$2.95

3 word format

Language : english

international relations

school essay

date published

25/04/2007

review : not yet assessed

level : Advanced

requested 36 times

Summary

The United Nations is not the first international organisation to be established to help settle conflict peacefully and to prevent future conflicts from arising. In 1899, the Hague Convention for the Settlement of International Disputes was established. “The conference was convened at the initiative of Czar Nicolas II of Russia "with the object of seeking the most objective means of ensuring to all peoples the benefits of a real and lasting peace, and above all, of limiting the progressive development of existing armaments."”1. “The Hague Convention set up the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which was the first global mechanism for the settlement of inter-state disputes”1. There was also the League of Nations established in 1919 by Woodrow Wilson. However, these organisations proved to be ineffective due to a lack of credibility and legitimacy. Therefore, I shall look at the United Nations’ effectiveness as a system by looking at what is has done so far, and by examining just how legitimate and credible it really is.

The United Nations is not the first international organisation to be established to help settle conflict peacefully
The United Nations was established in the aftermath of World War II to help stabilise international relations
Another way of looking at the effectiveness of the United Nations
The formation of the Security Council is also a point of contention
The United Nations is a label that people associate with a sense of reassurance
Another reason why the United Nations seems to be losing legitimacy is because of its failure to do anything
Lastly, the United Nations claims to be fair and looks legitimate with the input and involvement of NGOs
Conclusion

$5.95

6 word format

Language : english

humanities/philosophy

presentation

date published

11/04/2007

review : not yet assessed

level : Advanced

requested 1 times

Summary

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are probably the most famous political thinkers of the 17th century. The generally accepted view asserts that these authors stood poles apart, the first one advocating an absolutist regime and the latter recommending a stable civil society where powers are separated. But their methodological demonstration follows the same pattern and Locke shares with Hobbes the same initial assumption: They indeed both suppose that the correct way to tackle questions about the grounds of political obligation is by performing a thought-experiment: the description of the state of nature. They thus imagine a state of nature where individuals live in abstraction from all political institutions and superior control. Hobbes first expressed his conception of the state of nature in his most famous political masterpiece, the Leviathan published in 1651. John Locke further explored it in his Second Treatise on Civil Government written in the wake of England's Glorious Revolution of 1688. Devoid of any ultimate moral values, the Hobbesian “natural condition of mankind” seems to differ from the regulated state of nature guided by human Reason. And even if Locke’s philosophy sometimes seems to be rooted in Hobbes’ principles, we will see that their accounts of the imagined state of nature are sharply different. We’ll thus try to compare Hobbes’s and Locke’s visions of the state of nature, regarding their nature, their essence, and their purpose regarding their conceptions of political power.

Two strongly divergent views of human nature
1. Preliminary remarks on the concept of the state of nature
2. A dissimilar account of the state of nature in its initial form: two different behavioral analyses
3. The essence and the role of the law of nature in the state of nature also differ
4. State of nature/state of war
The opposed evolution of their state of nature leads to two different remedies
1. Two dissimilar degrees of development
2. A different exit from the state of nature: Whereas Hobbes advocates a radical break, Locke underlines the necessary continuity between the state of nature and civil society

$4.95

5 word format

Language : english

international relations

research papers

date published

19/12/2007

review : not yet assessed

level : General public

requested 0 times

Summary

This year, December 10, 2007 is a day of many important deadlines. Not only is it the day the independence of Kosovo is said to be decided, but it is also the date by which the handover of Ratko Mladic to the ICTY is supposed to occur. Both of these could prove to be fateful days in the history of Southeastern Europe, or they could fall through the cracks of history as just another failed deadline.
The ICTY is a United Nations-created body established to prosecute serious crimes committed during the wars in the former Yugoslavia from 1991-1996. It is unable to try organizations or governments, only individuals, and its maximum sentence is life imprisonment. Its main targets are individuals responsible for persecution of Bosnian Muslim and Croat civilians on national, political, and religious grounds; those who have targeted political leaders, intellectuals, and professionals; the unlawful deportation and shelling of civilians; as well as the destruction of homes, businesses, and places of worship. The most important thing “about prosecuting war crimes is not to get the individuals who may have committed those crimes – the lowly soldiers, thugs, paramilitary types of police officers – but to get the most senior political and military leadership responsible for having ordered those crimes” (Paul Risley, spokesman).

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person,” states the third article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The General Assembly of the United Nations adopted this declaration in 1948. The members of the Non-Governmental organization, Amnesty International, campaign worldwide for the rights named in the declaration and work to protect them. The members of this organization carry out their work by researching issues of human rights violations and publicizing their findings through news media, detailed reports, and advertisements. Amnesty International began in 1961 London as a volunteer movement and is still made up of volunteer activists regardless of their background or religious and political views. These members work to protect the rights of people while remaining neutral on the views of the victims it sets out to protect. Although various world media accuses Amnesty International of bias in its selective coverage, political persuasion, and ideological beliefs, this organization protects human rights by remaining independent from any government, party, or religion

“The conditions of life might include error,” Nietzsche says, yet without these conditions “no one could endure living” (Williams 117). Though we have forms, rules, and facts, he argues, we’ve merely invented them to cope with the mysteries of our environment. These structures or “articles of faith” that we assume and take for granted give us ‘life,’ as we know it, yet there are many ways to know life. Through “The Gay Science,” Nietzsche aims to demonstrate to the reader that “life is not an argument,” that the security one finds in one’s own values and view of reality is not binding for all. One’s life is not meant to prove a point, for instance to demonstrate the superiority of the male sex, the sacredness of chastity, or even the divinity of Jesus Christ. Values and judgments such as these may prove to be useful for the individual on some level, yet because they can only ever be derived from the individual’s own life experience (or inexperience for that matter) and thus cannot be imposed upon everyone as independent reality. “How then,” the reader may ask, “could Nietzsche ever prove anything affirmative about life?” for indeed his theory may at first appear to be nihilistic, relativist, or even life-negating. It may also seem self-contradictory for him to posit any of his judgments since they would only be true for him. However, this is a misguided interpretation of “The Gay Science,” and in its place, through the examination of Nietzsche’s analyses of consciousness, morality, and knowledge, it will be revealed how he has affirmed these and other elements of life, and finally, how all of life functions within his “the will to power” theory.

History is littered by the decaying carcasses of punishment, institutions that will forever be remembered for their severity, even amidst the global hunger for something worse. The tortured ghosts of this nation’s blackest memories still walk the halls of Alcatraz. The billowing sails of the Sydney Opera House rise above England’s greatest prison. But the modern era has given birth to a new generation of punishment, a new means to the utter control of the individual by the state: the death penalty. However, such a drastic measure will never be absorbed into American society without debate. As Anthony Amsterdam states, “capital punishment is a fancy phrase for legally killing people,” and a harsh step above life imprisonment. This debate, a debate between life and death, between abolitionists and retentionists, has uncovered facts and arguments long since lost in the shadows of the federal legal system. While the points made on both sides of the issue are crucial, the validity of the reasoning behind retaining the death penalty is unclear. Capital punishment is unnecessary, and like Alcatraz and Australia, it should fade to a distant reminder of humanity’s attempts to establish the perfect institution of punishment.

Although life imprisonment is a strict implication of incapacitation, proponents of capital punishment find it to be inaccurate, a ticking time bomb that threatens the lives of innocents.
Yet abolitionists question whether the death penalty is not incapacitation overload.
There is a blatant fallacy in this 'commonsense argument,' directly in the center of its definition of common sense.
Perhaps the strongest argument in favor of capital punishment is the notion of retribution.
Vengeance is a direct result of discrimination, natural prejudices that are introduced into the courts through juries, lawyers, and the murderers themselves.
Proponents and opponents alike must admit that the arguments in favor of capital punishment are deeply flawed, and in many instances, they do.
But is there not a better way?

$7.95

8 word format

Language : english

international relations

worksheets

date published

24/03/2006

review : not yet assessed

level : Expert

requested 12 times