Genocide
War is not a necessary evil humans must endure. Although, war is not necessary, humans go to war to try to gain power, fortune, and to spread their particular group’s religions and beliefs. By definition civilization is an advanced state of intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions. The chaos of war is reflected in the semantic history of the word war. War can be traced back to the Indo-European root *wers-, “to confuse, mix up.” In the Germanic family of the Indo-European languages, this root gave rise to several words having to do with confusion or mixture of various kinds. War is a state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties. The most widely used excuse to go to war is to progress civilization. To progress, is to advance toward a higher or better stage; as of a society or civilization. Burundi and Rwanda went to war with each other because of the “need” for a class of people to be looked at as the “dominant race/class”.
On April 6, 1994, Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana’s personal plane, a gift from French president Francois Mitterand, was shot down as it returned to Rwanda, killing Habyarimana, Burundian president Cyprien Ntarymira, and members of their entourages. In this tense climate, the assassination of Habyarimana was an act akin to throwing a match on kerosene. The events surrounding the assassination itself remain obscure, with theories abounding as to what party was responsible. The most likely scenario suggests that Hutu militants arranged the President's death, which they required as a pretext for mass murder. These two president’s were on their way back from Tanzania. In August 1993, at Arusha in Tanzania, a new comprehensive accord was concluded between Habyarimana and the RPF. A coalition government was promised, featuring a Hutu Prime Minister, and a 21 member cabinet with five Tutsis. Habyarimana was about to try to implement a power sharing, Arusha Accord in his government with the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). . To do so, however, would mean the effective end of his 20-year, one-party rule over Rwandan politics and society.
Extremists in the military and government bitterly op...
... middle of paper ...
...inued.
Despite overwhelming evidence of genocide and knowledge as to its perpetrators, United States officials decided against taking a leading role in confronting the slaughter in Rwanda. Rather, US officials confined themselves to public statements, diplomatic demarches, initiatives for a ceasefire, and attempts to contact both the interim government perpetrating the killing and the RPF. The US did use its influence, however, at the United Nations, but did so to discourage a robust UN response (Document 4 and Document 13). In late July, however, with the evidence of genocide littering the ground in Rwanda, the US did launch substantial operations—again, in a supporting role—to assist humanitarian relief efforts for those displaced by the genocide.
There are many positive and negative consequences of war. There may even be too many to list. One of the advantages is that a people or society may be able to gain control/power which would allow them to improve their status in society; as in a Revolution. The main disadvantage is the loss in life. The loss of life in wars will be taken on both ends of the war. These lives are lost forever and sometimes these “wars” never end.
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are comparable in their basic political ideologies about man and their rights in the state of nature before they enter a civil society. Their political ideas are very much similar in that regard. The resemblance between Hobbes and Locke’s philosophies are based on a few characteristics of the state of nature and the state of man. Firstly, in the state of nature both Hobbes and Locke agree that all men are created equal, but their definitions of equality in the state of nature slightly differ. According to Locke, “…in the state of nature… no one has power over another…” Locke’s version or idea of equality in the state of nature is based around the equality of authority and control. Each man has the authority to judge and punish themselves, but they do not have “…license to abuse others…” On the other hand, Hobbes’ definition of equality is based around the equality of man physically and mentally because “Nature hath made men so equal in the faculties of the body and mind…” Nevertheless, the natural equality in both Hobbes and Locke’s states of nature contribute to man’s urge and want to join a civil society.
The differences between narrator and character help to create a contrast between them. In “Cathedral” a blind man is able to live his life to the fullest while the narrator with no disabilities sits home and drinks his life away. The blind man still portrays an optimistic
...y will consent to this, and bring in a sovereign that will also operate under the law. Also, that sovereign will have to operate with checks and balances, under a government with divided powers. The difference with Hobbes is that if any powerful invader that takes over the land that you reside with the intent to be the sovereign is not allowed. As mentioned, such an action permits the people to declare war with this presumed authority. That also extends to the situation in which those citizens were unsatisfied with the government that they had initially consented to.
Even though, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were both social contract theorists and natural law theorists, they believed in different theories. Thomas Hobbes believed that humans are not by nature social animals. He felt that we live in a society that we must watch for dangers and live in fear. John Locke, however, believed that humans did in fact belong to a social class and should live in peace naturally. Thomas Hobbes felt that human beings are constantly engaging in violent acts against one another, whereas John Locke felt that violence is not acceptable due to the freedom given to individuals. Their beliefs were a vast difference from each other. Hobbes believed in accepting a ruler with complete control over the population, whereas Locke insisted on a democratic government that does not deny freedom to individuals within society.
...rbitrary power to transfer. Secondly, a government which is not bound by standing laws is really no government at all because it remains in a state of nature with its citizens. Thirdly, the Hobbesian sovereign’s right to take away his subjects’ property makes the establishment of this form of government absurd, because the purpose of government is primarily the protection of property. Absolute arbitrary government comes about when the legislature exceeds its authority. A legislature that abuses its power against it’s subjects’ interests is guilty of rebellion. In essence then, the government which Hobbes proposes to exit the state of war, would, for Locke either directly introduce or set the stage for civil war.
...rly $180 million in taxes, and crime rates have fallen by twenty-one percent. This new legislation that California used was the “realignment” legislation, which was passed in 2011. The realignment legislation “facilitated the earlier release of inmates serving time in county jails and cut back on incarceration for parole violations” (Goldberger). There are many other programs to help criminals be sent on probation after committing non-violent crimes. This program is called the Adult Redeploy program; this is aimed to send nonviolent offenders to specialty courts or probation other than prison. America’s criminal justice system has to go from incarceration to decriminalization and by making these legislations and programs, it will cut the incarceration rates, cut government spending, and give prisoners a chance to reform their ways without locking them away for years.
After the reading of this week, it 's clear that the social position of women in their life has a huge influence and a direct impact on not only their future, but on the one of their families and children. In case, they chose the criminal road, obviously, they won 't only negatively influence the future of their families, but they will put in danger their children 's future, offering them the automatic option to possibly repeat their pathway.
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes each supported different fundamentals of human nature and government amid the seventeenth century. Thomas Hobbes distributed his point of view of the human soul as negative, persuading others to believe that its evilness should be controlled by concealment under an outright ruler. John Locke advanced an idealistic perspective of human instinct in which they lived under a legislature that secured the privileges of the general population.
In her article “How the Internet Has Changed Bullying”, Maria Konnikova explained how bullying has reached technology, and in the workplaces of many adults. The Internet has made it harder to escape from bullying, and easier for bullies to escape from confronting their victims. Furthermore, the author stresses that cyberbullying not only targets high schoolers, but it’s affecting the lives of college students as well (Konnikova 1). Cyberbullying takes place in the Internet world where is easier for a bully to gossip and humiliate multiple of victims in a faster pace. The studies have shown that cyberbullying is making a greater impact in the victims’ and the bullies’ lives more than the traditional bullying and many people are not aware of it; therefore the schools, witnesses, and employers should work together to fight against cyberbullying and provide help to the victims and bullies.
McQuade, III, Samuel, James Colt, and Nancy Meyer. Cyber Bullying: Protecting Kids and Adults from Online Bullies. First Edition. Road West, Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2009. 47-49. Print.
Similarities between the research provided and my earliest memory suggest accuracy within each theory. However, the age at which I experienced this memory alters, though not by much, from all theories. Implying, the research is not yet ideal, but cannot be labeled as false. Creating the possibility that there may never be a set age at which these earliest memories occur. Perhaps, it will always be various amongst different
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two English philosophers who were very similar thinkers. They both studies at Oxford, and they both witnessed the civil Revolution. The time when they lived in England influenced both of their thoughts as the people were split into two groups, those whom though the king should have absolute power, and the other half whom thought people could govern themselves. However Hobbes and Locke both rejected the idea of divine right, such as there was no one person who had the right from God to rule. They both believed in the dangers of state of nature, they thought without a government there is more chance of war between men. However their theories differ, Hobbes theories are based on his hypothetical ideas of the state
Internet usage in children and adolescents has been increasing in a steadily fashion in the past number of years and with the increase in internet usage, a new form of bullying has developed – Cyber bullying. Cyber bullying can be defined as “the electronic posting of mean-spirited messages about a person,” (Merriam-Webster, 2012). This form of bullying can come through various mediums including but not limited to text messages, emails, videos, and social networking sites. There is an overwhelming amount of information that defines cyber bullying, identifies the demographics of bullies and victims of cyber bullying, and identifies the outcomes of cyber bullying on victims. More focus needs to be placed on who the perpetrators of this form of violence are and how this form of violence is linked to traditional bullying. This will allow researchers and practitioners to move forward with research and implementation preventative methods and intervention once the problem has already occurred.
War has been a prominent phenomenon that can be seen throughout the history of mankind, and it has been used as a tool by people in order to fulfil their needs. It is influential in reaching a peaceful resolution, and it acts as a refresher because without it society would be in chaos. War has allowed great empires, like the Napoleon Empire, to flourish and prosper, and has caused great empires, like the Roman Empire, to fall. War is needed in order to maintain a healthy and stable society. It is beneficial to the strength and socialization of a society, the health of its people, the productivity of the economy, and it can be used to force social changes and call for justice.
Every day we are surrounded by stories of war. In fact, we have become so accustomed to it, that we are now entertained by it. Video games, movies, and books filled with heroes who once dominated the battlefields. However it is constantly stated, “no good comes from war.” Even famous songs state “war... what is it good for… absolutely nothing.” But what if war was actually necessary? Throughout history, we see examples of the good things wars have brought. War has freed slaves, modernized medicine, brought down evil empires, and even brought countries together