Four Freedoms

The basic idea of the four freedoms has changed drastically from the times of the 1940s to the current time we are living in now. In the 1940s, the freedoms that people were promised to receive weren’t for all people of different races and they were different from what the four freedoms had to offer the common good of society compared to our time now. In present time, people are more accepted for who they are and what race they are. Also, almost everyone in America has the privilege to enjoy the perks of what the four freedoms promises Americans.As a nation the meaning of the four freedoms has changed overtime and the people’s tolerance of each other no matter what race, skin color, or where they are from has changed the freedoms largely over a period of 60-70 years. The freedom that I think has changed the most out of the four freedoms is the freedom of speech. Back in the 1940’s racial borders would prevent black people from being taken seriously if they were t o speak out on their own opinions and the way they see things. There was still this sense of racism in the 1940’s and African-Americans were still in the struggle to get the same civil rights as the white man.Also, if a black man was ever to speak out against the government he would be punished for even saying anything. An example of this was when Martin. Luther King. Jr. spoke out his opinion and started peaceful protests that would eventually get him in trouble. He ended up being sent to jail for sharing his opinion on black civil rights. Overtime he was killed by a James Earl Ray by assassination. In our present time we’ve learned to accept what everyone has to say and it’s respect to speak out on your opinion and there are no racial barriers.An example of freedom of speech today is Barack Obama. He believed and throughout his campaign for presidency proclaimed that healthcare should be available for every American. Before in the 1940’s a black man wou ldn’t be taken seriously and a black man wouldn’t see the point of speaking out his opinion when it doesn’t matter to anyone else. In comparison from back then to this point of time the freedom of speech has changed and people have learned to be more acceptable or open to whatever anyone else has to say no matter who the person is, what color their skin is or where they are from.Everyone truly does have the right now to say however they feel in America. The freedom that I think has changed the least is the freedom of fear. In the 1940’s the whole country has a sense of togetherness since Roosevelt was trying to unite our nation to fight back against Japan and Germany. World War II inserted a sense of fear into us when they bombed Pearl Harbor and we were all scared that other countries would take over ours. Roosevelt preached that if he country all stuck together we would do just fine and win this war as long as we were all a team.Everyone in America fear ed that we would be attacked and it relates to our time now in a way. When 9’11 happened in 2001 fear struck us. We couldn’t believe that airplanes were coming down and destroying massive buildings. We never expect anything like that to happen to us and we feared, â€Å"What if we were next? † As a nation we fought back against the terrorists and captured Osama Bin Laden the leader of Al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that bombed our country, and we showed the world that America shouldn’t be messed with because we are all one big community of a billion people.The people of America put trust in our government to do the right thing and they did. Overtime things have stayed the same in our nation and the unity to keep the rights we are promised as American citizens has drove us to make our country better. As Americans we know we are in good hands with the safety that the marines, army, air force and navy give us. The freedom that I think is the most important is the freedom from want. The freedom from want is to not want anything you can’t have and not being able to have it ever.In the 1940’s the freedom from want was available to all people besides people who were segregated against. The certain groups were Japanese, African-Americans, and sometimes Jewish people. For example, Japanese people were segregated against because of the attacks on Pearl Harbor and everyone thought all Japanese people were spies. Also, African-Americans were treated wrong just because of their history as slaves and they white man thinking they’re better than them. Another group were the Jews because Jews over the history of time were blamed for anything bad ever happening.Jews were always looked down by society and it’s sad that they couldn’t get the rights they were promised to have as American citizens. In our present time everyone has the opportunity to be whoever they are trying to be. Black people earned the right to be at equal status as white people. An example is Barack Obama and his life goal. Barack Obama knew from an early age what he wanted to do and he did it. He works really hard in school, did everything that could get him to where he is now and never took a bad turn in life.Back then it was a joke to think a black man would ever be President of the United States, but he proved the world wrong. Back then you would never think these people would have these rights, but they do now and everything is for the better since everyone can earn whatever they want to do as long as they set their minds to it. The freedom that in my eyes is the least important is the freedom of religion. The freedom of religion is being able to practice any religion of your own choice.In the 1940’s people were certainly able to practice any religion they want, but some religions were frowned upon and considered against the law. An example is the Ku-Klux-Klan and their practices in the 1940s. They used to murder b lack people, Jews and people who didn’t fit in with their society. Eventually this would become a religion for this group. In the 1940’s not every religion was accepted, but still is the same now. It’s not about the spiritual thoughts of hate against different races that got them in trouble, but the things they actually did physically that made the religion frowned upon and against the law.Now people are accepting any religion that practices spiritually, but when it comes to physical or verbal practices that hurt people then it’s against the law. The government cracks down on most of these hate groups, but the thing is you can’t stop anyone from what they want to do. Times have changed, but the ability to practice any religion you want will stay the same. The four freedoms have stayed the same and changed over a series of time. We consider the freedoms the same today and they all apply strongly to this day.As a nation we have bettered our self-inte rest to fit the nation’s best interest and learned to accept each other for who we are. Every person of every race has all the same rights. There still are those people, who don’t find each other equal, but they can’t publicly speak the way they fell or they will get in trouble. The four freedoms has ensured all Americans the safety, freedom of speech, freedom to practice any religion they want, and the ability to be anyone you want to be if you strive for it. Being American has perks, but the four freedoms help us distinguish us as Americans and make us who we are.

Food and Agriculture of Chile

Front page Acknowledgement Chile: Food and Agriculture Republic of Chile is a country in South America occupying a long, narrow coastal strip between the Andes mountains to the east and the Pacific Ocean to the west Chile is one of South America's most stable and prosperous nations. It has been relatively free of the coups and arbitrary governments that have blighted the continent. The shape of Chile is a distinctive ribbon of land 4,300 kilometres (2,700Â  mi) long and on average 175 kilometres (109Â  mi) wide. Its climate varies, ranging from the world's driest desert – the Atacama – in the north, through a Mediterranean climate in the centre, to a rainy temperate climate in the south. (Wikipedia)[1] The country had Latin America's fastest-growing economy in the 1990s and has weathered recent regional economic instability, as measured by the Gini Index (Mideplan. 2007). But it faces the challenges of having to diversify its copper-dependent economy – it is the largest world producer – and of addressing uneven wealth distribution. BBC News, 6 August 2011)[2] Brief History of Chile’s Agriculture: While the share of land devoted to export crops such as fruit and vegetables is increasing, about half of all farms still raise wheat, the traditional foundation of Chilean agriculture. Of the total land area of 74. 8 million hectares (184 million acres),2. 3 million hectares (5. 7 million acres) is arable land. Until 1940, Chile was substantially self-sufficient i n most basic foodstuffs. Since World War II (1939–45), serious food deficits have developed, adding to the nation's external payments burden. Agricultural production of major crops in 1999 (in tons) was as follows: sugar (raw), 448,000; wheat, 1,197,000; corn, 624,000; oats, 201,000; barley, 81,000; rapeseed (canola) 72,000; and rice, 61,000. Agriculture was one of the sectors most adversely affected by the recession of 1982, but it quickly recovered by the mid-1980s. Poor results in the traditional agricultural sector inhibit a more rapid expansion in agriculture. One of the areas of most rapid growth is in fresh fruit, with the production of grapes rising by 35% between 1981 and 1985. The fruit harvest in 1999 (in tons) included grapes, 1,575,000; apples, 1,165,000; peaches and nectarines, 310,000; pears, 350,000; oranges, 185,000; and lemons and limes, 110,000. Avocado production for 1999 was estimated at 82,000 tons, up from 39,000 tons during 1989–91. Most of the avocado orchards are in central Chile, from Region IV to Region VI (Encyclopedia of nations) [3]. Leading crops in 2001, with production in metric ton s, included fruits, particularly grapes and apples (1. 8 million), vegetables (2. million), root crops such as sugar beets and potatoes (1,218,040. 0), and maize (778,498). Chile is the Southern Hemisphere’s largest exporter of fruits, sending much of its crop to North America, where the fresh produce enjoys a market advantage due to the inverted growing season. The country also has an important wine-making industry (Fair Trade Finder) [4] Agricultural land (% of land area) in Chile: Agricultural land refers to the share of land area that is arable, under permanent crops, and under permanent pastures. Arable land includes land defined by the FAO as land under temporary crops (double-cropped areas are counted once), temporary meadows for mowing or for pasture, land under market or kitchen gardens, and land temporarily fallow. Land abandoned as a result of shifting cultivation is excluded. Land under permanent crops is land cultivated with crops that occupy the land for long periods and need not be replanted after each harvest, such as cocoa, coffee, and rubber. This category includes land under flowering shrubs, fruit trees, nut trees, and vines, but excludes land under trees grown for wood or timber. Permanent pasture is land used for five or more years for forage, including natural and cultivated crops. (Trading Economics)[5] Major Crops in Chile: Agriculture is the main occupation of about 15% of the population; it accounts for about 10% of the national wealth, and produces less than half of the domestic needs. Wheat, potatoes, corn, beans, sugar beets, and fruit are the chief crops; a variety of vegetables, fruits, and grains are grown in the Vale of Chile, the country's primary agricultural area. The vineyards of the valley are the basis of Chile's wine industry. (Trading Economics)[6] Agricultural region and climate: Chiles principal growing region and agricultural heartland is the Central Valley delimited by the Chilean Coast Range in the west, the Andes in the east Aconcagua River by the north and Bio-Bio River by the south. In the northern half of Chile cultivation is highly dependent on irrigation. South of the Central Valley cultivation is gradually replaced by aquaculture, silviculture, sheep and cattle farming. River valleys help pruduction of grapes for Pisco and papayas also include olives and avocados. Zona central, most important agricultural region with Mediterranean known as wine region. In the northan part, Zona Sur, is the region that support Wheat cultivation, cattle farming, silviculture and salmon aquaculture.

Analysis and Interpretation of Don Juan

Byron coined the term â€Å"Byronic Hero†. Don Juan is definitely a Byronic Hero. He has all the Characteristics of a Byronic Hero. This poem constantly takes me back to the 1800s, because at that time women had no rights at all. If they married someone then they were treated like property of their husbands and if they stayed single then their parents dictated every single thing she did with every single person. For most part women were not allowed to stay single unless they were nuns or prostitutes. Even when they were married they were not allowed to hold control of inherited wealth. They did not have the right to own a slave or even vote. Women were economically dependent. If a woman did something wrong and people find out about it, she would be tainted and blemished forever and also banished from society but if a man does the same thing or even worse, he could still be able to hold his head up high in society. Julia married Alfonso only because she had to. Alfonso never showed his jealousy because nobody likes a jealous person. Alfonso cared about what people thought and he was cleaver and careful. He never wanted people to know about his illegal affairs. I personally think Donna Inez is a psychopath and a Sociopath both. I mean why else would she use her son to destroy the relationship of her lover and his wife. Julia is not as complicated as Inez. Julia does not realize what Inez had in her mind. I think she thought Inez actually wanted to be her friend. Being a simple girl Julia probably didn’t know about Alfonso and Inez’s affair. When Juan was a child Julia showed affection for him but that was just normal and innocent. When Juan hit puberty something changed between both of them. They felt attracted to each other. As a grown woman Julia realized why she was feeling this way. But Juan is completely different. His mother never let him mix and mingle with people of his own age. At first he didn’t even realize what was happening to him. This poem follows a third person point of view. In these stanza’s Byron talks about lot of important issues but the tone is always humorous and satiric. Don Juan is a lot like Byron himself. The difference is Byron was highly educated and Juan had no interest in that line. Analysis and Interpretation of Don Juan Byron coined the term â€Å"Byronic Hero†. Don Juan is definitely a Byronic Hero. He has all the Characteristics of a Byronic Hero. This poem constantly takes me back to the 1800s, because at that time women had no rights at all. If they married someone then they were treated like property of their husbands and if they stayed single then their parents dictated every single thing she did with every single person. For most part women were not allowed to stay single unless they were nuns or prostitutes. Even when they were married they were not allowed to hold control of inherited wealth. They did not have the right to own a slave or even vote. Women were economically dependent. If a woman did something wrong and people find out about it, she would be tainted and blemished forever and also banished from society but if a man does the same thing or even worse, he could still be able to hold his head up high in society. Julia married Alfonso only because she had to. Alfonso never showed his jealousy because nobody likes a jealous person. Alfonso cared about what people thought and he was cleaver and careful. He never wanted people to know about his illegal affairs. I personally think Donna Inez is a psychopath and a Sociopath both. I mean why else would she use her son to destroy the relationship of her lover and his wife. Julia is not as complicated as Inez. Julia does not realize what Inez had in her mind. I think she thought Inez actually wanted to be her friend. Being a simple girl Julia probably didn’t know about Alfonso and Inez’s affair. When Juan was a child Julia showed affection for him but that was just normal and innocent. When Juan hit puberty something changed between both of them. They felt attracted to each other. As a grown woman Julia realized why she was feeling this way. But Juan is completely different. His mother never let him mix and mingle with people of his own age. At first he didn’t even realize what was happening to him. This poem follows a third person point of view. In these stanza’s Byron talks about lot of important issues but the tone is always humorous and satiric. Don Juan is a lot like Byron himself. The difference is Byron was highly educated and Juan had no interest in that line.

Avon Products, Inc Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Avon Products, Inc - Case Study Example This approach helped Avon achieve its transition from direct sales of the beauty business. The Company developed additional distribution channels that helped it improve in sales. Through its double commitment in the beauty products the company was able to gain The Company had begun to improve through its commitment in the beauty products business. Maintaining its dividend at $2.00 per share did not result to a drop in Avon’s Stock price. It maintained a fairly steady stock price during this period. Investors held Avon stock since it paid high dividends. The Company planned to reduce its dividends but was worried that it might drive down the stock prices. Retail business was helping the company make more sales thus increased profits. Avon was to reduce its dividends to conserve cash flow in the company (Tiemann 3). It believed that many of its investors would sell their shares quickly once it reduced its

Course Project Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Course Project - Assignment Example rm, such as the percentage of incongruence, specificity, and sensitivity between self-reported cancer-screening and medical record documentation among African American women. Descriptive research only examines variables in natural environments and does not include researcher-designed treatments or interventions. In addition, a descriptive research design aims to provide a picture of the situation by gaining more information about the characteristics of a particular field of study; thus, descriptive designs may be used in theory development, problem identification, and justification in current practice (Burns & Grove, 2009, 236). On the other hand, quantitative research designs are crafted to determine the relationship of variables in a population. Combining the two research designs, a quantitative descriptive research design establishes only associations between variables and not causality. The quantitative descriptive research design is appropriate to answer the research question because the descriptive design of the study described the current situation by using statistics to determine rates of participation in cancer screening among patients’ self-reported screening or medical records without treatment or intervention whereas, quantitative design establishes only association between self-reported cancer screening and medical record documentation. Powe, B.D. & Cooper, D.L. (2008). Self-Reported Cancer Screening Rates versus Medical Record Documentation: Incongruence, Specificity, and Sensitivity for African American Women. Oncology Nursing Forum, 35(2):

E-business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

E-business - Essay Example Any form of internet based service comes with security issues. Anything online is accessible to every part of the world with an internet connection. Frauds do happen and can be hard to track immediately. This is one of the main factors which deter some people from using online banking. Users who are new to managing online accounts or are not familiar with the risks involved can be tricked pretty easily. Hackers are always on the prowl for that careless internet user to steal information from. The advances in technology over the years have developed several forms of security features. However an equivalent number of hacking techniques have shown up as well. Emails are the easiest way to access users and ask them for their account information, while posing as banking personnel. This is termed as phishing and works pretty easily on those who are not aware of it. History has shown hackers to break into different kinds of confidential accounts. The security of online banking websites does fall short in this regard. However it is decent enough to provide a certain standard of protection if the user takes some personal measures as well. Every online account is password protected. Users should be encouraged to choose passwords which are complex enough. Using combinations of characters should be enforced while passwords with obvious words should be rejected completely. Using more the one password for each transaction, application of digital signatures for authentication and a combination of both are some techniques that are being used nowadays. A basic research on the bank’s web based security features will reveal how safe your money is. If their website does not have an SSL security built into every page, or allows an easy access to your personal information without multiple stages of authentication or has an option for easy password access, it is better to use traditional banking methods. The legitimacy of all operations co-ordinated by

Why can recounting past experiences be important in helping services Assignment

Why can recounting past experiences be important in helping services users have a sense of who they are Should care workers always encourage people to recall their pasts - Assignment Example 23-24). Some of these service users have undergone traumatic experiences or bad experiences that are either forgotten, repressed or others that happened when the service users were too young. The pertinent question then is, should remembrance of the past be used as an integral part of the reconstruction of the self identity of service users? As noted in the introduction, service users may have an abnormal or maladaptive self-identity. In the development of an individual, some steps are necessary and if developmental tasks are not successfully met, an individual may present immediate problems or have problems later in life (Berger, 2008, p. 34). This is supported by the psychodynamic theories of psychology i.e. Freud’s psychosexual approach and Erikson’s psychosocial approach. Freud’s theory is centered on sexual maturity and only focuses on the years before sexual maturity and how not accomplishing the tasks of a certain stage might later affect the development of an individual in a detrimental way. Erikson’s theory on the other hand is more expansive; covering the entire lifespan of an individual and is based on achievement of certain social tasks (Frager and Fadiman, 2005, p.49). The implication of not meeting some of the goals that one is supposed to meet in the developmental stages is dysfunction coupled with problems with one’s self identity. For instance, a child’s separation from the primary care-givers (mother and father) at the age of 0-2years can lead to general mistrust of the world around them (Aronson, Wilson and Arket, 2007, p. 56). Teenagers who do not have the proper support system are likely to develop an identity crisis; a false sense of self or a loss of perspective as regarding their abilities and the situation that they are in (Santrock, 2009, p. 50). Later stages of development like young adulthood and middle adulthood also present issues that might occur in

Stakeholder Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Stakeholder - Essay Example The inclusive definition includes any group or person who can be affected by the organization’s acts or who can affect the acts of an organization and now has expanded including non-humans too. The exclusive definition includes stakeholders that are focused on from the manager’s point of view such as the power of the stakeholder, the dependence of the institution on that stakeholder or even the risk from that particular stakeholder. The organizations that focus on the maximization of their wealth try to reduce and limit the quantity of stakeholders and try to aim on the financial measures. According to some writers, â€Å"stakeholders are recognized by the real or possible harms and gains that they will undergo or expect undergoing as a result of an organization’s activity or inactivity.† But such definitions are criticized due to the lack of specification and due to the challenges in recognizing the various stakeholders. Sometimes stakeholders are referred to as those people, who have the power to affect the institution, who the right of a relationship with the institution or have the importance to claim (Driscoll and Starik, 57). In present day’s nature is also being included in as one or more stakeholder(s) because of its importance not only to human life but also to the objectives, aims and intentions of a business o r a firm. As we previously studied that a stakeholder is an entity which gets affected by the acts or actions of an institution or has an effect on the acts or actions of an institution. Thus, nature has a lot of affects on the acts and actions of a firm and also gets affected to a very big extent by the acts and actions of a firm. Hence, nature and everything that comes in it hold the position of one or more stakeholder(s). But the fact that nature gets represented by social and ethical groups and by the various communities thus it many times does not gain the status of a stakeholder

My Intellectual Development Up Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

My Intellectual Development Up - Essay Example Frankly, my intellectual development up to where I am today would not have been successful without the unreserved guidance and support from my father, a successful businessperson whose relentless passion and dedication for success have always inspired me to achieve and be more like him in future. My own father is my role model and I always look up to him for not only love, guidance, and approval, but for inspiration in life as well, especially because I consider him a significant authority in matters regarding my personal growth and development. In all these years of my growth, from a small boy to the young adult I have become, I owe all gratitude to this amazingly great father, whose kind words of wisdom have catapulted me to where I am today. My father always encourages me to strive to be exceptional because being average alone is not good enough, especially in today’s era of globalization, where opportunities are increasingly becoming scarce by the day. Above all, my father has made it clear that I can always achieve everything I set my eyes upon in life with the right kind of positive attitude, and that nothing can stop me from doing so if I really purpose too. Every day I remember my father’s words that success begins by establishing a positive attitude I feel reinvigorated not just to succeed, but also to succeed exceedingly since nothing can stop me from doing so with the right attitude. Reading this amazing article titled â€Å"Gaining a sense of self-worth† from Deepak Chopra, a spiritual leader who responds to Oprah.com users’ questions with enlightening advice to help them achieve their optimum potential, has  really transformed my sense of self and how I approach life in general (Deepak).

Otto Von Bismarck Essay Example for Free

Otto Von Bismarck Essay Otto Von Bismarck was made Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Prussia by I in 1862. He stayed in power until 1890. His conduct of foreign policy between 1862 and 1871 is one of the most fascinating and complex parts of the nineteenth century. It ended with the unification of Germany on 18th January 1871, under Prussian dominance, with King William of Prussia being coroneted as Kaiser in Versailles. The German unification is possibly the most important and significant events in history, as it has had so many effects and consequences across the whole world, and still does to this day. One of the most widely debated topics of the nineteenth century is to what extent is Bismarck responsible for the unification. Basically, was Bismarck’s foreign policy more about conscious design, or a policy by default largely determined by other key personalities and events? Some people try and say that Bismarck was always heading towards German unification, and that he had been planning how to get there all along; but actually, Bismarck hardly planned a thing – he instead was just very good at taking things as they came. His main aim was to strengthen Prussia, and make it into a stronger country. An example of how Bismarck did not plan what he did is how he came to power. He was not elected, so he was not planning ways in which to gain votes etc. ; instead, he was suddenly catapulted from being ambassador to St. Petersburg, and then Paris, to being chancellor of Prussia. Bismarck was also known for his personality. It was this that initially got him to where he was. He was nicknamed ‘The Iron Chancellor†, and he fitted this name very well. In 1862, when William was refused money by liberals to pay for his army, he threatened to abdicate, but was persuaded to elect Bismarck as chancellor instead. Everybody who knew Bismarck knew him as being wild, and a bully, a conservative, an army man, and as being a ‘Machiavellian’. He was cunning, scheming, unscrupulous, vicious, manipulative, calculating, brutal, and devious, and also very good at improvising. It was these things that William liked about him, and Williams’s expectations of Bismarck were achieved. Immediately after being put in office, Bismarck suspended the constitution and gave the army the money it needed. Now he was in control of Prussia as it was maturing and reaching power. Another event that shows how Bismarck did not plan things is the Danish Crisis in Schleswig and Holstein in 1864. Some people say that Bismarck planned this, and did it to get Austria involved, and to be nice to her by giving her some land, but which he could take at any time as it was next to Prussia, and cause up rise. In reality, Denmark unexpectedly attempted to annex Schleswig and Holstein, and Bismarck just saw a chance to gain some land, respect, popularity, and a small advantage over Austria; he did not previously plan any of this, he just ‘played the cards he was dealt well’ e. g. e ended up doing it with Austria – this made him look good in front of everyone else, and also lulled Austria into a false sense of security. This was a first step towards Bismarck thinking cleverly about how he could get an upper hand over Austria. Although Bismarck did not necessarily plan all of the things that he did, he was very good at playing what came along well, and thinking about all of the consequences of his actions, and how he could use what he had to his best advantage; because of this, he was a great man who was clever and quick thinking, so we have not at all been deceived about him. It has often been said that Bismarck never meant for what most of what he did to happen, and that what he did was just mainly luck e. g. there was an extraordinary interlude of calmness during his time. This meant that he was able to many things that he should not have been able to do without risking international intervention. Britain is a good example of this international calmness. We were far more concerned with looking after ourselves, and keeping our empire strong and wealthy, than in events in Europe. The one thing that we did have a view on, and it was a strong view, was that we hated France, and this ended up being good for Bismarck anyway. Austria and France were also calm when Bismarck needed them to be – after Austria lost the war, it took her a reasonable amount of time to recover, and Bismarck used this time wisely; France had previously been hammered during Napoleon Bonaparte’s conquest of Europe, and was hated by many, and so was lying low for some time, and again, Bismarck used this greatly to his advantage. A handful people believe that Bismarck’s legacy is too big for his own good. As some people say that he caused German unification single-handedly, because this was a huge event which had enormous consequences and effects, people automatically think of Bismarck as being a greater and better person than he actually was, and that he shifted history his way more than he actually did. But, without Bismarck, luck and other things would not have been a big enough factor to cause German unification, and so he was needed, and he was a great man. Bismarck is said to have unified Germany, but there are several other people who contributed to it more than people think, who are often forgotten about, and not so well known. One of these people is Napoleon III of France. Napoleon III was a very weak, feeble, useless and pathetic ruler. When he was anxious to gain compensation and maintain France’s role as a great power, he was looking at Bismarck and Prussia for anything to grab onto and attack, but Bismarck gave him nothing to react to. This just angered Napoleon even more, and made it easy for Bismarck to use Napoleon when he wanted. Napoleon was such a weak and terrible ruler, that he automatically gave Bismarck an advantage, as Bismarck could easily control Napoleon, and trick him into doing things that he did not realize the consequences of. Bismarck very easily irritated Napoleon on purpose, but he did not go too far e. g. the Hohenzollem candidature, where Bismarck tried to put a Prussian prince in the Spanish throne. This would mean that Prussia would have a massive advantage, as France would be surrounded by Prussia, and could even face fighting on two fronts. Obviously Napoleon was furious when he heard about this, but Bismarck quickly withdrew the candidature, meaning that Napoleon did not act at all, and Bismarck looked good, as he had withdrawn it ‘to be nice to France’. Napoleon did not see what was happening, which meant that Bismarck could do almost what he wanted around him. Ludwig of Bavaria was an obstacle to Bismarck. He led the biggest German state (apart from Prussia). When Bismarck was making all of the head of the states agree to letting, acknowledging, and going to William’s coronation of becoming Kaiser of Germany, Ludwig was the only person to refuse, but Bismarck easily got around this problem by coming to an agreement with Ludwig, which was that Ludwig would accept the demands if Bismarck let him keep his ornate postboxes. This was a major victory for Bismarck, as it was the end of the very old state of Bavaria, which had lots of history, and patriotism, and was at one point a very strong power. Bismarck was controlled and told what to do mainly by William and also by the conservatives and the middle class taxpayers. William especially had absolute control over Bismarck. He had promoted him to chancellor. Prussia’s General (Moltke) was also very important. He was a superb General, and led Prussia’s army very well to its victories. Bismarck was not a military leader, and without Moltke could possibly not have done nearly as well as he did. Russia was massively important. She did not intervene during Prussia’s wars against Denmark and Austria in 1864 and 1866. If she had, Prussia would have probably lost, leading to a whole different outcome; the war with Austria led to the North German Confederation in 1867. Russia never once stopped the new central power from emerging, even though it was given plenty of opportunities. This may have been because of the Tsar. He always blamed Austria for his father’s death, and so refused to help her. Bismarck was helped on several occasions by certain countries not intervening in 1870 with the war with France, Britain did not intervene as she still hated France, neither would Italy, as she owed her acquisition of Venetia to Prussia’s victory over Austria in 1866 and also wanted to get the French out of Rome; and Austria was still recovering, and was held back by Russia, who threatened to send in 300,000 men if she got involved. This meant that Bismarck did not need to be scared of fighting on two fronts at all. Also, without the realignment of the great powers that resulted from the Crimean War, German Unification would probably not have happened. Bismarck himself even said: â€Å"It all began with the Crimean War†. Although all of these people and events were important, Bismarck was the fundamental key to the unification. Without him, it would not have happened, so we have not at all been deceived – he was a great man who was the key to the German Unification. When Bismarck came to power, Prussia was coming to its peak in almost every way. She had a brilliant General (Moltke), she was industrializing she had amazing railways and weapons and she had a thriving economy. Another help to Bismarck was the fact that Prussia was physically a large state. Some people believe that Bismarck did not need to do much, and he just did well, as it was a coincidence that he was in the right place at the right time. But, although Prussia was doing well at Bismarck’s time, it needed Bismarck to bring it all together, and make it happen! Many people say that German unification was inevitable, and would have happened even if Bismarck had never lived, because of certain preconditions. For example: nationalism had been growing for many years. This can be shown in the 1848 revolutions; also, it still kept on growing after the revolutions. Nationalism was now a talked about thing – people had written about it, and apart from the monarchs etc. who too were scared of it, people were discussing it among themselves. Also, gradually over the last few decades, there had been becoming less and less German states. Originally there were more than a hundred very small states, similar to the size of a large estate, or maybe a small county today; but as stronger states had engulfed other weaker states, fewer and larger states emerged. By the time Bismarck was around, there was not much more than twenty states. This gradual reduces in the number of states shows that eventually, there would have been a German unification without Bismarck anyway – he just sped the process up. The 1848 revolutions also showed that there was a want for change already there with the people, even before Bismarck, and so again, there would have been German unification without him. Another thing that shows that there would have been German unification without Bismarck anyway is that the Hapsburg Empire had slowly been on its downfall for many years, starting well before Bismarck’s time. At the height of its power, the Hapsburg Empire was enormous, and extremely powerful and very autocratic, but it had slowly been becoming less and less of a major power, and other countries were beginning to be able to almost rival it. Many people also say that the struggle between the German states and the struggle between Prussia and Austria had to be settled some time, and this would have happened regardless of whether Bismarck was there or not. By the time Bismarck came to power, there was as well a want for unification already there, which some say would have caused it anyway if Bismarck had not been there (liberals had wanted unification for a long time, but now there were also others who wanted it, like some of the working class, and some of the middle class – also, there were many who did not think about unification, but would have probably supported it if they could more easily). Also, in 1866, the southern states were becoming increasingly hostile to Prussia, and the other northern states. A war to resolve the hostility between France and Prussia, and to force the southern states into joining the North German Confederation seemed likely in 1869. This showed that even if Bismarck had not been there, then there would have been the unification anyway. People say that these points show that it was not Bismarck who caused the unification, but it was in fact going to happen anyway; but actually, it was Bismarck who brought all of these separate points together to make the unification happen. Without him these points would not have led to it, they need Bismarck! He brought these points together, and therefore it was Bismarck who made it possible. So we have not been deceived, as Bismarck was a great man, who shifted these points his way, leading to unification. Bismarck was a great man, and he had a great personality, and was always willing to do things. Bismarck was a great Machiavellian. He was brilliantly sly and cunning, and his truth was flexible. He was happy to put down anyone he needed to, even his friends. He always desired a stronger Prussia, and it was this desire that led to him unifying the German states. He was fundamentally a conservative, but he cleverly managed to get all different sorts of people to like him, and to be on his side – even many of the liberals. He was very gifted at making people believe something he wanted them to believe, or do what he wanted them to do e. g. he got William to agree to becoming the Kaiser, as he got all of the rulers of the other states to give him the crown. Bismarck was also very good at knowing when to stop – he would irritate someone a lot, but stop just before they exploded. He did this with Napoleon III. Bismarck also never took any risks that were too big. He always knew what he was doing, even though it often looked the opposite. He would only proceed with something if he was satisfied with his chance of success. This was his key strength – he was an unbelievable decision-maker. This meant that he was also very good at ‘playing things by ear’, which meant that he never had to plan things too far in advance, and he was very good at putting himself into other people’s shoes, and seeing what the consequences of all of his decisions could be. Bismarck was also very strong willed. He always did what he wanted, and never stopped or hesitated for anything. He was like a steam train going full speed, and having to make hundreds of decisions of what path to take – he was unstoppable. Proof of this is that when he came to power, the majority of people did not want unification, but he still managed to make it happen. William was also nearly useless without Bismarck. He was too weak and slow. Bismarck was a great man, and he certainly did shift history his way when he wanted to.

Descartes And Locke: The Matrix

Descartes And Locke: The Matrix Computer programmer Thomas A. Anderson leads a secret life as a hacker under the pseudonym Neo and wishes to learn the answer to the question What is the Matrix? The mysterious underground hacker offers him the opportunity to learn the truth about the Matrix. Morpheus offers Neo an option between two pills: A blue pill which would get him back in his original time, and a red pill that would let him to find the truth he is looking for. Neo chooses the red pill. Morpheus tells Neo that right now is the year of 2199 not 20th century, and that people have a war with smart robots that were made by people created in the 21st century. Morpheus thinks that Neo is that the One. He thinks that Neo will be able to put the war the end with his unlimited power. Neo is educated as a tough fighter. An opening in the back of Neos skull connects him directly to the Matrix. All the necessary knowledge and information is transferred through it. Morpheus is sure that once Neo fully gets his own power, t he Agents will be out of competition for him. Then they find out that they were revealed by their colleague, who had chosen to live in the Matrix not the actual world, and had made a deal with the Agents to give them Morpheus in exchange for a permanent come back to the Matrix. Morpheus is jailed. Neo and Trinity come back to the Matrix and try to get him out of the prison. Agent Smith kills Neo. In the actual life, Trinity says softly to Neos body what the Oracle had said to her: that she would get the true feelings of love with the One. She doesnt want to believe that he is dead and kisses him. Neos heart started beating again, hes alive; the Agents fire at him, but he moves his hand up and stops their bullets in mid-air. Then Neo destroys him. At the end he promises to show the imprisoned people a true life. Philosophy is concentrated on investigation of truths. In the movie, the investigation for the truth was about our own being. In this movie thoughts of Descartes and Locke were often used. Neo symbolized Descartes. He doubts all the things. This movie stressed the use of machinery as the course of action for humans. Descartes believed that all moves were of mechanical origin, but the spirit cannot be restricted. One of the events was a combat between Neo and Morpheus in a kung fu session. Neo is thought to be a super fighter. Initially he fails because he tries to use his brainpower to control his moves. Then he understands that the mechanism is guiding him not his brainpower. He thoughts that the human is an ideal computerized thing. Throughout the movie, many references were made to the idea of senses. It is believed by every human that to know reality is to experience through your taste, smell, touch, hear, and see. Locke believed that this was true. There is nothing in the mind except what was first in the senses. Locke believed our mind is an empty slate. This idea parallels to the ideas in the Matrix about the mind being an empty room. Locke, though, insists that when we begin to use our senses we start to have ideas. How are we to know that our senses are not programmed? There is no correct answer. No one knows. Locke does state that the mind at birth is the blank slate. In the movie, Neo was reborn into reality. He had wires and cords to machines. When they released them, he had no control over anything. He had no understanding. The world was new to him. Neo eventually learned everything again. He was taught through computers, though, he never used his senses. Locke feels that the connection of the mind an d soul is through them. You can never appreciate(http://www.solidpapers.com/collegepapers/Philosophy/11034.htm) life fully without all the senses. Locke explains that experience is twofold: external and internal. ( Modern Philosophy The Philosophy of John Locke, 2010, June 1 http://www.rafed.net/en/index.php?option=com_contentview=articleid=3324%3Amodern-philosophycatid=231Itemid=973limitstart=16 ) External experience, called sensation, gives us ideas of supposed external objects, such as color, sound, extension, motion. etc. Locke says supposed objects, since their existence has not been proved. Internal experience, called reflection, makes us understand the operation of the spirit on the objects of sensation, such as knowing, doubting, believing and so forth.(Philosophy of John Locke, 2006, December 30, http://themartinnews.blogspot.com/2006/12/philosophy-of-john-locke.html) In regard to the ideas furnished by sensation, it is necessary to distinguish the primary qualities (solidity, extension, figure, number, motion, etc.), which are objective, from the secondary qualities (color, sounds, etc.), which are subjective in their effect and objective in their cause. In other words the secondary qualities are powers for producing various sensations in us.(Philosophy of John Locke, 2006, December 30, http://themartinnews.blogspot.com/2006/12/philosophy-of-john-locke.html) For Locke, sensation and reflection are classified as simple and complex, according to whether they are irreducible elements, such as whiteness, rotundity, or reducible to more simple elements. Thus the idea of an apple is complex because it is a combination of the simple ideas of color, rotundity, taste, and so forth. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, John Locke, 2001, September 2 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke) I agree with Locke that our experience is separated into external and internal ones.