The letter to Julia from Gregory Williams Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The letter to Julia from Gregory Williams - Essay Example Sadly, you too, Julia, experienced the same thing when you came to the United States from the Dominican Republic. Your race and your economic status changed once your family stepped foot in New York. Where once you were members of a privileged class who employed servants and enjoyed a good life you then became a racial outsider dependent on other's perceptions. In your younger years, you found it was easier to be considered white than to be defined as some sort of racial anomaly and your family encouraged this with their ideals of beauty being defined by light-colored skin and blonde hair. Even when you were applying for jobs after graduation from college, it was not your educational background that was noted but your ethnicity. James also went through the pain of realizing he was "different" due to his mixed-race parents and found that while he had a hard time defining his own color, others were not so particular. When his minister was asked why Jesus was portrayed as white, he coul d not come up with a good answer that would make sense to a young man of mixed ethnicity. This lack of clear racial identity is on thing that seems to have changed little since I wrote my book. Even though it is now more acceptable that two people of different races marry and produce children, a stigma is still applied even by those with extensive education and community contacts. During my formative years, there were so many avenues closed to a person of color. It was more than disheartening to learn I was not eligible to win an academic achievement prize in the Indiana elementary school based purely on the color of my skin. Back then, "the prize did not go to Negroes. Just like in Louisville, there were things and places for whites only" (Williams, 126). We were not considered to be suitable matches for white women nor were we welcome at sporting events. I was horrified to be screamed at after attending a basketball game, "Niggers go home!" (Williams, 220). Surely in your times, this would not be tolerated! Even the ability to play basketball, the sport of which today is filled with people of color, was beyond my reach as my coach so aptly demonstrated by cutting me from the varsity team in favor of a white player with less skill. Today, people of mixed race are allowed to hold high-end jobs and receive the same education as others. You were both afforded professional opportunities that were closed to me. Through your writing voices, both of you have managed to become icons for all people now considered bi-racial and American citizens are listening to you. You have managed to reach the rest of America who might also feel the same as you did in regards to an ill-defined identity and slowly break away the barriers separating one race from another. There is a whole new category of race that now that did not exist when I was growing up. No one referred to my family and I as "bi-racial". One drop of colored blood in a person meant that he was Black and there were no other

Rizals life Essay Example for Free

Rizals life Essay Home, church, and school are the three important pillars that shaped Rizal’s identity as the voice and prophet of the Filipino people and his advocacy that unity equates to prosperity. b. Summary Rizal’s identity was shaped in his home, at school and at the church. These institutions gave long-lasting impression and influence to him. Rizal’s mother helped him to read, write, and express his emotions through poetry. The school at Binan gave Rizal his first formal schooling, shaped his character, and formed his habits. The church, on the other hand, shaped Rizal’s philosophy of life, moral philosophy, question of choice and manner of ethics. All these three institutions are the core to Rizal’s advocacy that unity is the strongest link that binds people together in building a great nation. Rizal is the dominant voice in our history not only because of the things said above but also because he was the first to put his own advice into practice. Because of his preference to choosing the ethical side of life over his personal freedom, he had to face the firing squad at the Luneta. c. Reactions or Comments The article, for me, brings out the nationalist inside of me. It makes me want to do more for my country and for my countrymen. It also made me realize that Rizal’s life was also a tough life for him to go through. My eyes were gradually opened to the fact that Rizal was just like any Filipino child, but I guess his only difference from other Filipino children is that he lived every lessons and insights that he had learned from his parents, from his school, and from their church. He chose the ethical side of life over his freedom. He had given so many advices to his fellow Filipinos because, I think, he believed that his countrymen will be able to live those things. He always gave emphasis on unity in most of his works because he firmly believes that unity is the most important factor in saving people from foreign disturbances and in facing any national problem. A statement of Rizal was cited on the article by the author. The statement goes, â€Å"Law knows no color of skin, nor does reason differentiate between nostrils. † I think what Rizal is trying to say here is that we shouldn’t be ashamed of who we are or what we have or how we look because everything is equal in the eyes of justice. We should fight for our freedom because it is in freedom that the people are led to security and prosperity. Indeed, the content of the article really had an impact on me. The article was nicely done and was easy to understand. Because of this article, I finally realized that Rizal’s works and thoughts are not only for his time but also for ours.

Free Trade :: essays research papers

American Political Science Review Vol. 94, No.2 June 2000 "Free to Trade: Democracies, Autocracies, and International Trade" The central question that is explored in this article is what kind of political regime is best for free trading in domestic or international commerce. At the same time it address the variation between democracy and autocracy, not on variation within either regime type. Some of the major articles discussed in the author's review of the literature are the actors and their preferences; such actors as the chief executive and legislatures in a democracy and a unitary actor in autocracy. Also mentions one of the major aspect of trade, the noncooperative trade barrier settings. Which usually happens when countries do not agree to mutual trade settings. The other article in the literature tends to compare the level of trade barriers and regime type. It does this by looking at the level of trade barriers across the three types of regime pairs; if trade barriers are lower with in democracy pairs than pairs composed of an autocracy and a democracy. The principal hypothesis the authors seek to test is "the ratification responsibility of the legislature in democratic states leads pairs of democracies to set trade barriers at a lower level than mixed country-pairs." The major independent variables used in this article are political economy of trade policy, domestic political institutions and commercial policy. The dependent variables are foreign policy of the involved countries and the chief executive. In order to collect data and analysis, the authors used the national income and population of both trading partners, as well as the geographic distance between them. They also looked at the competitiveness of the process through which a country's chief executive is selected, the openness of that process, the competitiveness of

Antigone’s Purpose

Brooks Fridey Antigone’s Purpose In the story of Antigone, originally written by Sophocles, explains the story, of a woman who stands up for her own beliefs against the king. At the time of Sophocles, women had little power and authority. They were expected to listen to their husband, king, or any man that speaks to or asks a woman of something. The story starts up where the story of Oedipus ends, in his death. Trouble and war are about to begin in Thebes, so Antigone travels there to try and stop what may become of her family and country.From my observations, this story can be analyzed in multiple ways, whether it is about the struggles of women, defying the higher power, or responding to the will of the gods. It is said that the royal family of Thebes is cursed to endure suffering, pain, death and loss. Antigone is aware of her family’s fate, but is ready to change her possible destiny for herself and her family. In Thebes, the members of the royal family are either k illing themselves or are being murdered. Antigone is torn by this and decides she must go to Thebes to fix this.She got word that her brothers, Polyneices and Eteocles, were going to fight each other until one was dead. She tried to be there before any fight happened, but was too late, and found out from her sister, that bother brothers were killed during the fight. The king ordered that Eteocles deserved a proper burial, but Polyneices was to not be touched and would not get a burial underground. Antigone asked her sister, Ismene, to help her bury their brother properly, but she refused. It was ordered that anyone who touches the body will be arrested and shall be punished by death.Ismene told Antigone that she cannot bring herself to do it. She feels that her family’s consistently terrible luck and the fact that she’s a woman are quite inhibiting. Antigone was ready to stand up for the women who would not defy men’s authority. She was fine with doing what she needed to herself. Ismene, who is trapped under the influence and power of man, tries to beg Antigone she will be making a mistake and will suffer great consequences. Stating, â€Å"It is a losing battle, fighting Man† (Sophocles). It is obvious throughout the story, that nothing will prevent or slow Antigone from what she is going to do.Not man, nor power, or laws is enough to change her mind. Creon’s reasoning as to why Eteocles gets a burial service and Polyneices is to be left out for the birds, is to him, justified that Eteocles died honorably defending the city, while Polyneices was just a dishonorable exile. This was no real justification to Antigone, and she was going to take matters into her own hands, defying the king. It was soon discovered that Polyneices’ body had been ritually prepared for a burial, so the messenger relayed the news to the king. He ordered that the messenger find who is responsible for this or he will die if he fails.As what seemed , intended the sentry soon found Antigone trying to bury her brother. She was arrested, and taken to Creon. Antigone does not deny her crime, she tells Creon her actions were for justice and obedience to the gods. With all of Antigone’s stubbornness, she continues to still disrespect the king even after she has been caught. She will not give in to the king, disagreeing with any justification he promotes. Creon attempts to shame her for her actions, but this has no real effect on her due to a large amount of pride dignity she has left for herself.Creon feels it is particularly important not to be beaten by a person of the female persuasion. The battle of opposite effect continues with Antigone and Ismene, as she is brought into question as well from a hunch the king has that Ismene is also involved in this crime. She immediately pleads guilty to the accusations, saying she aided in the burial of Polyneices. Antigone is enraged that she would plead guilty to something she had n ot done, but Ismene confronts the fact she will not be able to go on without Antigone alive.It is expressed throughout the story, the importance of obeying the gods. To Antigone, it is not necessary that someone should obey their leader at all times. She believes what Creon declared to happen to her brothers was unfair and that the gods were telling her she needed to bury her brother. Antigone was unapproved to the treatment of women in these times, and that the king must be obeyed in all causes. She believed the gods were the true powers, and bad things would come upon you if you did not cooperate with their requests.When Haemon comes into the story, acknowledged as Antigone’s fiancee, who is the son of Creon, makes it clear why Antigone was even still alive. Although Creon was cruel and often harsh, there was still something or someone holding him back from simply killing her. Haemon told his father it would be wrong to kill Antigone and would bring great mourning to the pe ople of Thebes following her death. He wants Creon to be open to others views, but Creon responds by calling Haemon a woman’s slave for backing up a woman and not his own father.A blind prophet advises Creon that he should properly bury Polyneices and release Antigone. He says if he does not he will greatly anger the gods, and might create his own misfortune for his disobedience. Possibly leading to his own death. As Creon ponders his possibilities and future, he finally decides to release Antigone and bury Polyneices. As he thought he was then making the right decision, he would soon find out what his choice will cause. Antigone knew she didn’t want to keep living in this world of mistreatment and cruelty, and was willing to end her life.Creon did not think she would actually go through anything like suicide, but upon her release, she quickly hung herself and gave herself to the gods. Haemon found out what happened, and enraged, attacked his father, and missed leading to Haemon striking himself with the sword and killing himself. As if the story for Creon could be any more devastating, instantly regretting his choice, is told by a messenger that his wife enrages by Creon’s actions, as well, and killed herself. Creon is left with nothing and no one close to him in his life, and wonders what to do now.This is a story that depicts the power of anyone, especially women. With enough determination and manipulation, anything is possible. Antigone was dealt with an accumulation of anger towards her genders rights, the abuse of power, and being righteous enough to still follow her gods. She is seen as one of the first feminists in this time, and although may have gone to an extreme to defend her honor, clearly made a point to Creon, leaving him with nothing, what neglect of someone’s abilities are and abusing one’s power can do.

Economic Systems Essay

Socialism Socialism is an economic system where all the economic decisions are made by the government or a central authority. There will be no private property rights since the government officially owns all resources. It is also known as a command economy or a planned system. Socialist economics refers to the economic theories, practices, and norms of hypothetical and existing socialist economic systems. A socialist economy is based on some form of social ownership, which includes varieties of public ownership and independent cooperatives, over the means of production, wherein production is carried out to directly produce use-value sometimes, but not always, coordinated through economic planning and a system of accounting based on calculation-in-kind or a direct measure of labor-time. The term socialist economics may also be applied to analysis of former and existing economic systems that call themselves â€Å"socialist†, such as the works of Hungarian economist Jà ¡nos Kornai. Socialist economics has been associated with different schools of economic thought, most notably Marxian economics, institutional economics, evolutionary economics and neoclassical economics. Early socialism, like Ricardian socialism, was based on classical economics. During the 20th century, proposals and models for planned economies and market socialism were based heavily on neoclassical economics or a synthesis of neoclassical economics with Marxian or institutional economics. look more:  what is the basic economic problem essay Characteristics 1 Public ownership of resources All the resources are owned and operated by the state or the government in the interest of society as a whole. This is to ensure equal opportunity of all citizens regardless of their income. Public ownership also aims to fully utilize the country’s resources. 2 Central planning authority The central authority is responsible for making economic decisions for society. The authority plans and allocates resources between current consumption and investment for the future. 3 Price mechanism of lesser importance Socialism gives less importance to market forces. Prices are fixed by the government and not determined by demand and supply. Private profits are not allowed and public interest is emphasized in the command economy. 4 Central control and ownership A socialist economy is a fully planned economy where the government intervenes in all aspects of economic activity. The government controls production, consumption, and the distribution of goods and services. Merits of Socialism 1 Production according to basic needs Production in a socialist economy is mainly directed at producing the basic needs of the people such as food, clothing and building materials. It is not determined by the purchasing power of the rich in society. The phenomenon of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer does not exist in the socialist economy. 2 Equal distribution of income and wealth There is no difference between the rich and the poor. This system provides equal opportunity for all citizens in earning an income. Wealth is also equally distributed since private enterprise is limited 3 Better allocation of resourses Under the socialist system, the planning authority will allocate resources between current consumption and future investment. 4 No serious unemployment or recession/ inflation The unemployment rate and inflation are usually taken care of by the government to ensure economic stability in the country. 5 Rapid economic development In a socialism system, the economy grows faster. The main factors responsible for the rapic economic growth are the full utilization of resources, planning and quick decisions. 6 Social welfare The government will provide all citizens of the country with full social security benefits such as pension, accident benefits and others. Since the government is concerned, labour dispute and wastage of resources do not exist in a socialism system. Economic Decisions in a Socialistic System What to produce In Socialism, planning authorities decide what to produce. The Central Planning Authority will collect detailed statistics on the resource availability in the country and link it with national priorities. If the planning authority has a choice of producing computers using more labour or more machinery. How to produce The Central Planning Authority also decided on the techniques to be used in the production of different goods and services. The choice is between traditional and modern technique of production. For example, the planning authority has a choice of producing computers using more labour or more machinery. For whom to produce The distribution of the national product is decided by the Central Planning Authority. The distribution of various commodities among citizens is done through a set of administred fixwd processes. Necessity goods are fixed at lower prices, and luxury goods at higher prices. The purpose of these fixed prices is to reduce inequalities in the distribution of income. Demerits of Socialism 1 Lacks of incentives and initative by individuals Individuals have no profit motive. This will lead to economic inefficiency since jobs are provided by the government and individuals are not motivated to work harder. 2 Loss of economic freedom and consumer sovereignty Under a socialist economy, the central planning authority or the government directs all economic activity. There is no choice given to the consumer and they accept whatever public enterprise produce. There is little variety in the goods and services produced and availability is restricted. Limited private organizations exist in a socialist economy. 3 Absence of competition Since there are limited private enterprises, less research and development (R&D) activities are carried out. This results in low quality products since there is no competition. Socialist economies in theory Robin Hahnel and Michael Albert identify five economic models within the rubric of socialist economics * Public Enterprise Centrally Planned Economy in which all property is owned by the State and all key economic decisions are made centrally by the State, the former Soviet Union. * Public Enterprise State-Managed Market Economy, one form of market socialism which attempts to use the price mechanism to increase economic efficiency, while all decisive productive assets remain in the ownership of the state, e.g. socialist market economy in China after reform. * A mixed economy, where public and private ownership are mixed, and where industrial planning is ultimately subordinate to market allocation, the model generally adopted by social democrats e.g. in twentieth century Sweden. * Public Enterprise Employee Managed Market Economies, another form of market socialism in which publicly owned, employee-managed production units engage in free market exchange of goods and services with one another as well as with final consumers, e.g. mid twentieth century Yugoslavia, Two more theoretical models are Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar’s Progressive Utilization Theory and Economic democracy. * Public Enterprise Participatory Planning, an economy featuring social ownership of the means of production with allocation based on an integration of decentralized democratic planning, e.g. stateless communism, libertarian socialism. An incipient historical forebear is that of Catalonia during the Spanish revolution. More developed theoretical models include those of Karl Polanyi, Participatory Economics and the negotiated coordination model of Pat Devine, as well as in Cornelius Castoriadis’s pamphlet â€Å"Workers’ Councils and the Economics of a Self-Managed Society†. Additionally, Jà ¡nos Kornai identifies five distinct classifications for socialism: * Classical / Marxist conception, where socialism is a stage of economic development in which wage labour, private property in the means of production and monetary relations have been made redundant through the development of the productive forces, so that capital accumulation has been superseded by economic planning. Economic planning in this definition means conscious allocation of economic inputs and the means of production by the associated producers to directly maximise use-values as opposed to exchange-values, in contrast to the â€Å"anarchy of production† of capitalism. * Walrasian / Market Socialist which defines socialism as public-ownership or cooperative-enterprises in a market economy, with prices for producer goods set through a trial-and-error method by a central planning board. In this view, socialism is defined in terms of de jure public property rights over major enterprises. * Leninist conception, which includes a form of political organisation based on control of the means of production and government by a single political party apparatus that claims to act in the interest of the working class, and an ideology hostile toward markets and political dissent, with coordination of economic activity through centralised economic planning (a â€Å"command economy†). * Social Democratic concept, based on the capitalist mode of production, which defines socialism as a set of values rather than a specific type of social and economic organisation. It includes unconditional support for parliamentary democracy, gradual and reformist attempts to establish socialism, and support for socially progressive causes. Social democrats are not opposed to the market or private property; instead they try to ameliorate the effects of capitalism through a welfare state, which relies on the market as the fundamental coordinating entity in the economy and a degree of public ownership/public provision of public goods in an economy otherwise dominated by private enterprise. * East Asian model, or socialist market economy, based on a largely free-market, capital accumulation for profit and substantial private ownership along with state-ownership of strategic industries monopolised by a single political party. Jà ¡nos Kornai ultimately leaves the classification of this model (as either socialist or capitalist) to the reader.[16] What are the disadvantages and advantages of socialism? Advantages of Socialism * In environments with plentiful resources, socialism provides all members with their survival needs, creating a stable social environment. * Members that cannot participate economically – due to disabilities, age, or periods of poor health – can still impart wisdom, emotional support and continuity of experience to the system. * Freedom from work provides opportunity for some societal members to explore non-economically-productive pursuits, such as pure science, math and non-popular arts. Disadvantages of Socialism * Since there is no culling and no economic advantage to working harder, socialistic systems provide no inherent incentive to participate. This makes socialism internally unstable. * Due to a lack of incentives, socialistic systems tend not to be competitive, making them externally unstable. * In times of plenty, immigrants are drawn to the free resources offered by socialistic systems, while potentially adding nothing economically productive. * In times of scarcity, resentment of non-economically-productive members of society increases, causing a destabilizing effect on the society and economy History of socialist economic thought Values of socialism have roots in pre-capitalist institutions such as the religious communes, reciprocal obligations, and communal charity of Mediaeval Europe, the development of its economic theory primarily reflects and responds to the monumental changes brought about by the dissolution of feudalism and the emergence of specifically capitalist social relations. As such it is commonly regarded as a movement belonging to the modern era. Many socialists have considered their advocacy as the preservation and extension of the radical humanist ideas expressed in Enlightenment doctrine such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Discourse on Inequality, Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Limits of State Action, or Immanuel Kant’s insistent defense of the French Revolution. Capitalism appeared in mature form as a result of the problems raised when an industrial factory system requiring long-term investment and entailing corresponding risks was introduced into an internationalized commercial (mercantilist) framework. Historically speaking, the most pressing needs of this new system were an assured supply of the elements of industry – land, elaborate machinery, and labour – and these imperatives led to the commodification of these elements. According to influential socialist economic historian Karl Polanyi’s classic account, the forceful transformation of land, money and especially labour into commodities to be allocated by an autonomous market mechanism was an alien and inhuman rupture of the pre-existing social fabric. Marx had viewed the process in a similar light, referring to it as part of the process of â€Å"primitive accumulation† whereby enough initial capital is amassed to begin capitalist production. The dislocation that Polyani and others describe, triggered natural counter-movements in efforts to re-embed the economy in society. These counter-movements, that included, for example, the Luddite rebellions, are the incipient socialist movements. Over time such movements gave birth to or acquired an array of intellectual defenders who attempted to develop their ideas in theory. As Polanyi noted, these counter-movements were mostly reactive and therefore not full-fledged socialist movements. Some demands went no further than a wish to mitigate the capitalist market’s worst effects. Later, a full socialist program developed, arguing for systemic transformation. Its theorists believed that even if markets and private property could be tamed so as not to be excessively â€Å"exploitative†, or crises could be effectively mitigated, capitalist social relations would remain significantly unjust and anti-democratic, suppressing universal human needs for fulfilling, empowering and creative work, diversity and solidarity. Within this context socialism has undergone four periods: the first in the 19th century was a period of utopian visions (1780s-1850s); then occurred the rise of revolutionary socialist and Communist movements in the 19th century as the primary opposition to the rise of corporations and industrialization (1830–1916); the polarisation of socialism around the question of the Soviet Union, and adoption of socialist or social democratic policies in response (1916–1989) and the response of socialism in the neo-liberal era (1990- ). As socialism developed, so did the socialist system of economics. Utopian socialism The first theories which came to hold the term â€Å"socialism† began to be formulated in the late 18th century, and were termed â€Å"socialism† early in the 19th century. The central beliefs of the socialism of this period rested on the exploitation of those who labored by those who owned capital or rented land and housing. The abject misery, poverty and disease to which laboring classes seemed destined was the inspiration for a series of schools of thought which argued that life under a class of masters, or â€Å"capitalists† as they were then becoming to be called, would consist of working classes being driven down to subsistence wages. Socialist ideas found expression in utopian movements, which often formed agricultural communes aimed at being self-sufficient on the land. These included many religious movements, such as the Shakers in America. Utopian socialism had little to offer in terms of a systematic theory of economic phenomena. In theory, economic problems were dissolved by a utopian society which had transcended material scarcity. In practice, small communities with a common spirit could sometimes resolve allocation problems. Socialism and classical political economy The first organized theories of socialist economics were significantly impacted by classical economic theory, including elements in Adam Smith, Robert Malthus and David Ricardo. In Smith there is a conception of a common good not provided by the market, a class analysis, a concern for the dehumanizing aspects of the factory system, and the concept of rent as being unproductive. Ricardo argued that the renting class was parasitic. This, and the possibility of a â€Å"general glut†, an over accumulation of capital to produce goods for sale rather than for use, became the foundation of a rising critique of the concept that free markets with competition would be sufficient to prevent disastrous downturns in the economy, and whether the need for expansion would inevitably lead to war. Socialist political economy before Marx Charles Fourier, influential early French socialist thinker A key early socialist theorist of political economy was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. He was the most well-known of nineteenth century mutualist theorists and the first thinker to refer to himself as an anarchist. Others were: Technocrats like Henri de Saint Simon, agrarian radicals like Thomas Spence, William Ogilvie and William Cobbett; anti-capitalists like Thomas Hodgskin; communitarian and utopian socialists like Robert Owen, William Thompson and Charles Fourier; anti-market socialists like John Gray and John Francis Bray; the Christian mutualist William Batchelder Greene; as well as the theorists of the Chartist movement and early proponents of syndicalism. The first advocates of socialism promoted social leveling in order to create a meritocratic or technocratic society based upon individual talent. Count Henri de Saint-Simon was the first individual to coin the term â€Å"socialism†. Simon was fascinated by the enormous potential of science and technology, which led him to advocate a socialist society that would eliminate the disorderly aspects of capitalism and which would be based upon equal opportunities. Simon advocated a society in which each person was ranked according to his or her capacities and rewarded according to his or her work. This was accompanied by a desire to implement a rationally organized economy based on planning and geared towards large-scale scientific and material progress, which embodied a desire for a semi-planned economy. Other early socialist thinkers were influenced by the classical economists. The Ricardian socialists, such as Thomas Hodgskin and Charles Hall, were based on the work of David Ricardo and reasoned that the equilibrium value of commodities approximated producer prices when those commodities were in elastic supply, and that these producer prices corresponded to the embodied labor. The Ricardian socialists viewed profit, interest and rent as deductions from this exchange-value. Das Kapital Karl Marx employed systematic analysis in an ambitious attempt to elucidate capitalism’s contradictory laws of motion, as well as to expose the specific mechanisms by which it exploits and alienates. He radically modified classical political economic theories. Notably, the labor theory of value that had been worked upon by Adam Smith and David Ricardo, was transformed into his characteristic â€Å"law of value† and used for the purpose of revealing how commodity fetishism obscures the reality of capitalist society. His approach, which Engels would call â€Å"scientific socialism†, would stand as the branching point in economic theory: in one direction went those who rejected the capitalist system as fundamentally anti-social, arguing that it could never be harnessed to effectively realize the fullest development of human potentialities wherein â€Å"the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.†. Das Kapital is one of the many famous incomplete works of economic theory: Marx had planned four volumes, completed two, and left his collaborator Engels to complete the third. In many ways the work is modelled on Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, seeking to be a comprehensive logical description of production, consumption and finance in relation to morality and the state. It is a work of philosophy, anthropology and sociology as much as one of economics. However, it has several important statements: * The Law of Value Capitalist production is the production of â€Å"an immense multitude of commodities† or generalised commodity production. A commodity has two essential qualities firstly, they are useful, they satisfy some human want, â€Å"the nature of such wants, whether, for instance, they spring from the stomach or from fancy, makes no difference,† and secondly they are sold on a market or exchanged. Critically the exchange value of a commodity â€Å"is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities.† But rather depends on the amount of socially necessary labour required to produce it. All commodities are sold at their value, so the origin of the capitalist profit is not in cheating or theft but in the fact that the cost of reproduction of labour power, or the worker’s wage, is less than the value created during their time at work, enabling the capitalists to yield a surplus value or profit on their investments. * Historical Property Relations Historical capitalism represents a process of momentous social upheaval where rural masses were separated from the land and ownership of the means of production by force, deprivation, and legal manipulation, creating an urban proletariat based on the institution of wage-labour. Moreover, capitalist property relations aggravated the artificial separation between city and country, which is a key factor in accounting for the metabolic rift between human beings in capitalism and their natural environment, which is at the root of our current ecological dilemmas. * Commodity Fetishism Marx adapted previous value-theory to show that in capitalism phenomena involved with the price system (markets, competition, supply and demand) constitute a powerful ideology that obscures the underlying social relations of capitalist society. â€Å"Commodity fetishism† refers to this distortion of appearance. The underlying social reality is one of economic exploitation. * Economic Exploitation Workers are the fundamental creative source of new value. Property relations affording the right of usufruct and despotic control of the workplace to capitalists are the devices by which the surplus value created by workers is appropriated by the capitalists. * Accumulation Inherent to capitalism is the incessant drive to accumulate as a response to the competitive forces acting upon all capitalists. In such a context the accumulated wealth which is the source of the capitalist’s social power derives itself from being able to repeat the circuit of Money–>Commodity–>Money’, where the capitalist receives an increment or â€Å"surplus value† higher than their initial investment, as rapidly and efficiently as possible. Moreover this driving imperative leads capitalism to its expansion on a worldwide scale. * Crises Marx identified natural and historically specific (i.e. structural) barriers to accumulation that were interrelated and interpenetrated one another in times of crises. Different types of crises, such as realization crises and overproduction crises, are expressions of capitalism’s inability to constructively overcome such barriers. Moreover, the upshot of crises is increased centralization, the expropriation of the many capitalists by the few. * Centralization The interacting forces of competition, endemic crises, intensive and extensive expansion of the scale of production, and a growing interdependency with the state apparatus, all promote a strong developmental tendency towards the centralization of capital. * Material Development As a result of its constant drive to optimize profitability by increasing the productivity of labour, typically by revolutionizing technology and production techniques, capitalism develops so as to progressively reduce the objective need for work, suggesting the potential for a new era of creative forms of work and expanded scope for leisure. * Socialization, and the pre-conditions for Revolution By socializing the labour process, concentrating workers into urban settings in large-scale production processes and linking them in a worldwide market, the agents of a potential revolutionary change are created. Thus Marx felt that in the course of its development capitalism was at the same time developing the preconditions for its own negation. However, although the objective conditions for change are generated by the capitalist system itself, the subjective conditions for social revolution can only come about through the apprehension of the objective circumstances by the agents themselves and the transformation of such understanding into an effective revolutionary program Anarchist economics Anarchist economics is the set of theories and practices of economics and economic activity within the political philosophy of anarchism. Pierre Joseph Proudhon was involved with the Lyons mutualists and later adopted the name to describe his own teachings. Mutualism is an anarchist school of thought that originates in the writings of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who envisioned a society where each person might possess a means of production, either individually or collectively, with trade representing equivalent amounts of labor in the free market. Integral to the scheme was the establishment of a mutual-credit bank that would lend to producers at a minimal interest rate, just high enough to cover administration. Mutualism is based on a labor theory of value that holds that when labor or its product is sold, in exchange, it ought to receive goods or services embodying â€Å"the amount of labor necessary to produce an article of exactly similar and equal utility†. Receiving anything less would be considered exploitation, theft of labor, or usury. Collectivist anarchism (also known as anarcho-collectivism) is a revolutionary doctrine that advocates the abolition of the state and private ownership of the means of production. Instead, it envisions the means of production being owned collectively and controlled and managed by the producers themselves. Once collectivization takes place, workers’ salaries would be determined in democratic organizations based on the amount of time they contributed to production. These salaries would be used to purchase goods in a communal market. Collectivist anarchism is most commonly associated with Mikhail Bakunin, the anti-authoritarian sections of the First International, and the early Spanish anarchist movement. The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin, influential work which presents the economic vision ofanarcho-communism Anarchist communism is a theory of anarchism which advocates the abolition of the state, private property, and capitalism in favor of common ownership of the means of production, direct democracy and a horizontal network of voluntary associations and workers’ councils with production and consumption based on the guiding principle: â€Å"from each according to ability, to each according to need†. Unlike mutualism, collectivist anarchism and marxism, anarcho-communism as defended by Peter Kropotkin and Errico Malatesta rejected the labor theory of value altogether, instead advocating a gift economy and to base distribution on need. Anarchist communism as a coherent, modern economic-political philosophy was first formulated in the Italian section of the First International by Carlo Cafiero, Emilio Covelli, Errico Malatesta, Andrea Costa and other ex-Mazzinian Republicans. Out of respect for Mikhail Bakunin, they did not make their differences with collectivist anarchism explicit until after Bakunin’s death. By the early 1880s, most of the European anarchist movement had adopted an anarchist communist position, advocating the abolition of wage labour and distribution according to need. Ironically, the â€Å"collectivist† label then became more commonly associated with Marxist state socialists who advocated the retention of some sort of wage system during the transition to full communism. After Marx Marx’s work sharpened the existing differences between the revolutionary and non-revolutionary socialists. Non-revolutionary socialists took inspiration from the work of John Stuart Mill, and later Keynes and the Keynesians, who provided theoretical justification for (potentially very extensive) state involvement in an existing market economy. According to the Keynesians, if the business cycle could be solved by national ownership of key industries and state direction of their investment, class antagonism would be effectively tamed a compact would be formed between labour and the capitalists. There would be no need for revolution; instead Keynes looked to the eventual â€Å"euthanasia of the rentier† sometime in the far future. Joan Robinson and Michael Kalecki employed Keynesian insights to form the basis of a critical post-Keynesian economics that at times went well beyond liberal reformism. Many original socialist economic ideas would also emerge out of the trade union movement In the wake of Marx, â€Å"Marxist† economists developed many different, sometimes contradictory tendencies. Some of these tendencies were based on internal disputes about the meaning of some of Marx’s ideas, including the ‘Law of Value’ and his crisis theory. Other variations were elaborations that subsequent theorists made in light of real world developments. For example the monopoly capitalist school saw Paul A. Baran and Paul Sweezy attempt to modify Marx’s theory of capitalist development, which was based upon the assumption of price competition, to reflect the evolution to a stage where both economy and state were subject to the dominating influence of giant corporations. World-systems analysis, would restate Marx’s ideas about the worldwide division of labour and the drive to accumulate from the holistic perspective of capitalism’s historical development as a global system. Accordingly, Immanuel Wallerstein, writing in 1979, maintained that â€Å"There are today no socialist systems in the world-economy any more than there are feudal systems because there is only one world-system. It is a world-economy and it is by definition capitalist in form. Socialism involves the creation of a new kind of world-system, neither a redistributive world-empire nor a capitalist world-economy but a socialist world-government. I don’t see this projection as being in the least utopian but I also don’t feel its institution is imminent. It will be the outcome of a long social struggle in forms that may be familiar and perhaps in very few forms, that will take place in all the areas of the world-economy.† Meanwhile other notable strands of reformist and revolutionary socialist economics sprung up that were either only loosely associated with Marxism or wholly independent. Thorsten Veblen is widely credited as the founder of critical institutionalism. His idiosyncratic theorizing included acidic critiques of the inefficiency of capitalism, monopolies, advertising, and the utility of conspicuous consumption. Some institutionalists have addressed the incentive problems experienced by the Soviet Union. Critical institutionalists have worked on the specification of incentive-compatible institutions, usually based on forms of participatory democracy, as a resolution superior to allocation by an autonomous market mechanism. Another key socialist, closely related to Marx, Keynes, and Gramsci, was Piero Sraffa. He mined classical political economy, particularly Ricardo, in an attempt to erect a value theory that was at the same time an explanation of the normal distribution of prices in an economy, as well that of income and economic growth. A key finding was that the net product or surplus in the sphere of production was determined by the balance of bargaining power between workers and capitalists, which was in turn subject to the influence of non-economic, presumably social and political factors.

Earth Day Essay

Earth Day Essay Earth Day Essay As people living on a planet to ourselves, working, producing products, expanding as a society whether it be new houses, buildings, jobs, food places and etc. When we first had all of these new things we didn’t think about the affects they would have on our earth. Considering this, who would have thought that those big buildings that constantly had smoke pouring out of them that also made the fancy cars, new dishwashers, T.V.’s, and microwaves could also be bad for us? It was said that the air was so dirty sometimes that tourists couldn’t see the city below from the Empire State building observation deck. It was then brought to Richard Nixon’s attention something had to be done. He then created the Environmental Protection Agency that would enforce laws that would protect public health and the environments as well. This set of laws then lead to the Clean Air act, a law that was designed to reduce air pollution. At the time cars would use lead gasoline, whi ch contained lead that could be a brain stunt in development. As I said before not everyone was thinking about the effects these new products would bring. As always though, someone was. Being the year 2014 and seeing how far we have come, could you imagine being the person who started Earth Day. The founder Gaylord Nelson, first had the idea after the 1969 massive oil spill in Santa Barbra. They figured if they could get enough of the public’s attention something could be done. And that is exactly what happened. On April 22nd 1970, 20 million people participated in the first ever Earth Day. The movement received what was seemed to be rare and unique support from people of every different background. Rich, poor, farmers, city slickers, labor leaders, even democratic and republicans. The first Earth Day was such a success that when the year 1990 came around environmental leaders were asking for another. The next Earth Day went global. This time they were 200 million people fro m 141 countries. The earth day of 1990 the main focus was have the importance of recycling made known to anyone and everyone. Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. Now to this day we are still fighting for a cleaner earth. The average person generates about 4.5 pounds of trash every day, which makes about 1.5 tons of solid waste per year. It is also estimated that 75% of solid waste is recyclable while only about 30% is recycled. Although that doesn’t seem like a lot there is still effort for a greener earth. With new recycled products such as paper and water bottles. The idea of using recycled products to make more of the same product is a sustainable and smart way to produce a product and although not every company knows that there are still many improvements from what was. Earth day 2014 consisted of over a billion people in 190 countries. This year their main

Poetry Rhythm And Metre †Part 2

Poetry Rhythm And Metre – Part 2 Poetry Rhythm And Metre – Part 2 Poetry Rhythm And Metre – Part 2 By Simon Kewin Our previous post looked at the basics of poetry rhythm and metre (or, in the US, meter). This post goes into further detail on the common rhythms employed by poets, and it covers some of the terminology used to describe and discuss them. Not all poetry pays close attention to metre, but a great deal does and a poet should always be aware of what the various terms mean. As we saw in the previous post, rhythm in spoken English is a product of patterns of stressed and unstressed syllables. So, for example, the word poem is a stressed syllable followed by an unstressed syllable. You could write it PO-em to highlight this. Poets refer to this particular pattern as a trochee (a word originating from the Greek, as with much poetic terminology). It’s an example of what is called a â€Å"metrical foot†, which is just another way of describing a pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables. Other examples of trochees would be â€Å"Monday†, â€Å"fire†, â€Å"water† and â€Å"speaker†. Of course, it’s always possible to pronounce these words so that they aren’t trochees (they aren’t â€Å"trochaic†) – you might, for example, say Mon-DAY rather than MON-day in an exclamation. If you did say â€Å"Monday† with the emphasis on the second syllable, then you would be using an iamb rather than a trochee. An iamb is an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed syllable. Other examples of iambs are â€Å"around†, â€Å"infect†, â€Å"decide† and â€Å"trapeze†. Between them, trochees and iambs make up a great deal of English poetry. There are two other metrical feet consisting of two syllables : the spondee (stressed-stressed, such as â€Å"heartbreak†) and the pyrrhic (unstressed-unstressed, such as â€Å"and the†). It’s rare for a poem to contain a lot of spondees or pyrrhics – they are generally used sparingly to break up a regular pattern of iambs etc. It’s also worth knowing about some three syllable feet : the anapest (unstressed-unstressed-stressed e.g. â€Å"to the moon†), the dactyl (stressed-unstressed-unstressed, e.g. â€Å"poetry†) and the amphibrach (unstressed-stressed-unstressed, e.g. â€Å"undying†). All of these terms are often used in combination with a word indicating how many of them there are in each line of a poem. This gives us a complete description of a poem’s metre. So, for example, if each line consists of five iambs, such as those from Gray’s Elegy Written in a Country Church-Yard reproduced in the first post, we would describe this as â€Å"iambic pentameter†. The word pentameter means, simply, that there are five metrical feet to the line. Other numbers of feet have similar terms: trimeter for three, tetrameter for four, hexameter for six and so forth. So, if your poem generally has four trochees to the line, you would say its metre is trochaic tetrameter. If you write poetry, metre is an additional dimension to your work you should be thinking about. Sometimes, as you write a particular poem, it will naturally start to fall into a particular rhythm scheme. Sometimes it is a conscious decision. Its always up to you whether you want to stay with a chosen metre and how strictly you want to adhere to it. Different metres will have different effects on the sound of your poem. It pays to experiment. For example, does your poem demand a fast-moving rhythm or something more sombre? Do you want to stick to a predictable, confident metre or write something less clear-cut, more full of uncertainties and pauses? The answer will always depend on the individual poem. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Fiction Writing category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:60 Synonyms for â€Å"Walk†Is There a Reason â€Å"the Reason Why† Is Considered Wrong?May Have vs. Might Have