The Theory Of Collective Security In The Un International Law Essay

The Theory Of Collective Security In The Un International Law Essay After it had been established in 1945, when World War II came to an end, the United Nation (UN) adopted the notion of collective security as a security arrangement. This arrangement was to ensure that all of the states under the shadow of the United Nations Organization would cooperate collectively to provide security for one another. However, to a great extent, the structure and practice of the UN sometimes sways from the theory of collective security. In this regard, this essay will first provide a definition of collective security. Subsequently, a thorough analysis will be given of the extent that the UN has been adopting the theory of collective security. According to Graham Evans and Jeffrey Newnham, The Dictionary of World Politics (Hemel Hempstead, 1990), the theory of collective security is a theory in international relations. According to them nations achieve security from attack by collective military agreements of all nations with each other to join forces against any aggressor. They believe that it is an alternative to balance of power  [1]  . What is meant by balance of power here is that parity of power between nations is contributing to peace, since it hold backs any one nation from being involved in war with another. As a result, weak nations may be supporting common stability by arming, but the strong nations possibly destabilize balance by going on arming. Furthermore, in its research titled Conflict Research Consortium, the University of Colorado, USA defines collective security as a type of coalition building strategy where each country agrees not to attack other countries and to defend them against any other poss ible attacks. The principal line of reasoning is that an attack against one, is an attack against all.  [2]  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  . Collective security theory is different from collective defense which means a coalition of nations which have contracts to protect its own group from outside attacks.   Examples of collective defense are NATO and the Warsaw Pact. On the other hand the UN is an attempt at collective security.   Advocators of collective security believe that it is more effective way to security than individual countries trying to act alone, as weaker countries cannot possibly defend themselves  [3]  . Although collective security arrangements are designed to aid international cooperation, security is not provided by the United Nations Organization for all its members. When United Nations laws are breached, powerful countries are not always judged the same way as weaker countries. On the other hand, some other scholars and diplomats believe that the security concept is misguided. In other words, it is bewildered because it is sometimes misused and even confused with other concepts such as mutual security agreements among the members of alliance such as NATO countries. Thus, practices are not subjected to the United Nations regulations. Not only this, sometimes cooperative security is applied by invading other countries, occupying lands, destroying economy and property and killing people. Thus, it becomes military alliance which leads to military confrontations and accordingly endangers peace and transfers the meaning of collective security to be an aggressive coalition. The role of the UN is activated by the Security Council which responds to the requirements of the members of the United Nations in voting and making decisions. The United Nations Security Council consists of 15 members: five permanent ones and ten temporary ones with two-years terms. The permanent countries are the USA, the UK, France, Russia and China. In theory, the task of these countries includes applying the theory of collective security when there are emerging issues. For example, under Chapter Six of the UN Charter, Pacific Settlement of Disputes  [4]  , the Security Council is entitled to investigate disputes and all other situations which may lead to such disputes. Thus, the Security Council may vote for appropriate procedures in order to keep peace and settlement using all possible ways such as collective security procedures. These decisions can only be made by the consent of at least 9 out of the 15 members of the Security Council members and none of the five permanent members should object or vote against such decisions. Furthermore, it is supposed that the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) as a principal organ of the UN should be charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. Thus, it should use its powers, according to the United Nations Charter, to establish peacekeeping operations and might be obliged to also establish international sanctions in addition to the authorization of military action. However, such powers should only be exercised through United Nations Security Council Resolutions. For example, under Chapter Seven, the Council has enough authorities to decide what procedures should be taken in case there are some situations where there are threats to peace, breaching peace or some acts of aggression against peace, people or countries. In this case, the Security Council has the power to use armed force in order to keep or restore peace and collective security. Examples of these measures were when there was an armed action by the UN in Korea in 1959 during the Kore an War and the use of coalition forces in Iraq and Kuwait in the year 1991 when Kuwait was liberated from Iraqi Forces. Moreover, the UNs role in international collective security is illustrated by the UN Charter. According to this charter, the Security Council is given the power to consider any situation which threatens international peace. The Security Council can also advise some procedures for peaceful resolution of any dispute. In addition, the Security Council can ask other member nations to totally or partially break off economic relations, sea, air, postal, and radio communications, and even diplomatic relations with any country against whom a decision is taken by the Security Council. Additionally, The Security Council can also use military force if it is deemed as necessary. However, it is sometimes possible to manage and avoid conflicts, by keeping the focus on cooperation  [5]  . Despite what has been mentioned above in regard to the adaptation of the Security Council resolutions and the theory of collective security, member states of the UN and also members of the Security Council have from time to time breached laws and regulations, hence undermining the theory of collective security. Although the United States of America is the sponsor and host of the United Nations Organization, it is the first deviator from its laws including the breach of collective security. According to the UN charter Article 24, in discharging these duties the Security Council shall act in accordance with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations. The specific powers granted to the Security Council for the discharge of these duties are laid down in Chapters VI, VII, VIII, and XII  [6]  . Yet, despite the absence of UN approval, U.S. military forces began invading Iraq from the Kuwaiti borders on the 20th of March, 2003. There was no unified support by the UN to attack Iraq and the Security Council was divided on the decision; however, undermining the theory of collective security, the USA alongside with the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland invaded Iraq and brought down the regime of Saddam Hussein in 21 days of major combat operations. With hindsight it became evident that t he justifications used for the war were invalid and were only used to try and legalize the war. The Bush administration, backed by the support of Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister announced the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Bush administrations general justification for the invasion of Iraq was presented by the US Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations Security Council on the 5th of February, 2003, when he said We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction; hes determined to make more. Given Saddam Husseins history of aggression given what we know of his terrorist associations and given his determination to exact revenge on those who oppose him, should we take the risk that he will not some day use these weapons at a time and the place and in the manner of his choosing at a time when the world is in a much weaker position to respond? The United States will not and cannot run that risk to the American peop le. Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option, not in a post-September 11 world  [7]  . According to Blair, the cause was Iraqs failure to take a final opportunity to disarm itself of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that USA and UK asked its government and president to do immediately in order to keep peace and not threaten world peace  [8]  . Two major forces in the world misused power and the notion of collective security and as a result the country was disastrously shattered, resources exploited with a high price of large losses of civilian lives. It became evident that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction There are many other examples of breaching the collective security theory applications and objectives by wrong policies and practices of the United Nations members. For example, the USA invaded Panama in December 1989. Some justifications were given for such invasion like safeguarding the lives of the U.S. citizens in Panama, defending democracy and human rights in Panama, combating drug trafficking and protecting the integrity of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties  [9]  . However with hindsight it became clear that the justifications were not enough to support the invasion and it was a clear breaching of collective security theory. Other examples of the limitations of collective security also comprises the Falklands War, when Argentina invaded the islands although they were considered British. However, there were many UN members who stayed out of the issue, as such an issue did not directly concern them  [10]  . The role of the UN and collective security in general is also evolving given the rise of internal state conflicts since the end of WWII; there have been 111 military conflicts world wide, but only 9 of which have involved two or more states going to war with one another. The remainder has either been internal civil wars or civil wars where other nations intervened in some manner. This means that collective security may have to evolve towards providing a means to ensure stability and a fair international resolution to internal conflicts. Whether this will involve more powerful peacekeeping forces or a larger role for the UN diplomatically, it will likely be judged from a case to case basis. Since the establishment of the UN in 1945, the Middle East has seen the negative consequences of breaching the agreements and arrangements set by the UN. Supported by the USA and some other Western Regimes, Israel has been breaching such laws. Since the voting of the existence of Israel in 1948 by some members of the United Nations, Israel has been continuously undermining recommendations and resolutions of the UN. For example, in 1967 it occupied territories from Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, killing civilians, creating unrest and destroying properties. In this regard, the worst misuse of the UN Security Council Rights has been utilized by USA. When it comes to condemning the illegal actions of Israel, the U.S. uses the right of veto against any resolution which may condemn Israeli actions. Moreover, one of the latest collective security resolutions made by the UN Security Council adopted a sanctions resolution on Iran although there were two votes against and there was one abstention. According to the voters the ban was on Iranian certain nuclear and missile investment abroad  [11]  . To sum up, the theory of collective security implies a security arrangement among which all members of the United Nations share to provide security shadowed by the UN resolutions to keep world peace using all possible approved ways including sanctions and force. Four basic principles of collective security should be adopted by the UN members. First one is that every state should have all relevant arrangements for which it should be committed. Second, when it comes to collective security, the power of using the veto to block any relevant decision should be very limited. Third, sanctions should not harm the people of the country on which they applied and should not harm other countries which apply them especially economically. Fourth, collective security should safeguard the world peace and the security of every country. However, deviations from such principle have been made by many members of the United Nations, mainly the USA. When it comes to condemn the illegitimate actions of one of its allies because such actions threaten the world peace and justice, the USA uses the veto to block any sanction or penalty. Finally, economic sanctions which are supposed to serve collective security often negatively affect the lives of the people of the cou ntry on which such sanctions are applied and not the governments which have enough to fulfill their needs. Collective security is abused by some representatives of nations which call for peace, justice, prosperity and happiness. Although it looks very ideal and great in essence, it is evident that member states of the UN have departed from the theory of collective security to a great extent, especially when their national interests are at stake; thus undermining not only the theory of collective security but also the UN organization itself.

Honesty VersusTruthfulness :: Definition Essay

Honesty Versus Truthfulness Honesty and simply being truthful seem, on the surface, to be one and the same concept. However, though they are closely related in definition and are in fact listed as synonyms, there are fundamental differences between the two. Truthfulness is defined as "consistently telling the truth, honest" in The American Heritage Dictionary, which also defines honesty as "the capacity or condition of being honest; integrity; trustworthiness." Honest means "not lying, cheating or taking unfair advantage." So what does that mean? The definitions are nearly identical, so one must turn to the connotations. Truthfulness is the more basic of the two, it implies, as the definition says, speaking the truth predictably. If one is truthful, one tells the truth when asked a question. One does not spread lies, and one faces reality as it is. However, it is possible to be truthful and still not be trustworthy. If someone tells everything he knows when asked the smallest question, would you want to trust that person with an important secret? Likewise, someone can be truthful and still not be lawful, or entirely in the "right." For instance, someone could be involved in something illegal, and, when asked about it, could tell the truth up to a point. The person in question would be consistently telling the truth, but it would not be the whole truth. Honesty is a somewhat more complex idea that covers a broader range of requirements. Honesty is truthful, reliable, trustworthy, and open. It encompasses the virtues of truthfulness without the gaps. Being honest implies that you are willing to tell the truth at cost of personal risk. It implies being open and truthful no matter the conditions one faces. Real honesty means telling the truth out of respect for others and for oneself. Someone who is honest does not necessarily have to be asked in order to tell the truth; it is their standard of conduct and communication. Of the two qualities, honesty is the more admirable because it is harder to both attain and maintain.

Population Control in China Essay -- Essayas Papers

Population Control in China â€Å"Vigilantes abduct pregnant women on the streets and haul them off, sometimes handcuffed or trussed, to abortion clinics. [Some] aborted babies cry when they are born (Steven Mosher).† This quotation shows one method how China tries to carry through its population control in a manner which is very cruel and against human rights. We, Western people, do not understand why China needs a population control and why this control has to be carried out so harshly. But why had China to control its population? From 1949 on, Mao Zedong feared war with the United States or the Soviet Union. â€Å"China’s millions [of people] were the country’s primary weapon against technologically superior enemies.† The Chinese population grew explosively, with a growth rate of more than 2% per year until 1970. Deng Xiaoping saw the problem in the population explosion and invented the one-child family in 1979. 1981 the one-child policy was introduced nationwide. This policy was effective in the cities, but in the rural areas the goal of minimizing population growth was unsuccessful. But why did the one-child policy work in cities and not in rural areas? The problem in China is the desire for having a male descendant. Every Chinese family wants to have one boy to continue their family name. In rural families the desire for sons is even higher because boys have more workforce than girls, and rural families needed the workforce for maintaining their farms. Because of the urge to have a son, many baby girls were killed or given to orphanages after they were born. In the mid 80s infanticide of girls was so high that the government loosened its one-child policy a little bit for rural families. According to the new policy, rural famili... ...ingly to the Chinese Prime Minister Zhu Rongji (1999), â€Å"China will continue to enforce its effective family planning policy in the new century in order to create a favorable environment for further development.† The one-child policy will probably be carried out until 2050. Bibliography: Xiaokang, Su; Xue, Yuan. â€Å"The humanitarian and technical dilemmas of population control in China.† Journal of International Affairs, Winter 96 http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/pages/easc/curriculum/china/1995/geography/lessoon6/rl.htm http://www.pop.org/china http://www.geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa092799.htm?once=true& http://www.hhs.se/EIJS/anomaly/COneKid.htm Graham, Hutchings. Modern China; A Guide to a Century of Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,2001 Robert E., Gamer. Understanding Contemporary China. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner, 1999 Population Control in China Essay -- Essayas Papers Population Control in China â€Å"Vigilantes abduct pregnant women on the streets and haul them off, sometimes handcuffed or trussed, to abortion clinics. [Some] aborted babies cry when they are born (Steven Mosher).† This quotation shows one method how China tries to carry through its population control in a manner which is very cruel and against human rights. We, Western people, do not understand why China needs a population control and why this control has to be carried out so harshly. But why had China to control its population? From 1949 on, Mao Zedong feared war with the United States or the Soviet Union. â€Å"China’s millions [of people] were the country’s primary weapon against technologically superior enemies.† The Chinese population grew explosively, with a growth rate of more than 2% per year until 1970. Deng Xiaoping saw the problem in the population explosion and invented the one-child family in 1979. 1981 the one-child policy was introduced nationwide. This policy was effective in the cities, but in the rural areas the goal of minimizing population growth was unsuccessful. But why did the one-child policy work in cities and not in rural areas? The problem in China is the desire for having a male descendant. Every Chinese family wants to have one boy to continue their family name. In rural families the desire for sons is even higher because boys have more workforce than girls, and rural families needed the workforce for maintaining their farms. Because of the urge to have a son, many baby girls were killed or given to orphanages after they were born. In the mid 80s infanticide of girls was so high that the government loosened its one-child policy a little bit for rural families. According to the new policy, rural famili... ...ingly to the Chinese Prime Minister Zhu Rongji (1999), â€Å"China will continue to enforce its effective family planning policy in the new century in order to create a favorable environment for further development.† The one-child policy will probably be carried out until 2050. Bibliography: Xiaokang, Su; Xue, Yuan. â€Å"The humanitarian and technical dilemmas of population control in China.† Journal of International Affairs, Winter 96 http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/pages/easc/curriculum/china/1995/geography/lessoon6/rl.htm http://www.pop.org/china http://www.geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa092799.htm?once=true& http://www.hhs.se/EIJS/anomaly/COneKid.htm Graham, Hutchings. Modern China; A Guide to a Century of Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,2001 Robert E., Gamer. Understanding Contemporary China. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner, 1999

Discrimination on Blacks Essay

Thesis Statement: Many Americans cherish their country as a place of opportunities, but African Americans have experienced horrible things and have not been given the chance white Americans have, as others in this country. African Americans were freed from slavery by the 13th amendment of the constitution and the 14th amendment and let them be free but that did not mean they were given the same opportunities as other white people. But still in the 1960’s they were discriminated against because of the color of their skin. This means they were not allowed to go to the same school, movie theaters, restrooms, public facilities. Before the Civil War blacks were not allowed to read and write. Their white owners felt that if they became educated they would not want to be slaves. After slaves were freed in America the government had to decide how to share resources with blacks, In regard to education it was decided that African Americans had the right to an education however it was decided separate but equal was fine. This meant that schools were designed so black and white people were served but in separate areas or different locations. The problem was blacks and whites were not given the same buildings or resources, African Americans got much less. White’s believed that blacks were incapable of learning at an advanced level. In the 1960’s, 15 percent of African Americans had no schooling, and 48 percent had never gone beyond the fifth grade. The reason behind this was because African Americans were treated so horrible. They were called niggers, black monkeys and filthy trash. African Americans also get threats how if they came across town where whites were they would be burned or killed. The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States between 1876 and 1965. The Jim Crow law was to segregate African Americans and whites for the reason that blacks would not be in contact with the whites. One of the civil rights activists was Rosa Parks who was a African American who faced horrible discrimination. December 1, 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat in a colored section for a white passenger because she felt that she should get equal rights. Another activist was Martin Luther King Jr. In 1963 on the Washington March Martin Luther King Jr. made a â€Å"I have a dream speech† where he talked about racial problems and discrimination.

Invisible Saviour Siblings Essay

The philosopher Immanuel Kant said â€Å"Treat others as an end and not as means to an end. † People need to value others for themselves rather than for what they can achieve by the means of them. The idea of selecting an embryo, conceived by IVF, which will become a child that can donate for an older sibling suffering from a genetic disease, has created a difficult moral dilemma. Concerns over the creation of what are called â€Å"savoir siblings† are specifically created to help an existing child. In the novel â€Å"My Sister’s Keeper† by Jodi Picoult there is a girl named Anna who was brought in to this world for the purpose to save her sister Kate. Anna suggests that while her method of coming into the world is not conventional, since most babies born are unwanted; she at least was a wanted child. But she is wanted as a product, as a medical treatment, as a donor. Anna came to a decision that she wanted to stop donating to her sister, so she starts a lawsuit for medical emancipation; the right to control her own body. The child is used as something instrumental and has a welcome that is far from being unconditional. Even the label â€Å"savoir† is a misnomer. When we speak of a savoir we refer to someone who has made an active choice to donate. The child never has a choice. When a donation occurs it will have lifelong effects on the body. The possible psychological problem the child will have from being a savior sibling. The parents do not think about the saviour child in the terms of an individual. The parents need to realize that there is a line that separates the value of preserving life and the costs of the quality of life. When a child is born it is up to the parents to make the decisions for them, but what if the parents are not focus on that child? It is their zeal to make things better for their sick child, but the parents have forgotten that their donor child is a person with feelings, not a something just to pick at when needed. In the case of babies who are selected as a source of cells, the â€Å"savior † is passive and is treated as a product. The choices being made about donation is not even being discussed about. Anna is not even being asked about what she wants to do, â€Å"You make it sound like there’s some process involved. Like there’s actually a choice. † (192) the parents are deciding what is for the best. They do not even consult with Anna about how she feels about everything. Anna had to quit hockey because she was missing two many games, but the only reason why she was missing games was that she had to be there when Kate might need something. Her choice to play hockey was taken away from her and no one in her family even cared. They did not even notice when she started to play hockey, so why would they notice when she stopped. There is a big chance that the family would not even listen to Anna if she would have said that she does not want to continue being the donor. The doctors do not ever consult with Anna about what she wanted to do; they only talked to the parents. They never let Anna make her choice. She was brought in this world as a savior sibling, but it did not mean to make her sacrifice her whole life. The use of savior siblings have raised the issue of the possibility of psychological trauma that the created sibling may suffer from knowing that they was created partly for reasons of imposed selflessness. The child could feel as if they had been used. The donor sibling would feel that they were around to provide â€Å"spare parts†, and were not valued for who they are. Remember the adolescent cry â€Å"I did not ask to be born† and add to it the accusation that the parents only had them to save their siblings life. The moment the child is brought in to this world they have a job to perform. How the parents treat Anna makes her feel like her only purpose in life is to help heal Kate. With these feelings it makes her think about what if Kate was not sick, â€Å"It made me wonder, though, what would have happened if Kate had been healthy. Chances are, I’d still be floating up in Heaven or wherever, waiting to be attached to a body to spend some time on Earth† (08). If Kate was healthy would the parents ever thought about having a third child. The parents once said that their family was complete with two children; each child favored a parent. Anna has matured faster than any child her age, because from the start of her life she was not fully allowed to be a child. She learnt early on that Kate was the main focus and everything else became second. Growing up is hard enough, but when there is question on ones existence it can have serious emotional effects. The child becomes lost in their quest for their own identity. Furthermore, if the treatment of the sick child is unsuccessful, their death can be much harder for the savior sibling, as they may feel as if they have failed. The child would have to go through the rest of their life feeling guiltily about not saving their sibling life. Donating an organ is not as simple as it sounds. The donor of the organ has to deal with limitations on their life. In the novel Anna is being pressured by her mother to donate her kidney to her sister Kate. Her mother does not think about the after effects of the surgery. Anna loves to play hockey, but donating her kidney will stop here from playing. Kidney organ donors should not participate in physical activity that could damage their other kidney. Anna’s mother Sara only concern is Kate, so when Anna wanted to go to Hockey camp her mother said no. Her mother is not caring for what Anna wants â€Å"Not because I am afraid of what might to Anna there, but because I am afraid of what might happen to Kate while her sister is gone. If Kate survives this latest relapse†¦.. we will need Anna-her blood, her stem cells, her tissue-right here. (269), she wanted Anna to be where she needed her. If Anna did go through with the surgery something could go wrong, but does her parents ever does comprehend it. If there were no complications with any of these procedures, the savior sibling would still stay in the hospital with stress and pain which they are not gaining any type of personal benefit. The mother will be so worried about Kate after the surgery; she will be by her side and not by Anna’s. The parents should not make an organ donation decision. It has to be Anna’s choice. Going through with a kidney donation, she would lose some quality of her life. While there is potential harm, it is not without potential benefits to the saviour sibling. The donor child might derive pleasure from knowing that he or she has saved his or her sibling’s life and would benefit from the saved child’s company. In this respect, it is appropriate to consider the welfare of the donor child within the context of the family since his or her social, emotional and psychological interests depend on the welfare of the child’s family. Saving the life of the existing sibling is also in his or her best interests. This will ensure a happier family (e. g. no grieving parents) from which the donor child would benefit. There are benefits to the child, but if the child is born and the transplant is made but is unsuccessful, what comes of the family at that point? The donor child would feel that they have fail in their job in helping to keep their sibling alive. If the transplant was successful, there is no time frame for a savior sibling to stop providing transplants for their older sibling. The donor sibling could chose not to donate later in life or chose to no longer accept the role of â€Å"saviour† for which they were originally conceived. The parents might not like that they brought this child in to this world for a certain purpose, but now the child does not want to donate anymore. The savior child would have no support from their family. They would feel that they had only one purpose; to save their sibling. Parents have more choices than ever before and they need to use every resource available to protect the health of their children, but there is a line that should not be crossed. There are potential harmful psychological effects on a child born not for itself, but to save another. If conception of saviour siblings for the donation of cord blood stem cells is permitted, what is to stop donation ending there. There may be an inevitable situation where the donor child will be expected to â€Å"donate† bone marrow in the event that the umbilical cord stem cell transplant fails or the sick sibling relapses and requires further treatment. If the child is under age, then the parents decide the choice for them and of course they would have the savior child donate whatever the sick child needs. Parents are blinded from seeing what is in the best interest for both of their children. The only thing that is on their mind is to save their sick child. If there is no benefit at all to the created saviour child, it appears hard to justify that it is humane and proper to use them to save the life of a sibling. Every parent has to seriously decide the point at which they will halt their efforts to save their sick child regardless of the potential outcome. There comes a point when people have to realize there is nothing they can do. The parents get so consumed in the entire process and the emotions involved in saving your sick child that they may lose the ability to know when to stop. Despite how gut-wrenching it may be, they have to stop, not only for the sake of their other children, but for the sake of their sick child. They should have to realize that there comes a point when vigilance becomes obsession and good intentions get warped and bastardized to the point that they do more harm than good. People should to write to President to have him put regulations on the use of Genetic technology for creation of savoir siblings. A savior sibling cannot lose their quality of life just because they were conceived with the weight of the family on their shoulders. The child should not go through life suffering, for the reason that she was conceived to help heal their sick sibling.

Analysis of Social Class

Paper #2 Analysis of Stratification Social Class Introduction This paper will describe this student’s informed opinion regarding the class structure in the United States in terms of social class. Prior to researching for this paper this student did not think much about social class. However after knowing what she now knows it seems impossible to not realize the stratification in society. This paper will discuss key terms, additional readings, new knowledge regarding social class, and a critique of class structure. Class structureSociety is divided into seven sections: The super rich, wealthy, upper middle class, lower middle class, working class, the working poor, and the underclass. The super rich includes the persons who have benefits such as: A social register, alumni set asides at Ivy League schools, interlocking corporate boards of directors, and whose incomes are over $250,000. The wealthy class includes those with incomes over $200,000, children in private schools, and servants. The upper middle class includes approximately 23% of the households in the United States.The incomes in this class of society range from $75,000 to $199,000. They are highly educated and professional, and active in local politics. The lower middle class is the most diverse class and is typically comprised of teachers, nurses, firefighters, police officers, and office workers. Their annual incomes range from $50,000 to $74,999. Their children can only attend college with work-study or student loans. The working class or â€Å"blue collar class† of society have jobs, not careers, as factory workers or clerical workers, or in hospitality and tourism.The working class comprises 27% of the class structure. The children of the working class attend a community college for two years but are not likely to graduate. The working poor’s annual income does not exceed $25,000, they have unstable work without benefits, and include the highest percentage of people of color. The last class of society as outlined by Dr. Armstead, is the underclass. This class is growing rapidly. It includes about 15. 6 million unskilled workers and unemployed young mothers.There are other economic stratification systems which include: Closed systems, open systems, Marxian model, and Weberian model. People born into a closed system are assigned their class position at birth and will never have an opportunity to better their situation. An example of this is India’s cast system. Those individuals living in an open system have an opportunity to move from one social class to another. No system is completely open or closed. The Marxian model divides society into four classes: capitalist class, managerial class, small business class, and the working class.The Weberian model divides society into six sections: upper class, upper middle class, middle class, working class, working poor, and underclass. Additional Readings There are different social and economic lifestyles am ong the social classes. For example, Dr. William Domhoff believes the elite class of society sticks together by relaxing and socializing with each other at exclusive places such as The Bohemian Grove in California. Journalist Barbara Ehrenreich went undercover as an unskilled worker posing as a cleaning lady, waitress, nursing home aid, hotel maid, and Wal-Mart sales clerk.Through her journey, readers were able to see what â€Å"prosperity† looks like through the eyes of the lowest level workers. The root causes of inequality are still not entirely understood as D. Weinberg explains in â€Å"A Brief Look at Postwar U. S Income Inequality. † One of the factors that influence inequality is the wage distribution has become considerably more unequal with more highly skilled, trained, and educated at the top experiencing real wage gains and those at the bottom experiencing real wage losses (P60-191 3).Also divorces, births out of wedlock, and the increasing age at first mar riage have led to a shift away from married couple households and toward single parent household, which typically have lower incomes. What Was Learned Just like H. Gans in his â€Å"The Uses Of Poverty†, this student too thought it would be impossible to find the positive functions of poverty. Without the poor, who would do the â€Å"dirty work†? Such as field working or truck farming. Gans explains an interesting function of poverty which is that the poor help keep the rich busy. Society uses the poor as beneficiaries of charity affairs.One more example outlined by Gans is, since the poor are powerless they absorb the costs of change and growth in American society. They are pushed out of their neighborhood to make room for progress which includes express ways, hospitals, and universities. The poor are important in their own ways. The poor pick the tomatoes that the rich eat. Even though the rich may eat organic tomatoes, both chew and swallow tomatoes in the same way. This student acknowledges that there are indeed distinct social classes; however each class has its own distinct and important role in society.Critique of Class Structure Like a cast system, J. Rawls explains that most Americans raised at the top or bottom are likely to stay there as adults. The graph in the power point lessons shows a small deviation however the majority of society tends to stay in the class which they were born into. Of course social class in the United States does not compare to India’s cast system because in the United States, there is much much more opportunity to better your situation. Another eye opening aspect of this project was B. Ehrenreich’s book.It was interesting to see how the low paid jobs which are considered â€Å"unskilled† actually require a lot of skill. Even the lowest paid job, requires exhausting mental and muscular effort. As D. Weinberg said, what if food stamps and welfare checks were added into the definition of inco me? If the definition of income was broadened, would any of the class percentages change? The way our society is divided there are some negative aspects such as: Poor neighborhoods have run down schools unlike upper class neighborhoods, whose schools have well maintained lawns and graffiti free walls.Also these underclass neighborhoods are high in crime. Until only recently have poorer neighborhoods in Miami held farmers markets and book fairs. In this student’s ideal society, most of society would be middle class, leaving political agendas and the running of huge corporations up to the super rich. This student feels badly about assigning some people to the underclass of this â€Å"ideal† society, but she understands now that the poor play an essential part of a healthy society.Between the facts provided in the various power point lessons and the additional reading assigned, one is able to formulate their own opinion about society in the United States and its different class divisions. This paper has described this student’s informed opinion regarding the class structure in the United States in terms of social class. The seven key terms, super rich, wealthy, upper middle class, lower middle class, working class, the working poor, and the underclass have been explained, and additional readings have been discussed.All of this along with new knowledge regarding social class has enabled this student to critique the class structure in the United States. It is important that when studying or speaking with others about societal class division, that the speaker and listener keep an open mind. One can hope for equality for all, but as Dr. Armstead explains, total equality for all is impossible; however fairness for all is achievable. Citations Hunt, Elgin and Colander, David. (2011). Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society. 14th Edition. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. www. trinity. edu/mkearl/strat. html www. census. gov

Administrative Theories in Public Administration Essay

I have never thought that administrative theories in Public Administration has been established back in 1800 with theorist who have discovered or developed and now has been part of the system of the Philippine government. The earliest contributors to our understanding of management theory included practicing managers as well as social scientist. More recent theorist has tended to be academic or management consultants. The early theorist can be divided into 2 main groups – the practicing managers such, as Taylors and Fayol and the social scientists, such as Mayo and Mc Gregor. Meet the Mr. Taylor, the theorist of Scientific Management. Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915), one of the early practical manager-theorist, born in Boston, Massachusetts, spent the greater part of his life working on the problems of achieving greater efficiency on the shop-floor where he manages. The solution he came up with was based directly on his own experience at work, initially as a shop floor worker and later as a manager. He pioneers scientific management which includes: The systematic study of the relationships between and tasks to redesign the work for higher efficiency. Taylor sought to reduce the time a worker spent on each task by optimizing the way the task was done. Scientific Management Theory Organizations were seeking ways to better satisfy customer needs Machinery was changing the way goods were produced Managers had to increase the efficiency of the worker-task mix According to him, there are 4 Principles to increase efficiency that are: a. Study the way the job is performed now and determine new ways to do it. Gather detailed, time and motion information; try different methods to see which is best b. Codify the method into rules – Teach to all workers c. Select workers whose skills match the rules set in step2 d. Establish a fair level of performance and pay for higher performance – Workers should benefit from higher output But, Taylor recognizes that the measures he was proposing would appear to be more than just a new method – they would be revolutionary. He stated that the outset that â€Å"scientific management† would require a complete mental revolution on the part of management and workers. Henry Fayol (1841-1924) – father of modern management theory He divided industrial into 6 groups: technical, commercial, financial, security, accounting & managerial And formulated the 14 Principles of management which we are using it every day in our daily activities, allow me to enumerate them and somehow expand a little. Division of Labor – allows for job specialization, Authority and responsibility – Fayol noted firms can have too much specialization leading to poor quality and worker involvement. Unity of command – employees should have one boss. Line of authority – a clear chain from top to bottom of the firm. Centralization – the degree to which authority rests at the very top. Unity of direction – one plan of action to guide the organization. Equity – treat all employees fairly in justice and respect. Order – each employee is put where they have the most value. Initiative – encourages innovation. Discipline – obedient, applied, respectful employees needed. Remuneration of Personnel – The payment system contributes to the success. Stability of nature – long term employment is important. General interest over personal interest – the organization takes precedence over the individual. Esprit de corps – share enthusiasm or devotion to the organization. I have added here some of the theorist I researched which I consider to be worth sharing. Mary Parker – an influential leader in early managerial theory. a. Suggested workers help in analyzing their jobs for improvements b. The worker knows the best way to improve the job c. If workers have the knowledge of the task, then they should control the task. The Hawthorne Studies It appears that the workers enjoyed the attention they received as part of the study and were more productive. Contingency Theory – Assumes there is no one best way to manage The environment impact the organization and managers must be flexible to react to environmental changes The way the organization is designed, control systems selected, depend on the environment Conclusion As management theories evolved in centuries, the principles and ideas were never changed yet it has been a guiding value to those who are in public nor private service and to those who are employed and business people. It’s amazing how they have passed on to many generations of people who wanted to learn and use the theories. The theories have been explicit in explanations and user-friendly, though there are theorists who have presented different thoughts on the earlier theorist but if we examine deeply, it’s all the same, only presented in different design. Before I end, I would just like to emphasize the last part of the theories because it speaks about our relationship with the environment and how we will relate environmental, Technological environments change rapidly so must managers.