International Organization

By its very nature, the European Union (EU) is an amalgamation of different independent countries that came together initially for economic reasons. Later they realized they could cooperate on foreign policy and even militarily activities.  What this has resulted in is a very strong economic block, but other spheres of the Unions activities are yet to mature as the economic sphere has.

When the original 6 countries gathered with an aim to ensure that the frequent conflicts, which had resulted in World War II, did not reoccur, they did not envisage a day when they would be organizing most of their activities centrally.  With the current membership of 27 countries and the population of 495 million people, it is the economic component that has grown to be the strongest one over time (Europa, 2009).

On the other hand, its political outlook is still divisive.  Though there is the European parliament, each country still has its own local government, which decides its individual foreign policy and military issues. It is only recently that the Union has finally started to elect a political president and a minister of foreign affairs, which is an evidence that the political aspect of the union seems to be moving towards a unity.  This has been made possible by the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by all of the members (BBC, 2009).

The non-ratification of the treaty stalled the political integration of the union for a long time.  It now gives the block the clear directional guidelines towards increased efficiency, democracy, transparency and consistency with the rest of the world.  Militarily, though there is cooperation, before the political dynamics can be nailed properly, there will always be disagreements on the way forward.

It is true that the European Union is an economic giant. Its aim is to achieve stability in Europe, given the current economic meltdown. It is a political dwarf, but it will not remain it for long.  With the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, this is bound to change. It will remain a military worm until the political aspect is mastered.  Then and only then will it be able to finally tackle the military dimension.

Hegemony is the ability to make others agree with ones viewpoints or the way of doing things.  This ability to manipulate others in accordance with ones way is the result of having much control power that the others would like to have as well.  It could take the form of dogma, intellectual or financial influence (Hegemony, 2009).

In any society, in order for success or progress to be actualized, there needs to be a person, who acts as the driving force.  For a long time, one was either a communist (on the Russian side) or a capitalist (on the American).  With the collapse of the communist protagonist, capitalism has been the leading ideology in the world.  This has happened as a result of the economic and military power of America. On the other hand, the Chinese and other countries practicing a hybrid system of communism have been offering a differing opinion.
In the recent past, as a result of the increasing economic power, resulting from a rise in oil prices, many countries have broken from the lead by America and are offering divergent views.  China is an emerging leader taking over from Russia (Lipschutz, 2009).  Other examples of such countries are Venezuela, Libya and Iran.  While China has the strength of numbers (a population of 1.6 billion), Venezuela has rich oil resources, and Iran, in addition to oil resources, has never been on the US side.  The economic power makes it possible for dissenting voices to become increasingly vocal.

In their economic development many countries seem to be following the American way of solving problems and making changes to suit their unique circumstances.  Hegemons have had their positive impact in the civilization of the world.  Americas influence, though a bit watered down, remains the foundation, from which all others grow their systems.  The US will continue to dominate the world psyche for a long time to come and there will be an increasing number of other countries, who want to rise. And the chance to challenge America is not too high, unfortunately.

When one uses cooperation and negotiations at the expense of the threat of force and temptation of reward to achieve a desired result, they are said to wield soft power (Nye, 2009).  It is generally agreed that Nelson Mandela, President of Brazil Lula and President of the USA Obama are a good example of individuals, who have soft power and increasingly exercise it.

For the past eight years America has been engaged in one war or the other in the name of fighting terrorism.  At the beginning of it all, many people in and outside America were on board with the war against terror band wagon.  Especially after the attack on September 11, 2001, which destroyed the world trade center, the majority of people were easily convinced of the need to tackle the global terrorism once and for all.
Unfortunately, even with all the might of the western powers in Afghanistan, and the fact that increasingly, people are realizing even the Iraq war was waged on false pretence (ONeill, 2009), support for this war on terrorism is fast fading.  The disproportionate use of force and the increasingly number of civilian casualties are responsible for the waning support.

Another factor is the amount of information available for ordinary people.  With the access news reporters have and with an increasingly strong opinioned blog community, it is not possible for the west to have the public getting only their view.  The fact that people are prone to side with the underdog is making for serious negative opinion on the war.

It must be understood that it is not that the public is siding with the terrorists. Its just that they can not see the military applying carefully premeditated tactics.  The disproportionate use of military power is also responsible for the loss of support  America is increasingly seen as having responded with a hammer to a mosquito bite.

In the world we live in, some companies have operations involving more than one country, region or even continent.  Multinational Corporation is a simple term used to describe this kind of organizations.  Some of them are known to have operation budgets running to hundreds million dollars.

Any investment in a country achieves two things, first, it ensures the country can get taxes from investors and secondly, the citizens get employment in the organization.  In a world where corporations are looking to minimize their production costs, increasingly, big corporations are locating their manufacturing divisions near the source of raw material.

Multinational corporations are known to have the capability to impact life both positively and negatively in communities, in which they operate.  When looking to invest in areas where the infrastructure is poor, governments are known to negotiate concerning concessions with the corporations providing these (infrastructure) to the locals.  Increasingly, nations are raising considerably large sums of money for the rights to use raw materials, unique in certain states.  This money has been used to improve the lives of the citizens of the country.  Botswana and the Gulf States are a good example of high revenue from multinationals used wisely for the good of all (Diamonds, 2007).

Unfortunately, in some cases, multinationals are known to support repressive regimes in order to guarantee the continued exploitation of the resources of a country.  They are known to turn a blind eye as a clique of a few individuals, use the wealth intended for a nation to enrich themselves.  In some cases, they are known to even bribe leaders of a country in order to get concessions on minerals. In other countries, these multinational companies have been known to pollute the area they work in extensively, so that the environment becomes inhabitable for ages to come.

Even when the United Nations has intervened in order to guarantee a fair use of resources for the good of a nation, it can only rely on the goodwill of the leaders (Thibodeaux, 2006).

Multinationals, which in some instances have budgets enough to fund the entire expenditure of the nation they operate in, can intimidate the leaders of the state.  There is, however, assistance for those nations willing to ask for it.  They are good partners in development (MNCs) when their money is used for the good of the people.  They constitute, however, the worst problem to the nation, when they allow the money they bring into the country to be used against the very citizens of the country.

Bhagwatis Globalization

Globalization is a big and very messy issue for anyone to tackle. In his work, In Defense of Globalization, Jagdish Bhagwati attempts to articulate what globalization looks like and why the world should embrace it. However, even though he illuminates a number of interesting and useful nuggets of information, the argument that he lays out in his piece is obviously less convincing than it should be.

As a quick refresher, globalization is the term used to describe the ongoing process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become connected and integrated through a globe-spanning network of communication and execution, generally using trade and technology as the medium to span from national to international economies. This can happen through a number of ways trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, even the spread of technology. Bhagwati, in his ambitious work, attempts to address all of these factors trying to make the case that globalization is not the problem but the answer to the numerous societal ills that plague the world.

He begins hitting the ground running, as the reader can see with the first chapter being titled Anti-Globalization Why, and, in addition, it is naturally grouped in the first section designed around Coping with Anti-Globalization. However, what Bhagwati is doing here is actually attacking the detractors of globalization without even defining what the globalization platform is. Early on, he states that the then informed refutation of the fears and follies that animate the anti-globalizers, we cannot adequately defend the globalization that many of us seek to sustain, even deepen, and then continues without any clear arguments for the stance of anti-globalization, merely focusing on how it manifests instead.

Moreover, he suggests throughout the work that hes willing to listen and consider the reasoning behind the anti-globalization movement, but again provides no examples of how these conversations with them play out. The reader is left simply to take his word for it when he tells us that he talks with them at every opportunity he finds enthusiasm, even idealism, but never any ability to engage concretely on the issues they take a stand on. Bhagwati simply isnt very convincing on this point surely the anti-globalizers must be able to express some sort of rationale and motivation behind their actions even if it ultimately proves to be entirely irrational. He doesnt, at least initially, allow the reader to judge globalization versus anti-globalization for themselves, seeming to believe that his own approach is more deserving of the benefit of all the doubts about it. However, this approach of trivializing rather than directly countering the beliefs of the anti-globalization movement undermines any potential credibility to his argument.
Fortunately though, after the initial misgivings, Bhagwati recovers when he begins to discuss the policy implications, costs, and overall benefits of globalization. Unfortunately, though, he still falls back to stating information rather than arguing a point or explaining an issue. For example, a typical passage such as
However, I would argue that seizures of people and property are not the way to organize the protests, but that the methods of non-violent resistance advanced by Mahatma Gandhi and practiced so well by Martin Luther King Jr. are the better way.

Here again, Bhagwati relies far too much on fanciful phrases and offers too little supporting evidence as well as completely disregarding possible counter-arguments toward his view. While the aforementioned passage could certainly be considered a supportable position, he leaves it at that. He offers no further explanation as to why he believes what he just stated is the better way.

To clarify a constant criticism to how Bhagwati presents his work, he tends to use the phrase, as seen above, I would argue. Yet, usually after this phrase he goes on not to argue anything. In many cases, it would be better to preface his positions with I think or I believe. Throughout his work, it appears that Bhagwati doesnt have a clear understanding what it means to argue a point, or at least this is certainly not how its done. He says that the methods of Gandhi and MLK Jr. are favorable, yet both of these role models ended up getting themselves killed. It would be fair to say that at least a little justification should be needed as to why their methods are superior when asking people to follow their footsteps, regardless of how noble the cause is, yet none is offered.

What Bhagwati does do right, though, is detailing his lengthy understanding of the intricacies of globalization. He knows that it comes with some costs, and all throughout he believes intensely in real-world policy solutions to make the difficult transition to free-trade regimes less burdensome on those that would be hit hardest by it. What he doesnt do is focus on airy theory and call for the immediate abolition of all trade restrictions, instead keeping grounded and in-touch with the real-world consequences that exist. Also, while he illustrates that he is very much pro-free trade, he is far more hesitant about issues of free capital flows. He incorporates both of these beliefs into his defense of globalization.

Additionally, Bhagwati displays a lot of interest in the role of the NGOs, Non-Governmental Organizations. In particular, he constantly reminds the reader about the varying interests, goals, and general abilities of NGOs between developed countries and developing nations, highlighting the valuable relationship that NGOs create between the two.  In fact, many of these issues introduced are issues that are not widely looked into by much of the western world. He combines this information chapter after chapter with other main criticisms toward globalization in developing nations, including world poverty, child labor issues, environmental issues, womens rights, nations transitions to democracy, culture, and wagelabor standards.

Overall, his analyses do generally cover most of the concerns of globalization, of course suggesting that the benefits clearly outweigh the costs. However, in doing so, Bhagwati insists that these problems are not inherently due to globalization but rather the policies which arent implemented in conjunction with it. He states this point clearly in that domestic policies, which the poor countries could change, are the source of the problem. Essentially, what he is stating is that it is the individual, government, or nations fault for not utilizing globalization effectively when a problem arises. Sure, common sense might suggest that other, better polices should be instituted, or popular and NGO pressure could institute necessary safeguards in order to prevent the aftereffects of freeing-up trade from negatively impacting an economy, but the reality is that not all governments and nations are as open or sensitive to said common sense or outside pressure.

Bhagwati assumes that the proper polices and safeguards are obvious and easily enacted when such moves are not always available or widely agreed upon. Even today, professionals and scholars in the field argue about the proper approaches to achieving positive globalization. For example, the Soviet and Indian five-year plans had many supporters at one time, even among Western economists. There are also powerful special interests in the foremost capitalist countries that need to be taken into account, of which are incredibly costly and nigh impossible to get rid of entirely.

To Bhagwatis credit, most of the issues behind globalization are incredibly complex. Yet, complexity is not an excuse to neglect a major issue in globalization, the environment, and that is exactly what Bhagwati does. He barely hits at the fundamental problem that environmentalists have with free trade, i.e. its historical success. To explain, its a generally accepted fact in todays world that increases in economic activity, like the production and consumption of more goods, almost inevitably has an inverse relationship with the environment. This is easy to understand, the more factories, more cars, more waste products, etc., entails a massive hit to the environment. The developed world is experiencing this crisis right now. Bhagwati totally ignores this argument. He does point out that a protectionist or self-sufficient regime as practiced by the Soviet Union and India for a time might mitigate the environmental impact, but, again, environmental harm almost always comes with increased economic activity, and globalization would lead to increased economic activity.

In contrast, Bhagwati does explain why the labor consequences in developing nations, such as questions of child labor, women in the workplace, wages, unions, etc., must be seen through a multicultural lens, not just through Western eyes. He does quite a good job discussing the different incentives behind developed and developing workers as well as unions and companies have in labor protection. He considers current globalization treaties which use self-interest rather than actual fairness as the dominant factor, and, unfortunately, notes that powerful Western forces tend to have the edge in this area.

Bhagwati does take direct aim at the argument that the United States must impose labor and environmental standards on poor countries in regards to future trade agreements. He goes to point out evidence that establishes the fact that U.S. multinationals do not actually seek out less developed countries with low standards, but instead find most of their affiliates in other high-wage, high-standard countries. Bhagwati notes that when they do invest in poorer countries, the result is not the race to the bottom as imagined. What actually happens is that high-wage, high-standard countries do invariably bring standards that generally far exceed the current economy of the poor country, creating a race to the top situation. Bhagwati also warns that withholding U.S. trade and investment from poor countries will inevitably mean slower economic growth, fewer girls studying in school, and more people working low-wage, low-expertise jobs like those found in farms, factories, and brothels. With that in mind, Bhagwati is also willing to acknowledge that there are certain sectors where policies that arent exactly in the best interests for poorer nations have been forced on them under the guise of the ideal of free trade. For example, intellectual property protection could be viewed as negatively impacting poorer nations. Large-scale pharmaceutical multi-nationals continue to threaten and impose untenable conditions on poorer nations with little or no recourse. He notes that some concessions were made at the Doha Round negotiations, yet, the issue continues to manifest problems for free trade.

Essentially for Bhagwati, free trade shouldnt be considered an end-in-and-of-itself, but instead should be seen as an often powerful weapon in the policies we can deploy to fight poverty. He does cede that the aforementioned intellectual property protection issue is a shortcoming of the current free trade system as practiced now. He also cautions against the ever tempting too fast integration into the global financial system without proper protection against capital outflows, but this is not exactly a new problem or one unique to globalization policy-making. Ultimately though, he emphasizes that free trade is the way to go, contrasting the negatives with how it will improve the average wealth of citizens. Not only that, it opens the door for incredible gains, something that protectionist or self-sufficient economies just cant rival.

However, Bhagwatis analysis on capital controls and go-slow reforms for countries in transition appears flawed here. He does support the free movement of goods, yet he does not hold that same support for capital, citing that short-term capital flows tend to destabilize emerging economies. This, though, is simply incorrect. Short-term capital typically moves out of emerging economies because of the loss of confidence that is felt in regards to the stability of the internal domestic markets. Bhagwati simply appears to have erred in terms of cause and effect here. Also, the too fast integration that he warns about also is another statement he makes without proper support. He utilizes the example of Russia and its rapid reforms that devastated it. However, he omits the fact that Russias economy was a mess before those reforms, the true root of Russias lingering economic problems are the half-hearted reforms implemented by its corrupt leaders. If the too fast integration was really to blame for the economic upheaval, why werent former Soviet bloc countries that reformed even more aggressively than Russia, such as Poland and the Czech Republic, doing so much better than Russia Not only that, why are countries like the Ukraine and Belarus, who lagged behind even Russia, consequently doing so much worse than it Bhagwati leaves that answer up in the air.

Nevertheless, Bhagwati must understand that sensible policies must be implemented in order to take advantage of the opportunities globalization has to offer. Not only that, protecting those who might suffer in the short-term and long-term from a change in the rules is a huge issue that cannot be addressed simply or generally. Some changes are sensible, such as his view on the World Bank

In my view, the Bank should automatically trigger support when the WTOs Dispute Settlement Mechanism brings a significant loss of income and attending adjustment problem for producers in poor countries who have lost market access.

Even here, though, he admits that the World Bank is ultimately crippled now by overreach, and probably wont doing that in the foreseeable future. Also, the more vital domestic regulations that are needed isnt something that one can put much stock in considering the state of the world today.

In the end, In Defense of Globalization does offer a decent overview of many of the current globalization-issues. Bhagwati also, when he chooses to focus on concrete examples and arguments, does make a decent case for why an open world is better than a closed one. However, the lack of examples, clear arguments, and supporting cases ultimately mar his work. Extensive references do point the interested reader, however, to additional sources regarding many of the points he makes should they choose to look into them. Nevertheless, a bit more clarity and depth to some of the arguments should have been implemented for a clear case in defense of globalization.

The Dominican Republic

The Dominican Republic (D.R) is a region located on the eastern part of the island of Hispaniola. It covers 23 of the region and it is estimated to be forty thousand and forty two kilometers square in size. The Dominican Republic has a population of about nine million people. It is the second largest island on the Caribbean after Cuba. The Dominican Republic is governed by a system of a Representative Democracy. There are three arms in the government namely the judiciary, the legislature (composes of 32 senators and 178 chamber deputies) and the executive (the President and the Vice). A more recent history of D.R dates about six hundred years ago after its discovery by the great sailor Christopher Columbus in 1492. He presented it as a gift to the king of Spain. Spain later handed it over to France who ruled until its independence in 1884. The nation became a democratic republic in 1962 after a dictatorship rule was out-thrown. The current president of the Dominican Republic is called Leonell Fernandez.

In the mid 2005, Dominican Republic saw the coming together of three big entities in the Caribbean to form a high technology research centre. These entities were the Stevens Institute of Technology, the Coralina Group Technologies and the Pontifica Catolica Universidad Madrey Maestra (PCUMM). This institute was to collaborate with the international commission for science and technology in increasing the level of knowledge in the nation. In Latin America, the Dominican Republic is one of the few countries with advanced technology. Although the country cannot boast on many major achievements, it is on the forefront in promoting the development of ICT in Latin and North America.

The D.R is the leading tourist destination in the Caribbean at the moment. By May 2009 aids prevalence in the region was very high. The most contributing factor was the high rate of Sex trade in the country. An estimate of eighty eight thousand people is living with HIVAIDS. The percentage of adults living with HIVAIDS is 1.7 of the whole population.  HIV AIDS is more prevalent in men between the ages of 15-49.  The number of infected males and females between 15 to 49 years is 62,800 and 23000 respectively. About 3,300 children below fifteen years of age are suffering from HIV AIDS. The Dominican Government has responded fully to this pandemic. The government is putting in place strategic plans to deal with aids. Funds have been allocated to conduct education on aids.

The culture in D.R is a blend of African, European (Spaniards) and the original Dominican natives (Taino). Over 95 of the people in the country are Catholics. Beauty is keenly observed in the nation and a festival (Cabral) is carried on every Good Friday for teens to demonstrate their understanding of beauty. Traditional art and music (merengue) are still practiced in the Republic. The Dominican cuisine is largely served in many restaurants in the country. Baseball is the most practiced sport in the country.

In matters relating to economy, the country is not faring well. The budget is operating at a deficit of 3.3 on the GDP. The country has not yet recovered fully from the current recession but the spending power or per capita is gaining. Thanks to globalization, the countrys economy is picking up very fast through exports. The countrys best performing sectors are tourism, mining and agriculture. These sectors have been boosted greatly by globalization. Currently the country is in a very big debt totaling over eight billion US dollars. The IMF is very much involved in the promoting the economy of the country. It supports the budget through a stand-by arrangement between the two. The countrys imports include consumable goods, oil, textiles, fertilizer and medicinal products. The exports include natural gas, precious stones and agricultural products.
The DR environment consists of unique ecosystems. Currently the climate in the region is facing serious threats. The major causes of these problems are extensive mining activities, agriculture, and deforestation. Activities like tourism in the coastal areas have initiated development along the coastline. This has led to the degradation of coastal reefs and estuaries. The country has accepted to ratify the Kyoto protocol and has implemented measures to pursue environment matters.

The population in DR is estimated to be about nine million people. It rates number eighty two in the world. The population of the country is largely composed of middle aged people (60). About 5 of the population composes of persons over sixty five years and 35 is children below fifteen years. The ratio between male to female is 105 for every group of 100 respectively. Most of the population lives in the Cibao and coastal regions. Urban areas consist over 65 of the population. The fertility rate is estimated to be 2.8 ( 22.91 for every 1000 people). Population growth rate for the past 20years is 1.8.  Mortality rate as at July 2009 was estimated at 5.28 deaths in a group of 1000 people a day. The country backed by the UNICEF is setting measures to curb its population growth. It is estimated that by 2015 the population of D.R will be over 11million. One of the best measures taken by the Government is the provision of civic education on matters relating to family planning. Tax imposed on contraceptives has been lifted to reduce prices.

A recent conflict involving the DR was on the year 2008.  Although this was a Haitian problem, it spread to the DR forcing it to retaliate. The Haitians were demanding the return of a former president. The major conflict between the two nations was born from the numerous kidnappings of Dominicans by the Haitians. These forms of conflicts affect the economy of DR greatly. This is because the country depends mostly on the service sector (tourism) and it cannot thrive in an unstable political environment.

The Dominican Republic is the biggest economy on the Caribbean. The country also has the most stable but not powerful system of governance (Cuba rates number one) in the region. These are some of the crucial strengths the country has apart from its stability in economy. The countrys GDP is enough to support its huge population. The country is actively involved in peace negotiations (Haiti) and is on the forefront in implementing the Kyoto protocol having accepted to ratify it.
Cultural war is a claim that political conflicts facing the society today are as a result of several conflicting society values. These conflicting values are the traditional values that are upheld by the society and the emerging liberal values as a result of culture imperialism and civilization. The American society is faced with widespread culture wars in different aspects of Americans lives. The culture of wars in the American society can be traced back to 1960s and it has taken various forms as the society transforms. Many sociologists argue that the American society no longer live in a moral universe. They base their arguments on the increased cases of acts which are against the morals of the society such as same sex marriage. The cultural elites are finding society morals as taught by Christianity not accommodative to the modern world and they are pushing forward their ideologies which are unethical into the society resulting into cultural wars.

Culture War in America
There are many conflict ridden questions any one asks himself when one looks at the American society. The American seems to be split into two in different aspects of the society touching on the Americans morals and values which has resulted into a cultural war. The Americans have taken sides on matters related to war in the Middle East, same sex marriages, abortion, stem cell biology and different aspects of technological advancement. The advancement of communication technology has had the greatest impact on the cultural polarization of the American society. The cultural wars have fascinated the media which has in turn made the problem even worse. These divisions leave every one wondering whether these divisions are really healthy in a diverse and democratic society or not (Hunter and Wolfe, p 34).
Everyone in America including a casual observer will agree that there is an increase in polarization in the American culture in the politics, society values, acceptable life styles and thoughts. There are many and endless conflicts in the American society with major differences of opinions which in many cases are resulting into violence or even death of one of the parties involved. Many people are seen to applaud the result of these conflicts depending on their opinion on the matter or which side they support. This brings out the question whether the American society has a culture war. In America today, we are experiencing a culture war in our day to day activities. For politics to social life, the American culture is at war.

Today, the American politics are not dictated by class or race as it used to be in the past years. The American politics are dominated by cultural conflicts between the political classes where cultural values and morals as well as lifestyles are the main areas of contention. Most newspapers and other news agencies and literatures use war language to sell more which is a clear indication of a culture war in the American society and the whole world. Scholars and academic writers have contributed to the view of the American society as a society with a culture war. James Davison Hunter in his book Culture Wars discuses very clearly the idea of a culture war. He analyzed the conflict ridden polarization of politics between the political elites who have nothing in common but constantly oppose each other. The book implies a decline in American politics as a result of this culture war which will be very difficult to revive (Hunter, p 23).

There is evidence of culture war developing in all aspects of Americans life. It is very disturbing to think of how differing groups of people with different ideas on the future of American society degrades the society morals. There is war of culture between the cultural elites and the less powerful in the society. The elite want to defend their positions and influence while the rest of the society are accusing them for underrating the American cultural and social values and believes morality will support them. The cultural war is however not reducing the polarity between the elites and the less powerful members of the society which has existed in the society for many years. The war cannot take the American society to the family centered society that existed in the mid 20th century.

There have been political conflicts in the past one decade over the control of the mass media, American politics and the public culture. The movies producers and other forms of entertainment industries have been the target of many elites. Other critics believe that those who have an upper hand in American affairs have sold the American culture. They put it indirectly that the social elites have introduced new cultures to the Americans and has turned the reality into fiction. They convert what is real into unreal by producing simple and exaggerated images where they can make money from the Americans or use numerous marketing tricks to trade practically anything to the American society (Sanes, Para 6).

The culture of unreality has been opposed for a very long time in the United States. However, this culture has become very persistent and in present all over the American society making it hard to fight since it is concealing the originality of the American society in all aspects. Fiction science has been introduced in the news in the American television to ensure that one does not change the channel he or she is watching. The computer generated images in the news have transformed the nonfiction news which the Americans used to watch into dramatic series.

The fiction science has influenced the politics of the United States in many ways. Fiction gives the false identity of a political candidate through the use of media commercials which are full of computer generated images which are intended to induce an emotional response in favor of the candidate. Many of these images have no relationship with the reality. They use brightly colored and luminescent lights they attract the attention of the public. The American zoos and museums have been transformed by these conversions of reality into fiction. Displays which meant to educate people on nature have been modeled into theme parks. The urban centers especially Las Vegas has been transformed into fiction town with giant images that do not relate with the reality (Sanes, Para 10).

Many Americans today are victims of culture wars. The values of the American have been eroded and many have lost the self confident Americans had in the past years. For example, in a public meeting, people who owned guns were asked to raise their hands and many people who owned guns chose not to raise their hands. Many Americans today will choose not to reveal their conviction about a fundamental right. The Americans no longer have their traditional courage of conviction. They are not proud of themselves or what they believe in as a result of culture war. Although it is a war without guns or blood shed, the liberty of Americans is being lost and they are less free as they were some decades ago (Williams, Para 2).

Cultural wars are impacting negatively on the social life of the Americans and the consequences may be far reaching. One of the major cultural battlegrounds in the American society today is the rights of same sex married people. There has been a conflict for many years between the conservative who are strongly opposed to special rights for gay men and the liberals who believe that same sex married couples are a disadvantaged minority in the community. The liberals claim that this minority group suffers from discrimination and biasness based on sexual orientation and therefore deserves special rights in the constitution. The liberals believe that the government has no compelling reason to interfere in individuals private lives. The state should therefore leave the individuals to choose what to do with their private lives without state restriction. The conservative opposed to special rights for homosexuals believe that the state governance should be based on moral and values derived from the Christian teachings in the bible.

The fight between the conservatives and the liberals over the matter raise a lot of questions. One wonders why the debate is such a loggerhead between the two groups. The two groups are willing to fight to death, which raises the question - why Is it because a necessary and primary change is taking place in an already civilized society The conflict can be termed as a cultural war which is evident today in all aspects of the Americans life as a result of a morally and culturally polarized society.

The culture war being experienced in the world today, the United States included has been mainly caused by advancement in technology. Technology has changed the way of thinking, most notably converting what is real into fiction. The advent of modern means of mass transport and communication has greatly transformed the world culture resulting into culture related conflicts. In the past centuries, it was impossible for a person to wakeup in one continent and be in another at sunset. Today, this is possible and at a cost that is affordable to the majority all over the world. Today, people can easily move within short notice from one area to another looking for better careers, better neighborhood or improved living condition as a result of transport technology. Again, the voice of an individual in any part of the world can now be heard by people from all over the world which was not possible in the past years. This makes individual opinion on different aspects of the society known all over the world. Every evening, the expressions of people from different parts of the world can be sampled in the news and viewed by people from any part of the world. People who live in remote rural areas and poor villages which are not exposed to the modern cultures can view the events in other parts of the world through mass communication technology (Bidstrup, P 1).

The impact of these technological advancements destabilized the organization of the society cultural values resulting into cultural wars. In the past, people were tied to their societies and committed to their cultures just because they could not move and were stuck there. Even if they had the means to move out of their communities, they had no economic reason to move which is there in the modern world. For this reason, people lived in their places of birth where they were loyal to there culture to avoid the ire of other community members. It was almost certain that the individual will live in that community forever.

In the modern world, this is not the case. People move from one place to another in search of better living conditions and jobs. It is reported that the frequency at which the Americans move increase as the years pass leading to an increased lack of commitment of the Americans to their cultural values. Americans today make no attempt of living to the expectations of the neighbors and the community since they can leave at any moment. Many Americans are even not interested in knowing who their neighbors are since they will leave the neighborhood sooner or later. The neighbor is also likely to leave any time also. For this reason, many disputes go unsettled and the Americans just move on without caring about others. The modern transports and communication have therefore magnified the extent of cultural war since the Americans are losing their traditional values as a result of increased mobility. The main reason why there is no commitment to the society among the Americans is simply because of the increased mobility of people as a result of development of mass transport.

Twentieth century has seen a lot of changes in the community where women are no longer seen as an inferior branch of humanity. The American society today recognizes the role of women in the society which was not the case in the past centuries. The women can now be heard because of the gender forum that emerged in the 20th century. The contribution of these forums is far reaching since women cannot only be heard but also their words make sense in the context of the modern world. Other minority groups in the United States can also complain and be given an ear by the authority. The cultural war between the conservatives who believe God created the universe to favor men and should not favor women and other disadvantaged groups and the humanist who believe God created us equal has been evident in the American society for many decades. Women as well as other minority groups have been fighting for their constitutional rights, which has been very successful although after a big struggle (Bidstrup, P 1).

Cultural war is very evident in the American society today. It has resulted into polarization of the society as a result of the Americans taking sides on different aspects of life touching on the Americans moral. As a result, some sociologists have argued that the Americans have no morals at all. The advent of mass transport and communication technology has resulted into lack of commitment to the society. Technology has changed the reality into unreality.  

The Political Theory of Alexander Hamilton and Its Reflection in American Political System

Alexander Hamilton was one of those political thinkers whose theory shaped the political profile of the young American nation. A theoretician of republicanism, author of about a half of the Federalist papers, signatory of the Constitution, friend of Washington and somehow an aristocratic idealist, Hamilton left a legacy, which continues to influence America until now. This legacy can be found in Hamiltons works on political philosophy and state building. In turn, these works were written not only by a Founding Father, but by a man, thus every piece of Hamiltons political writing is deeply personal, reflecting not only abstract mediations, but practical experience. In this paper, I will attempt to analyze certain Hamiltons ideas to prove that his theory had a strong relation to drafting, adoption, application and interpretation of the basic American constitutional instruments. In this theory, Hamilton managed to reconcile such controversial matters as liberalism, aristocratism, democratic values and political centralism. This complex theory became a practice of American government and American people. Accordingly, America is still affected by Hamiltons individual reflections, insights and mistakes.

Review of Literature on the Subject
Hamiltons personality and Hamiltons political views have attracted scholars ever since 1800-s, this, for the purposes of this paper I will review only certain landmark works presenting various approaches to the subject. An example of Hamiltons comprehensive biography is Alexander Hamilton (2004) by Ron Chernow. This book presents a classical view of Hamilton as a national hero and a founding father. Another classical approach is demonstrated in Alexander Hamilton and the Idea of Republican Government (1970) by Gerald Stourzh. The book offers an image of Hamilton as a patriot of the Republic and influential theoretic of centralized government. Another approach to research on Hamiltons heritage is presented in classical Alexander Hamilton by Henry Jones Ford first published in 1900. The book presents Hamilton as occasional figure torn by inner controversies, admirer of Britain and a latent monarchist. A contemporary view of a famous conflict inside the federalist movement, including conflict between Hamilton and Jefferson is available in Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson A Study in Character (2000) by Roger G. Kennedy.

Hamiltons view of human nature
Even the most perfect political system would not work in case it contradicts human nature. A government and a people consists of individuals sharing all virtues and weaknesses peculiar to human species. Thus, Hamiltons starting point was understanding of human nature, including nature of those men who are vested with authority. As put by Hamilton himself, principles of human nature are as infallible as any mathematical calculations (Stourzh 76).  Rosano argues that Hamiltons predominately and radically liberal conception of human nature is based on Lockes concept of liberty, Hobbess concept of power, and Machiavellis concept of the effectual truth. (Rosano 61). This rather tricky combination was a result of Hamiltons controversial views formed by demonstrative superficial idealism and deep inner skepticism. This controversy, probably, has never been resolved by Hamilton himself. His nature was profoundly aristocratic, what he proved by his duel with Burr. Hamilton chose to die as a nobleman in spite of submitting a dispute for judicial consideration as a profound democrat would do. On the other hand, Hamilton admired the ideas of European Enlightenment with their call to democracy and self-government. Perhaps, Hamilton would be happy to see a free community of noble individuals without vices however, he realized that such vision is practically impossible. This antilogy made Hamilton skeptical about human nature itself. He pessimistically noted that, A vast majority of mankind is entirely biased by motives of self-interest (Stourzh 78). Later Hamilton claimed such views openly when he wrote of deductions for the ordinary depravity of human nature (Federalist No 78). These Hamiltons position corresponds to Hobbess concept of corrupted human nature which has to be oppressed by the government in order to preserve peace and stability (Stourzh 73).

Surprisingly, Hamilton simultaneously managed to admire the theory of Hobbess eternal opponent Locke, who worshiped the natural state of man as a supreme value. To what extent has Hobbes advocated power, to the same extent had Locke strived for recognition of human rights. Hamilton shared the ideas of the latter when he wrote The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power (Stourzh 14). According to Hamilton, implications like love, liberty, desire of happiness, and public good are deeply rooted in every heart (Rosano, 63). This makes a contrast to his early writings of human corruption. It appears that Hamilton suffered from mismatch between that what he wanted to see and that what he actually saw. This should be taken into account when analyzing Hamiltons political heritage. For him the government was an instrument for bettering human nature and prevention of its corrupted manifestations. Deep understanding of Hamiltons political theory is impossible without consideration of this peculiarity.

Hamiltons Political Theory
Theoretical views on politics shared by Hamilton are best reflected in the Federalist papers, about a half of which were authored by Hamilton personally. Seemingly, there is no crucial issue which Hamilton would not touch, yet his primary concerns were necessity of Consitution, separation of authority between the federal government and the states, powers of the central government, as well as issues concerning national bank, national debt, national armed forces and navy.

Hamilton venerates the people as a source of national will, yet this will has to be presented by someone, and this someone is likely to be corrupted. Hamiltons response was a system of direct ties between the people and the central government, which would not be interrupted by intermediaries in the person of local authorities. In his letter to governor Morris Hamilton wrote it has ever appeared to me as sound principle to let the federal government rest, as much as possible, on the shoulders of the people, and as little as possible on those of the State Legislatures (Chernow 774). This view caused Kapstein to assert that No other American statesman has personified national power and the rule of the favored few so well as Hamilton (Kapstein 36).

And indeed, in his most influential theoretical work reflected in the Federalist papers Hamilton speaks as an advocate of a stronger union between states which is likely to secure rights of the people inside this state. According to his idea, a slimsy confederation of half-independent states is likely to sink in inner conflicts, thus making the rights of the people insecure and the entire union vulnerable to foreign invasions. To justify this view Hamilton once more referred to the corrupted human nature by observing that to presume a want of motives for such contests as an argument against their existence, would be to forget that men are ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious (Federalist No 6). Envy, national conflicts, territorial disputes, apportionment of national debt, senseless scholastic debates, disputes upon private contracts all this, According to Hamilton, is likely to ruin a Union (Federalist No 7). Thus, the Confederation appeared to be insufficient to preserve the union. Powers of states had to be strongly limited for the common good.

Central government could impose such limitations only. Hamiltons idea of the central government is quite authoritarian, causing allegations of monarchism and betrayal of ideals of freedom. Hamiltons views on this subject were strongly affected by his personal experience during the Revolutionary war. The work of a procurement officer performed by Hamilton during the war was not heroic but very necessary. During this period Hamilton desperately fought against Congresss foot dragging in every matter of supplying the army (Kennedy 36). This made him reluctant about ability of a collective body to manage a state effectively, especially in critical situations. Unable to completely deny his democratic views, Hamilton came to idea of delegation of powers to the government by the people. These are the people who, by their mutual consent vest their government with powers to rule them. In this respect Hamilton wrote of a government the constitution of which renders it unfit to be trusted with all the powers which a free people OUGHT TO DELEGATE TO ANY GOVERNMENT. The primary general function of such a government would be defense and protection of the community, in any matter essential to its efficacy that is, in any matter essential to the FORMATION, DIRECTION, or SUPPORT of the NATIONAL FORCES (Federalist No 23). At this point Hamilton finds a compromise between Hobbess strong centralized government and Lockes idea of government as protective institution, which should not interfere into affairs of its subjects. In such a manner the government would enjoy only those powers granted by the community, however, it will be able to effectively protect this community by virtue of these delegated powers. This pretty logical idea has been reflected in the Constitution and the American Bill of Rights, although there are at least two basic problems with it. Firstly, elimination of state authorities with aim to reduce the influence of human corrupted nature is a two-edged sword. The problem is simply raised from the state level to the federal level. A federal government controlled by unworthy people was probably Hamiltons nightmare, especially in a situation when the states have no considerable opportunities to oppose the corrupted central government. The second problem is in delegation of powers. Mutual consent may be a good theory however, it is never practically achievable. Thus, there exists a notable problem of defining those powers which have to be delegated to the central government and which should not. One more criticism of Hamiltons theory came from his opponents like Jefferson. A strong central power will have a strong army and police to enforce its decisions and protect the union. These institutions are likely to be used by the central government to expand its powers against defenseless states (Stourzh 198).

As regards matters of finance and taxation Hamilton, surely, advocated centralized taxation and centralized banking system based on national debt. According to Hamilton, this would enable to centralize and effectively apply the resources of a nation (Federalist No 30). Yet this idea, as understood by Hamilton himself, would bring about the issue of inequality, since those who borrow assets to the central government would tower over the rest of the people (Kapstein 37). Some response was provided by Hamilton when he wrote that The loans it might be able to procure would be as limited in their extent as burdensome in their conditions. They would be made upon the same principles that usurers commonly lend to bankrupt and fraudulent debtors, with a sparing hand and at enormous premiums (Federalist No 30), however, it appears that Hamilton simply tried to escape the problem. As a Secretary of the Treasury, he obviously realized the need for centralization of assets through banking and taxations system, however, as a freedom idealist, he could not have avoided the view of national indebtedness as a burden imposed on every free person. Current situation with national debt demonstrates that Hamilton simply chose the bad from between bad and worse. Centralized financial and taxation system did enable to preserve the Union in hard times, however, currently America faces the negative consequences of such preservation. This is Hamiltons theory where the roots of the present situation are found.

In his conclusive remarks to the Federalist Papers Hamilton notes that there would appear still to remain for discussion two points the analogy of the proposed government to your own State constitution, and the additional security which its adoption will afford to republican government, to liberty, and to property. But these heads have been so fully anticipatedthat it would now scarcely be possible to do anything more than repeat (Federalist No 85). However, American national history proves that these crucial issues were far from explained both in the time of Hamilton and in the following decades. Hamilton has not offered a universal solution he simply suggested one of the possible models which, as any models, had its strong and weak points. Perhaps the USA survived thanks to these strong points. However, this does not mean that the weak points never revealed themselves.

Practical Application of Hamiltons Theory
The most notable practical application of Hamiltons political teaching is the Constitution of the United States of America, whose most furious advocate Hamilton was. The Constitution follows a model for division of powers proposed by Hamilton, including a single legislative body consisting of representatives of the people, a unified executive system, unified judiciary. Exclusive right of the central power to solve the issues of taxation and public debt. In accordance with Hamiltons idea, the Congress has a militia under its command. Thus, Hamiltons political model was eventually reflected in the organic law of America.

Application of this organic law appeared to be more complicated. Not less important than the adoption of the Constitution were sharp debates about its application in the late 18th and early 19th century. Perhaps the most controversial issue around these debates was Hamiltons doctrine of implied powers, contrasting Jeffersons idea of strict interpretation of the Constitution (Kapstein 37). The doctrine of implied powers began to flourish already after Hamiltons death in the judgments of John Marshall, Hamiltons confederate, who served as Chief Justice. Centralization of American government was completed after several rulings rendered by Marshall in such landmark cases as Marbury vs. Madison (1804) and McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) and Cohens v. Virginia (1821). At that, the Constitution shaped by Hamilton was used as a mighty tool for centralization.

In Marbury vs. Madison Marshall determined that the judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the Constitution. To support this Marshall created a pretty logical construction pointing out that as long as the Constitution is a supreme law, the Supreme Court is empowered to review all cases where the Constitution is concerned. This was the first application of Hamiltons implied powers doctrine, but far not the last.

Another direct reference to the doctrine was the Supreme Court judgment in McCulloch v. Maryland, where Chief Justice Marshall put a period to application of Hamiltons idea of centralized power and centralized banking. By determining that the Constitution grants to Congress implied powers for implementing the Constitutions express powers, in order to create a functional national government and that the State action may not impede valid constitutional exercises of power by the Federal government (Smith, 89) the Supreme Court made the states entirely dependent on the central government in every matter related to the Constitution. Deserves noting that by referring to implied powers Marshall laid grounds not only for application of Hamiltons political heritage, but for subsequent violations of Constitutional rights. Thus, just few years after Marshalls death, his theory proved to be a double-edged sword.

Rosano fatefully observes that Americans are happy and the founders are celebrated because they had the chance to prove their virtue they were virtuous because they loved liberty and the public good as well as fame (Rosano 72). This passage is very much applicable to Hamilton. A revolutionary hero and a prominent author, he presents a perfect set of virtues admired in America. It is hard to find another figure which would be so momentous for America as Hamilton was, perhaps with exception only for Washington. However, being a momentous figure, Hamilton gave America not only liberty and virtues, but a sense of helplessness against central government, as well as long-lasting problems such as national debt. The controversies of Hamiltons theory made American political system controversial. Numerous attempts to fix this by subsequent amendments and court decisions prove that Hamiltons model is viable, but far from ideal.

Brazils Economy and Security Issues and the Countrys Role in Latin America

Brazil is a country that is unique and diverse within Latin America in the sense that Brazil, with more than 173 million inhabitants (2002), is larger than the continental United States (slightly smaller if Alaska is included) and shares land boundaries with all South American countries except Ecuador and Chile. To give insight to uniqueness and diversity, Adler (2006) emphasizes that Latin America is a stark reminder of how the United States was the first hundred years after the Constitution when national security and economic growth were closely connected, this situation is no different when looking at Brazils economy and national security.   As a matter of fact, Brazils rapid economic growth allowed the nation to overcome Argentina as the pre-eminent economic force in South America and yet, has always refrained from displaying overt ambitions to continental leadership and indeed identified clearly with other South American nations, especially those situated in the Rio de la Plata basin. However, there are various factors have contributes to the general economic patters in Brazil interconnected with national security strategies. This is in the sense that there is a relationship between economic growth and the strategic conduct of any developing or undeveloped country (Alberto, 2003).

In terms of national security applicable to brazil situation, the traditional understanding of security needs a redefinition and even a conceptual revision  in its theoretical, structural and operational aspects, to meet the challenge of bolstering relations in the southern hemisphere (Tickner, 1993). These security challenges that face Brazil just like most countries in Latin America as mentioned by Russell, Roberto, (1990), includes high rates of drug smuggling, organized crime, delinquency, immigration, gun violence, social disturbs, and environmental deterioration. Indeed, these are security threats that are very sensitive to any country in the world as its implications have a bearing on national development as a whole.

The economic growth of Brazil has been built over the years through a lot of hardship and hard work from all the stakeholders. Particularly, Brazil had experienced sustained growth at nearly four percent from 1940 to 1980.  In this period of nearly four decades, Brazil had the fastest growing economy in the western hemisphere. Per capita GDP increased over eight hundred percent, from 678 in 1940 to 5570 in 1980, measured in 1980 dollars.  Brazils economy gained on the U.S. economy, rising from only ten percent of US GDP per capita to over 20 Brazil had experienced sustained growth at nearly four percent from 1940 to 1980.  In this period of nearly four decades, Brazil had the fastest growing economy in the western hemisphere. Per capita GDP increased over eight hundred percent, from 678 in 1940 to 5570 in 1980, measured in 1980 dollars.  Brazils economy gained on the U.S. economy, rising from only ten percent of US GDP per capita to over 20 percent. Brazil was the worlds ninth or tenth largest according to the criterion of purchasing power parity used by the World Bank, and the ninth largest market-based centre of production (Coatsworth, 2007). This amazing economic profile and growth of Brazil does not only play a crucial role in internal matters, but also affect the external relations of Brazil as well. In fact, it has also enables it to build the national security to the point of nearly obtaining nuclear weapons.

Evidently, Brazils economic successes affected its political, military and social relations with many other countries. In fact, Brazils weight and role as a middle or regional power in Latin America relies on three dimensions in the power hierarchy among states territorial, economic, and military.   As a result of Brazil being a regional power in Latin America with these factors strategically positioning it for the same, these factors allow states to conduct autonomous actions that influence their neighbors and rivals, and help determine the way in which the condition of being an international power expresses itself.  How Brazil fits in the context of these factors and of its own modern history is very unique.

These economic successes also affected the political relationships and thus either directly or indirectly impacted its current strategic position in the world economic activities. Economic growth paves the way for investment in weapons and technology to directly affect strategic advancements in deterrence and battlefield initiative. The overcoming security and economic challenges with prosperity, does not only qualifies Brazil as both the intermediate state and regional power. In turn, economic decline causes political leaders to make unwanted decisions towards strategic interests. Brazils period of economic failures from 1980 to present day will show how strategic deterrence and battlefield initiative have been affected (Steven, 2002 Tickner, 1993). Moreover, from economist Theodore Moran perspective, he believes that there are three economic threats that could endanger national security fundamental and cumulative decline relative to the other major industrial states a loss of crucial economic and technological capabilities within the country and the growing dependence on other countries for vital goods, services, and technologies.

Latin America, like most regions, will use force to protect itself from its neighbors and within its own borders. In Brazil, the strategic theory comes in two forms external and internal. The broad definition of this theory includes not only defense against external aggression but also internal defense against internal insurgencies and other internal powers. Latin America contains many instances of internal threats whether they are governmental takeovers by authoritarian leaders like General Pinochet in Chile or insurgent groups like the Shining Path in Peru. The unique thing about these internal takeovers is that many of these attempts occur without the chance of a decisive victory.

However, it is encouraging that history indicates that many internal threats in Latin America succeed only after several failures. These failures rally more political support and following attempts, often by the same rebel leaders, are sometimes successful (Adler and Polsky, 2006). As this has enabled Latin American nations take strategic actions to protect their internal borders, just as they would protect their external borders. Gary Hart argues that political decisions on national defense ought to be defined-to include economics and technology which can drive political leaders to make strategic decisions based on their current security threats. The argument that economic growth affects the political decisions of a nation to protect its internal and external borders can be explained through a close analysis of the manner in which Brazil exploited its efforts to have dominance in the world security.

In order to understand why the drastic change in Brazils economic and national security strategic conduct took place, it is important to study the history of the country and its struggle to be the first in Latin America to obtain nuclear weapons. Luiz Bandeira describes that from the early twentieth century to the ninety seventies, the United States of America spearheaded efforts to have special relationships with Brazil (Adler and Polsky, 2006). In return, Brazil managed to have a lot of recognition and received economic prosperity and military support from the United States of America. Furthermore, Brazil received economic prosperity and military aid from the United States of America (Tickner, 1993).

The economic prospects, which Brazil enjoyed, made it to believe that there was a legitimate division between military nuclear and nonnuclear countries. Brazil had been focused on being on the nuclear side. The country even declined to sign the Treaty of Tlatelolco (Shearer, 1998). This treaty was a nuclear free treaty of Latin America that mainly focused at ensuring peace, stability and equality not just in Latin America but also all over the world. Furthermore, Brazil worked with West Germany in nineteen seventy-six and even signed an agreement that would allow them to receive nuclear fuel enrichment equipment in exchange for uranium. Such actions lead to the need for most nations to be more cautious with external perceptions (Shearer, 1998). There was a dire need for the nation to look around other nations at understand what the actual perceptions of other nations are on these economic, political and security decisions. Although Brazil was hurting its relationship with the Unites States of America, it was careful to maintain an economic and political balance within Latin America. This seemed to be a great achievement for Brazil in its efforts to achieve superiority among its neighbors.

Williams (2000), comments that Brazil has been able to control strategic power, security and economic status through the role it has played in Latin America. The mediation roles in various conflicts that have arisen in Latin America have been played by Brazil. Brazil constant participation in conflict resolution efforts have been due to its moderate economy, its close proximity to many of the nations, and the political ties it enjoys with the United States of America (Kapstein, 1992 and James, 2008). For this reason, Brazil has been inferred as the intermediate state and a regional power in Latin America due to its strategic peace role, which it has always played in Latin America.

Besides being a peace hub, Brazil continues to dominate the economic platform of Latin America. This economic growth has greatly shaped the political decisions and influenced national security (Hart and Rudman, 2001). Although, continued mismanagement of economic resource continues to ruin Brazils prospects of its continued dominance of the economic and political arena in Latin America. Policies, which are at times made, do not have the greater economic interests of the whole country as the guiding principle (Bandeira, 2003 Bellamy and Bandeira, 2003 Williams, 2005). In the sense that, the leaders who are in power make decisions that favor the insurgent group leaders who in turn reward through with monetary benefits. Because on the other hand, this illegal groups normally have the intention of creating situations that would lead to the overall benefits of a few people who are in various leadership positions. This perceived benefit between the leaders and illegal groups hampers democracy, economic performance and threatens national security of the country.

Despite the great achievement in economic and national security mighty of Brazil within Latin America, there are three threats that mainly threaten the national security of Brazil which includes the loss of crucial economic and technological capabilities within and outside the country the fundamental and cumulative decline relative to the other major industrial states and the ever-growing dependence on other countries for vital goods, services, and technologies.

Additionally, Brazils technological prowess has continued to degrade take its toll in the form of an incalculable political price, as it caused Brazil to lose its absolute air power to Chile and Venezuela in 2006.This has indeed negatively affected the political landscape of the country in relation to its neighbors.
  The country has even started depending on other countries on very crucial gods and services and technologies (Moran, 1993 Shearer, 1998). This impact is reflected in the relationship between Brazil and Argentina who have historically and geographically been bounded by common frontiers, with economies which to a large extent were complementary due to differences in soil and climatic conditions. Brazil and Argentina has always kept close bilateral trade relations from colonial times but the different natures of their main exports led to links of dependence on the markets of rival industrial powers. However, during economic hardship of Brazil, the competing interests put further stress on their relationship. Even the United States of America protectionists had concerns with Brazils industrial exports that targeted North American market and exploitation of possible competition in third world countries. That during Fernando Henriques presidency the pattern of cooperation suffered mixed reactions and tension with the United States. But was rescued in nineteen ninety-eight, Brazil signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty which help which helped in removing the factors of contention between the two countries.

In conclusion, Brazils national security and economic growth were closely connected and none can perform better than the other. In the sense that economic boom made Brazil to invest in military technology to boost its might in the region and the world, while economic decline resulted to a cut in such many programs. Therefore, there is need to asses the threats to both economic and national security and develop a more compelling and effective internal strategies that would serve as platform to regional and global influence.
In this regard, Brazil does not need a strategy, but rather a grand strategy that addresses both national security and economic issues with integrative approach. In support of a grand strategy Alberto (2003), argues reaffirms that argues that the policy responses of greatest benefit to Brazil cannot be based solely on the economic criteria. Therefore, it is clear from the discussion presented that Brazils aspiration to an enhanced international status of the Americas and the world, and a redefinition of relations between the United States and Latin America, flowed from its emerging identity as a capitalist power during this period (Alberto, 2003).
In January of 2008, my country, Kenya, was nearly destroyed due to the botched presidential elections.  The rigged elections triggered the escalation of long standing ethnic tensions, mostly over land ownership, as the news reports.  Anyone Kenyan, however, knows that the problem is much more than that.  Having been born and raised in Kenya, I know that the problem is not simply land but that of extreme poverty.  Fifty-five percent of Kenyans are living below the poverty line.  There are those who say this is because of the endemic corruption that has plagued this countrys government but that is still only part of the bigger problem.
It is in search for the solution, however, that I have been led to this point in my life.  I feel that I do understand the problems of my country but at the same time acknowledge the limitations that I have when it comes to solving these problems.  The fundamental problem that has led to the poverty and the all-pervasive corruption is that the laws, the constitution and institutions do not ensure equity and justice.  This failure of the public policy in Kenya is one of the reasons that have led me to my interest in earning a MAPP degree.

Having worked for the Kenya Revenue Authority, I have gained a deep appreciation of the importance of appropriate policies that will benefit the society as a whole.  I realize, however, that I need to gain a better education in order to be able to really contribute towards helping others and making the world a better place.  This, I feel, is the advantage a MAPP can bring me, teaching me, through practical application and theoretical thinking, how best to implement the change that I see as necessary for the growth and development of my country.

During my undergraduate studies, I focused on economics and philosophy.  I have also just gotten my Masters in Business Administration.  It has been said, however, that desire and natural talent are nothing if they cannot be harnessed properly.  In order to harness these talents, I firmly believe that taking my MAPP at this institution would be the best way to achieve this.  One of the many wonderful concepts I have learned from my parents is to strive for academic excellence while balancing life with other activities and contributions.  It is this fine balance that I feel will be provided if I am accepted in this program.  I strongly feel that in order to reach my full potential I need to be in an environment that best caters to my interests and goals.

I feel that I am ready to tackle the challenges of this masters.  If anything, I feel that the narration of these experiences serves to substantiate my claim that I do realize what I need to do in life and what I aim to make of my career.  Unlike most people, I genuinely believe that I have been fortunate to get these experiences and I know that I should make the most of this.  As such, I would like to thank you for your time and consideration for this application.


Having been accepted at the University College London (UCL) to study MSc in Public Policy, I hereby apply for a scholarship from your organization. I am requesting for Pound sign 22, 440 to cater for tuition and living expenses during my one year course that takes 37 weeks.

In line with your principle Wealth contributed by society should be returned and in generous measures, I intend to return to Singapore after my studies to help develop my country through public consulting. In addition to being consistent in my academic performance, I have also been actively involved in extra curricular activities as the project director of the NUS Students Animal Welfare Group where I led the organizing committee of the Singapore Animal Welfare Symposium in May 2009. In addition, I am serving as the executive editor of a student newspaper in my university, leading a team of 6 student writers. I am also a regular volunteer and lifetime member of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) in Singapore and have actively participated in international conferences and programs on social issues.

An opportunity to study at UCL will complement my achievements and enable me serve the community better. The scholarship will also help me realize my dream and become an ambassador to Singapore at UCL. Below is a table showing the total cost of the course.

Democracy Leads to Violence Along Class and Ethnic Lines

It is no doubt that an overwhelming majority of political observers recommend democracy as the best system of political governance in the modern world. This support is based on the fact that in the ideal case, democracy is fully representative of all citizens in a nation and its operational framework guards the masses against abuse by the governing authorities. Furthermore, democracy sets an environment conducive for the promotion of domestic and international peace and economic development (Carothers, Berman, 29). There has been a radical shift in momentum at present as compared to much of the twentieth century where most of the focus was on proving the political and economic viability of democratic systems, now most of the attention in the international political arena concerns the promotion and nurturing of democratic regimes and institutions.

However, there contention has continued to increase as to what really defines a stable democracy. On one side, Universalist proponents of democracy have argued that a democracy can emerge under any socio-political and economic conditions and still prevail while on the other hand, preconditionist theorists have a firm belief that a particular set of supportive circumstances and conditions must already be existing for a democracy to emerge and then thrive.

Recent events have undermined the effort of global policy makers to universally endorse the establishment of democratic orders in the world. The post cold war era and the subsequent disintegration of the USSR had set a foundation for the spread of democracy as the leading system of governance. Many institutions emerged particularly from the west to fund a wide range of nations from all corners of the globe with the sole aim of promoting democracy and good governance (Carothers, Berman, 32). Unfortunately, towards the turn of the millennium, rampant corruption in many countries undermined democratic governance, and in some cases, long-running cultural and religious orders clashed sharply with democratic principles. The disappointing result was that as the effort to reinforce democracy was being overdriven, many of the pre-established democratic regimes were stalling or had already failed (Mansfield, Synders, 39). The need thus arise to re-examine the viability of democracy as a system of governance, and possible negative effects on the background of specific underlying circumstances.

The Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle had pointed centuries ago of the need for cyclic alternations in governance systems as a means of ensuring political and economic stability. Honestly, observing recent developments in the world, it is true that the liberties provided for in democratic principles has been abused and brought more problems than solutions. There has been an increase in the number of states where political power has become concentrated in the hands of a few powerful individuals whose sole aim is to protect their interests and amass political and material worth. In other words, democracy has become a camouflage for oligarchies.

The corruption of institutions of democracy and the running of state affairs by a handful of powerful individuals or the ruling class has brought a lot of conflict between the holders of political office and the governed masses. In a capitalist setting, greed for property and affluence has driven those wielding the power to cleverly devise within the framework of democracy schemes aimed at maintaining their status(Mansfield, Synders, 3). Worse still, cases exist where a nation is comprised of diverse ethnic entities. In such a scenario, there could arise a certain ethnic community or a coalition of ethnic communities that has the numbers to continually manipulate the provision that the majority rules to completely marginalize the minorities from policy issues, economic participation and wealth distribution. This will breed a lot of animosity and violence, even genocide.

Historically and presently, the process of democratization, often a transition from authoritarian or dictatorial rule, is very difficult. It often stimulates the emergence of revolutionary nationalism and there is imminent clash between the state loyalists (the ideal democrats) and the territorial control enthusiasts (Mansfield, Synders, 41). The result is rivalry between those elements keen to protect their interests and those ready to embrace the idealness of democracy, and the rules and processes guiding the formulation and implementation of politics become undefined. There is then an attempt based on might and affluence to manipulate policy making so that the determinant factor is compromise, coercion, oppression and patronage rather that the principles of democracy.

Militant nationalism and the inherent inclination of politics among ethnic lines are prevalent in many young democracies (Carothers, Berman, 37). Even though democracy is supposed to forge domestic and international harmony and tranquility, these factors create an imbalance that tentatively promotes civil war at home and inter-state war. The ending of the cold war saw the emergence of unstable democracies that led to many wars and abuse of human rights. Infamous examples are the bloody wars leading to the splitting of Yugoslavia into two warring nations just six months after a democratic election and the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In the Yugoslavia case, ethnic animosity between the Serb and Albanian ethnic groups was the cause of conflict, while militant nationalism and the disputed claim over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh was the cause of the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Even though some young democracies like South Korea, Brazil, Taiwan and South Africa have had smooth transitions into democracy, the realization is that nations need to have in place competent and impartial institutions of state before they can be pressed externally to go the democracy way. This calls for the need to limit the degree of liberty exhibited in institutions, or at least first put in place the necessary prerequisites so that the democratization process dose not go haywire. This puts authoritarianism as the suitable mode of governance so that there can be economic liberalism and sufficient institutional control by a government wielding enough power to enforce standards, mobilize its human resource towards the meeting of national and socio-economic objectives.

Basically, the situation arising is that there is a conflict between the ideals of democracy and the power of constitutional liberalism. A liberal authoritarian regime is likely to gain legitimacy on account of them offering a reasonable degree of individual liberty to their citizens. In a world where civil groups and the media are increasingly influential in matters of policy, non-liberalization of the ideal democratic order is likely to be characterized by little corruption, stronger institutions and increased inclusiveness of the masses in policy and economic matters. Whereas liberal democracies have as a characteristic economic oligopolies and wage exploitation, extortive state capitalism and economic regulation even in the minor industries, authoritarianism does not support resource accumulation (Mansfield, Synder, 44). Therefore, the state does not need to supersede economic markets as the main strategy of determining the trajectories of the social and economic orders and creating a system in which the welfare certain classes of citizens will not be compromised. Through this, monopolies and oligopolies will be discouraged as the affluence of enterprise will not exceed that of the state.

U.S Supreme Court Case In Re Gault

Re Gault was one of the landmark rulings in the United States.  It was an important ruling that shaped juvenile justice system. The ruling reinforced the importance of due process in handling juvenile related cases. The ruling also showed that minors have the right to the represented by an attorney like other people.  The court agreed that the constitutional guarantee of due process is applicable to juveniles who are charged as delinquent (Scott 557). This was an important ruling that changed the life of average American juveniles who find themselves accused of delinquency.

Case summary and rulings
Gerald Francis Gault was fifteen years old when he was taken to custody for alleged obscene call.  It was on 8th June 1964 when Gault was take into custody without parental notification after their neighbor, Ora Cook, complained of having received indecent telephone call, which according to Gault, was made by his friend (Great Supreme Court Cases). When Gault parent returned home found their son missing, they traced him to County Childrens Detention Home but they were denied a chance to talk to him.

The next morning, Judge McGhee from Superior Court presided over the preliminary hearing but did not deliver any verdict on the case.  Gault was kept in custody for some few more days but later released without an explanation.  On June 15th, juvenile judge McGhee delivered his verdict on the case arguing that Gault was a delinquent child and had to be confined until he reached 21 years (Great Supreme Court Cases). Surprisingly, the accuser, Ora Cook, did not attend both hearing and the judge claimed that she did not have to be present. Since there were no witnesses sworn in the court and no transcript of hearing, the ruling was followed by contents particularly from Gualts parent who disagreed with the judge that Gault had admitted having made the indecent call.

At the time, Arizona laws did not provide for juvenile appeal and hence the case was petitioned at the Supreme Court for habeas corpus writ. However, Arizona Supreme Court referred the case back to McGhee. The court again dismissed the appeal for habeas corpus and the case was referred to state Supreme Court based on the fact that Arizona Juvenile Code could be considered unconstitutional and that Gila County Juvenile Courts decision was a denial of the due process (Great Supreme Court Cases). This was based on the fact that the juvenile code did not require parental notification and did not allow for appeal.  In the County Court decision, the court did not give notification of the charges against Gault. It did not inform Gault of his right to counsel, right to defend himself in front of his accuser, and the right to remain silent.  The court action did not provide for any record of the hearing proceedings.

After review of the appeal present on the above facts, the Arizona Supreme court also dismissed the habeas corpus writ. The court upheld the constitutionality of the court proceedings in agreement that it had followed the due process (Koroknay-Palicz).  The court also ruled that the country court did not in any way violate the due process.  Hence, the case was appealed in United States Supreme Court.

United States Supreme Court decision however dismissed the ruling from the Arizona state courts. In a close 8-1 decision, the court asserted that the court commitment of the juvenile to State Industrial School violated his rights as provided in Fourteenth Amendments (Great Supreme Court Cases).  According to the court ruling, this was a violation of the juvenile rights since he had been denied the right to be represented by an attorney as provided in the 14th Amendment. Also, the court argued that the accused had not been notified of his the charges brought against him and also he had not been informed of their right against self-incrimination (Great Supreme Court Cases). He was also not given the right to have an opportunity to face his accuser which would have given him a chance to defend himself. Either, he had not been given the right to appeal the sentences delivered upon him in a higher court. The only judge who voted against the rest argued that the main purpose for institution of juvenile court was for mere correction not punishment and hence the constitutional procedural safeguards commonly used in criminal trials did not need to be applied in juvenile cases.

This case became a landmark ruling in the United States because it changed the due process in prosecution of juveniles. The ruling asserted the right of juvenile to be taken through a due process of law like other people. In upholding the ruling the Supreme Court reinforced the equality of American people regardless of their age in face of criminal justice system.

The ruling had short and long term effects on American culture and democracy. The case ruling asserted the importance of treating juveniles and equal citizens who had rights like the rest of the population. The case was important in advancing democratic rights to juvenile (Kowalski 25). In short and long term, it reinforced the importance of duel process of law for all.  This decision also affected the average American in their daily life in different ways. The decision guarantees all Americans the right to be protected by the law regardless of their age. After the court ruling, average Americans feel more secure in the face of law since they are assured of protection from violation of their rights in a due process of law.

Propaganda and Terrorism

This paper will present terrorism in the form of a raw idea and how propaganda, ideals, and governments fuel it. The introduction gives a brief explanation and an overview of the essay. The body of the essay explains how governments, ideals and propaganda have promoted terrorism all over the world.  The summary about the findings of the essay has been done in the conclusion part of the essay.

Propaganda involves the use of false information to influence peoples opinions and ideas. It may involve manipulation, omitting important information, distorting it or avoiding the truth so that the other person can accept a certain belief. The information delivered is misleading and deliberates and supports the interest of those propagating it (Lutz, 2004).

Terrorism involves the use of fear in order to compel individuals to perform a certain activity. It involves the use of illegal violence and war to intimidate governments or societies. The terrorists perform their activities in pursuit of their goals which are political, religious or ideological. Terrorism has existed for a long period of time. It has been mostly used by the weaker side in a conflict. Terrorists carry their activities in a secret manner and they form in small groups so that they may not be recognized by their opponents (Livingston, Kress  Wanek, 1978).

Terrorism involves the use of violence to intimidate people. Activities such as destruction of property are used by terrorists to spread violence. Threats of violence are spread by terrorists so that the propaganda can terrorize the intended persons. Terrorists use propaganda to portray how they intend to cause violence to target individuals (Lutz, 2004).

Activities involving terrorism have the characteristics of causing fear and have long term psychological impact. Attacks by terrorists are conducted in order to promote fear. They are intended to exert psychological fear on the people being attacked. Terrorists attract a large audience so as to spread fear among communities. They attack national symbols to display their might and try to cause fear to the society they are conflicting with (Livingston, Kress  Wanek, 1978).

How Governments Have Promoted Terrorism
Some governments have supported terrorism in order to fight their enemies and achieve some economic gains. Saudi Arabia is said to support terrorism through financing terrorists and recruiting individuals for the Al-Qaeda and other similar groups. Some reporters say that the Saudi government has persuaded its people to support terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries. There has been an increase in the number of Saudi fighters working in these countries. The Saudi government is said to provide military support to the Yemeni government in its efforts to suppress the Houthi Shia population in the north. Saudi government has remained to support international terrorism (Lutz, 2004).

The success of Al-Qaeda terrorist group has been achieved due to the support it has gained. Some nations and states finance and assist in the operations of the group. The environment has changed and terrorist groups change their relationship with nations so as to avoid suspicion. The United States and the United Kingdom are the leading sellers of arms all over the world. They form business friendship with some terror groups in order to sell their weapons to them (Gareau, 2004).

Globalization has also increased the rate of terrorism since people can interact all over the world and communication is no longer a barrier to activities that involve operations where distance is a problem. Terrorists take advantage of failed states to carry out their activities. Most of the failed states have a good relationship with terrorist groups. Terrorists collude with rebel groups in the failed states in order to gain power. They have quick access to the territories of these states since there are mechanisms to suppress their operations. The environment in failed states encourages the flourishing of terrorism since they are able to finance and form strong groups with splinter groups in these countries (Houen, 2002).

Unregulated international economy encourages the flourishing of terrorism. The financing of the terrorist groups is done in a secret manner and the economies of the world cannot regulate their financial systems. No sanctions can be placed upon these groups since there is no controlled system of operating international economic affairs (Alexander  Kilmarx, 1979).

The United States have failed to change the policies and programs of the Saudi government that have continued to produce military and suicide bombers. The US government has neglected to sweep terrorism emanating from the Saudi government. This neglect has led to the death of many people including the American armed forces and residents (Livingston, Kress  Wanek, 1978).

When Fidel Castro was in power, he used to spread anti-US propaganda in order to create violence that affected the Colombian society. His intentions were to activate anti-American propaganda in order to spread terrorism in the US. Castro supported terror groups with the intention of fighting the Americans (Lutz, 2004).

How Ideals Have Promoted Terrorism
The United States government has perpetrated terrorism due to its activities that cause revenge from other countries. The US government has tried to overthrow more than forty foreign governments. It has tried to terminate more than thirty popular national movements. The government of the United States is known to use weapons of mass destruction. These activities have led to the death of many people. The US conflict has been recognized to affect developing countries with rich natural resources. Many sanctions have been put upon some states by the UN, and the US government implements these sanctions. This has caused retaliation from most governments and some terrorist groups have come up to fight against the American attacks (Alexander  Kilmarx, 1979).

Lack of political involvement in the fight against terrorism has caused the increase in the terrorist activities. Lack of political participation has caused the increase in terrorism. The political ideals have promoted terrorism since they lack the agenda of eradicating the problem but instead concentrate on other issues that aim at fueling the situation rather than providing a solution. Politicians have poorly conducted the activities of the government and the current problems being experienced today have been caused by the poor ideals that have been put across by the politicians (Alexander  Kilmarx, 1979).

How Propaganda Has Promoted Terrorism
The administration of President G. Bush exaggerated the concept of terrorism. This caused the US government to overspend its resources in the effort to suppress terrorism. The government promoted more terrorism instead of reducing it, since retaliation followed, causing the US residents to become targets by many terrorists all over the world (Gareau, 2004).

The terrorists used propaganda to spread their activities. The Al-Qaeda group has been sending video clips of how they are attempting to attack countries. This has created fear to many countries due to the spread of false information. Many states fear terrorism activities and take every effort to prevent it. When propaganda is spread, the governments put mechanisms to protect themselves. This has promoted terrorism since the governments are not aware of the truth of such propaganda (Houen, 2002).

The mass media has promoted terrorism by inflicting fear and indicating uncertainty in future. The US government withholds some information from the media in order to protect itself from terrorism activities. The government has held the idea that media is a source that is being used by terrorists to spread fear to the government and its citizens. There are certain websites that have been developed to propagate terrorism through spread of fear to those who access the internet sources. The spread of misplaced concepts through the internet has increased and terrorists are using their own websites to instill fear to people. Movies are also used to spread propaganda by terrorists. The Al-Qaeda group has produced several movies to show their plans to attempt terror attacks in some countries (Houen, 2002).

Military campaigns have been carried out to instill fear to the enemy countries. Terrorism is an activity that is done by countries which have no power to fight their rivals. They spread fear through propaganda. Terrorism has been applied as a secondary tactic in war with an objective of spreading fear to the enemy. Governments also instill fear to the citizens so as to maintain state power through the use of propaganda (Gareau, 2004).

Propaganda and terrorism are two words that cannot be separated. Terrorism has been made successful through the spread of propaganda. Political ideals have encouraged the spread of terrorism since many politicians create fear to their own citizens and people from other countries, hence encouraging retaliation from these individuals. Government activities have influenced the growth of terrorism since some states have been seen supporting terrorism through financing and selling arms to these groups.