Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism Examples and Facts Essay

Libertarianism and utilitarianism are contrary to each other. In utilitarianism, people believe that an action that produces happiness is what one should go. Utilitarian’s do not care whether what they are doing distracts another person’s rights. Conversely, in libertarianism, a person’s action for happiness should not violate another person’s rights. Libertarians values actions that promote fairness and justice in the society unlike, the utilitarian actions that in some cases violates fairness and justice.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism: Examples and Facts Essay specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Libertarianism and the Government In libertarianism, the libertarians’ perceives the government as the one that threatens peoples’ rights. They rank the government as the greatest threat to human rights. Also, the libertarians do not agree with th e idea of governments to pass moral laws. It is not suitable for the government to dictate the life of an individual. They also disagree with the governments’ tax process meant for re-distributing purposes. According to the libertarians, taxing an individual to help another person is a way of forcing a person to work for another person. Libertarians advocate for individuals to stand alone in society. However, they require the government to develop rules that protect individual property, protect an individual from theft, fraud, coercion, and breaching of contracts. A person who breaks societal rules is against his or her right to standing alone and is subject to face charges. In implementing these rules, the government would be playing an essential role in protecting the rights of a peaceful person from criminals, and foreign aggression. When the government violates these rights, it is playing a criminal role, and therefore, there is no need for a government. The libertarians advocate for the society to be at liberty in which individuals do not operate under rules that force them to do specific actions. In conclusion, libertarians advocate for a society that the government has limited control or a society where the government does not exist. Workers Participation Libertarianism promotes workers participation in various activities that are of their concern at workplaces. Workers can enhance their engagement when they have freedom in the workplace. Freedom allows the managers and workers to make decisions at the workplace together. It is also by allowing freedom at the workplace that the employers can provide safe working environments.Advertising Looking for essay on political sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Socialism and capitalism Employers promote socialism by involving workers in the decision-making process. In libertarian socialism, the factors of production gain control of the public, but respects private property. It also advocates for social organizations not to use coercive forms while handling workers, thus promoting workers relation. Socialism also extends to the market by promoting the owning of economic systems by the public in a market. When the public owns the economic systems, society can control unfair competitions amongst the producers. Libertarianism is against state capitalism since in state capitalism the government has control over different states economic activities. They view it as a way that the state uses to get profit from citizens. State capitalism is a monopoly in nature denying citizens a free market. A free market allows people to practice their freedom of consulting prices where supply and demand determine the price. Conversely, state capitalism does not give suppliers and buyers the freedom to choose the price. Free market reduces coercion forms in the market. In conclusion, unlike utilitarianism, libertarianism ensures that there is respect for individuals’ rights and the promotion of freedom of choice. This essay on Utilitarianism vs Libertarianism was written and submitted by user Kenneth Stark to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Mat 201 Module 1 Essay Example

Mat 201 Module 1 Essay Example Mat 201 Module 1 Essay Mat 201 Module 1 Essay TUI THOMAS J. COBB MAT 201 Module 1 – Case Assignment Dr. Alfred Basta Mat 201 Module 1-Case Assignment Thomas J. Cobb 1. Suppose you have 4 nickels, 6 dimes, and 4 quarters in your pocket. If you draw a coin randomly from your pocket, what is the probability that: a. You will draw a nickel? The probability of someone drawing a dime would be 4/11 or 36%. b. You will draw a dime? The probability of some drawing a nickel would be 6/11 or 54% c. You will draw a quarter? The probability of someone drawing a quarter would be 4/11 or 36% 2. You are rolling a pair of dice, one red and one green. What is the probability of the following outcomes: a. The sum of the two numbers you roll from the dice is 11. There are 2 possible outcomes. 5,6/6,5 b. The sum of the two numbers you roll is 6. There are 5 possible outcomes. 1,5/5,1/ 3,3/4,2/2,4 c. The sum of the two numbers you roll is 5. There are 4 possible outcomes. ,4/4,1 /3,2/2,3 3. A glass jar contains 6 red, 5 green, 8 blue, and 3 yellow marbles. If a single marble is chosen at random from the jar, what is the probability of choosing a red marble? a green marble? a blue marble? a yellow marble? a. The red marble would have a 6/22 or 27% chance of being drawn. b. The green marble would have a 5/22 or 23% chance of being drawn. c. The blue marble would have an 8/22 or 36% chance of being drawn. d. The yellow marble would have a 3/22 or 14% chance of being drawn.

Bioterrorism and Anthrax, October 2001 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Bioterrorism and Anthrax, October 2001 - Essay Example In accordance with Gaudioso (2011): â€Å"Microbial or other biological agents, or toxins whatever their origin or method of production, of types and in quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes† are considered biological weapons. Hostile goals of the inventors and researchers in this field are evident and armed conflict among different countries can burst out. Bioweapons are coming†¦ During several previous years the world was frightened by H1N1 flu. Media sources were acclaiming for staying at home, wearing special flu masks. Internet is full of pictures, when people go to work, walk or even marry in these masks†¦It is the example of a global paranoia, but, as a matter of fat, no one could find a holistic approach and a global remedy for curing this virus. Of course, many viruses and bacteria expansion are of natural origin, but it is a well-known fact that they occur in the result of ecologically unfriendly envir onment, overconsumption of people, unconsidered usage of natural resources etc. In one way or another, but a modern individual is captured in the web of unseen bacteria and viruses of unknown origin. There is a rich history of biological weapons implementation, actually. Terrorist are more inclined to creation of biological weapons than to a creation of military ones. ... They stake on viruses and bacteria, which will lead to health inures or even lethal outcome. In case bioterrorist attacks are well-considered and invented by the scientists and researchers of one country to gain victory over another country, then it is important to know different types of potential biological weapons, viruses and bacteria. Currently governments of many countries are looking forward to a perspective of dealing with biologic terrorists. They are focused on searching for an early detection system for biological, chemical and radiation terrorist attacks. Modern society should give an answer to the questions: why? When? How? Bioterrorist attacks occur. The medical community is focused on looking for unseen diseases and possible methods of treatment. Bacteria are resistant to antibiotics and some bioagents are modernized to make them lethal. Modern public is called for being on alert. Thus, modern laboratories can be focused on creation of special fertile area for viruses and bacteria development and creation. At the international level Biological Weapons Convention claims: â€Å"development, production, and stockpiling of biological weapons agents, toxins, equipment, and means of delivery by State Parties are prohibited† (Gaudiso, 2011). Domestic control over potential development of bio weapons, related material development and other measures are taken by the governments and people live under a sword of Damocles, with a feeling of a constant prosecution and hazard. Concerning a process of manufacturing, it can be mentioned that a process of fermentation is a method of providing nutrients to biological organisms, which will result in a rapid growth

Civil Right Movement Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Civil Right Movement - Essay Example They were the oppressed group as they were denied the equal rights and opportunities as white people. The end of World War II set a new tone for civil rights movement. The movement got prominence when in 1954 Supreme Court of US gave a landmark judgment in Brown vs. Board of Education case. In this judgment, Supreme Court declared racial segregation in school totally illegal and a punishable crime (Brown vs. Board of Education). Finally, the Civil Right Act of 1964 put an end to all discrimination that African Americans were suffering from since centuries. The Act eliminated obstacles that persisted for centuries preventing development of African-Americans. Over 45 years have passed since then; the status of African Americans when seen in the above perspective has improved a lot. Now they have not only equal voting rights to elect the government but they can also occupy any office in the US by their sheer ability. The segregation episodes that their children faced in the schools have been now buried deep into history books. They share all public places with equal rights. They can enter into any professions without any restriction depending upon their interest and ability. It is not surprising that African Americans have excelled in sports, politics, business and hosts of other activities. Their contribution in the US mainstreams reached to its pinnacle when an African American reached to the highest office of US in 2009. Several well-known figures such as Tiger Woods, Oprah Winfrey, Michael Jordan sprung into limelight in the post-civil movement era. Boxer Muhammad Ali, tennis star Arthur Ash, Michael Jordan in basketball, athlete Carl Lewis are some of the prominent names that have excelled in sporting activities after the end of Civil Right movement. Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell became Secretary of State and many large cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles, New York have had mayors from African American community. Barack Obama occupying the highest office in US is a veritable testimony to the genuine change process that has taken place in the last few decades in the country giving equal opportunity, status and privilege to the African Americans as enjoyed by others. The law has given them equal rights and opportunities in all walks of life; this certainly proves that the status of African American has improved significantly since the end of the Civil Rights Movement. Answer 2. The US Law has taken its course giving African American full rights and opportunities but the African American community still faces numerous issues and challenges in the US society. Cedric Herring argues that African Americans still face job discriminations in the US. Giving an example of Texaco, the author states that the companies systemically deny promotions to the members of African American community. The New York Times produced evidence that how several Texaco Executives referred them as 'black jelly beans' and 'niggers' in their mutual conversations. Fi nally, Texaco admitted having excluded all black employees’ names from the list of next level promotions. Later, Texaco had to settle the case by paying $176 million in the largest ever discrimination suit seen in the US. Before 1964, discrimination to the African American community was overt but in the post civil rights movement era it has taken a covert route. Before 1964, no laws questioned the

Examining The Incentive Effect Of State Aid

Examining The Incentive Effect Of State Aid This article examines how the incentive effect of state aid is defined and measured. It also considers how the use of the incentive effect may impact on the behaviour of aid recipients. The availability of state aid would naturally induce them to undertake riskier projects that are not normally included in business plans which tend to be conservative. Therefore, if business plans (looking into future) are the benchmark by which the incentive effect of state aid is established, then this benchmark may be a too easy test of the existence of the incentive effect. The article also argues that the timing of the assessment of the need for state aid has a  decisive impact on the determination of whether aid has an incentive effect or not. The timing of the assessment of the need for state aid is critical. Even projects that have already started may deserve to receive state aid if the aid can ensure that they are not abandoned. This is highlighted by an analysis of the case of training aid to DHL. The Commission believes that training aid should not be used to induce companies to undertake regional investment. Commercial reality suggests that companies take into account the total amount of aid they expect to receive at different locations. The article examines this Commission Decision on the proposed training aid to DHL and suggests that that aid could have had an incentive effect, if it were offered to DHL before it made its decision to establish a logistics centre in Leipzig  [1]  . State aid must have an incentive effect. But it may induce beneficiaries to undertake riskier projects and investment in riskier projects may not be in the interest of society at large. The incentive effect of state aid means that undertakings are expected to do something extra with the aid. That extra must go beyond their normal practices. This has recently been confirmed by the CFI in the Kronoply case: Case T-162/06, Kronoply GmbH Co. KG v Commission of the European Communities (2009)  [2]  . The Commission has defined how the incentive effect is to be understood and measured in a  number of recent policy documents, most notably the Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General block exemption Regulation) Recital 28, Article 8; Framework on Research and Innovation (the RDI Framework): Community framework for state aid for research and development and innovation (OJ C 323, 30/12/2006, p. 0001 0026) 1.3.4.; Guidelines on Risk Capital: Community guidelines on state aid to promote risk capital investments in small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ C 194, 18/8/2006, p. 0002 0021) 1.3.4.; Guidelines on Environmental Protection: Community guidelines on state aid for environmental protection (OJ C 082, 01/04/2008, p. 0001 0033) Recitals 27, 28; Guidelines on the Assessment of Large Regional Projects: Commission Communication criteria for an in-depth assessment of regional aid to large investment projects, 24/6/2009 [not yet published in OJ], http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/09/292format=HTMLaged=0language=ENguiLanguage=en. The incentive effect is established at three levels of assessment that may be termed standard, additional and detailed (note that all guidelines use these three levels): at the standard level which applies to all cases, state aid lacks an incentive effect and it is therefore unnecessary when it is granted after a project or investment has been initiated. [see Art 8(2) of the block exemption Regulation, chapter 6 of the RDI Framework, chapter 3 of Environmental Guidelines, point 17 of the Guidelines on the Individual Assessment of Large Regional Projects]; at the additional level of assessment, undertakings [primarily large] which apply for aid before they start a project or investment, must also demonstrate that they do something extra by showing that they go beyond their normal practice as defined by their annual reports, or business plans OR other typical or benchmark behaviour for the industry in question in terms of output, expenditure, jobs, etc. [see chapter 6 of the RDI Framework, chapter 3 of Environmental Guidelines, point 19 of the Guidelines on the Individual Assessment of Large Regional Projects]. at the detailed level of assessment [for aid amounts above certain thresholds], undertakings [primarily large] must further show that in the absence of aid they would not carry out the project or investment. They must also demonstrate that the project or investment itself is uneconomic or too risky. [see chapter 7 of the RDI Framework, chapter 5 of the Environmental Guidelines and point 23 of the Guidelines on the Individual Assessment of Large Regional Projects]. Phedon Nicolaides, Michael Kekelekis: An Economic Analysis of EC Guidelines on State Aid for the Rescue and Restructuring of Companies in Difficulty, Intereconomics, July/August 2004, 9p. The Rescue and Restructuring State Aid Guidelines 1999 to expire on 9 October 2004. This article mentions certain inconsistencies and proposes how to improve the next guidelines. COM itself was aware of certain problems, namely: What is the definition of firm in difficulties? How to assess group of companies (allocation of costs within the group)? Urgency issue: when the state aid is granted prior to COM approval. One time, last time principle rescue aid is a one-off operation Different time limits in the current framework What compensatory measures are sufficient? There are 3 internal inconsistencies in the Guidelines: 99% of companies are SMEs, but state aids for SMEs are exempted from state aids notification if lower than 10 mil. EUR + if purpose of rescuing companies is to prevent their surviving competitors dominating the market, then SMEs would not need to be rescued; why to ask firms facing bankruptcy to reduce their output?; if every company that receives restructuring aid has more than a fair chance to become profitable (return to viability), why then do private investors need any state aid? ECJ has repeatedly ruled (e.g. in case C-730/79 Phillip Morris v. COM, paras. 16-17): State aid is allowed for the purposes of inducing firms to do something they would not otherwise do under free market conditions. The article further analyses 3 hypothetical plans for restructuring (to reduce workforce from 300 to 200, 100 OR 50) and assesses how minimising social cost is taken and should be taken into account by the COM. 60 % of EU awards were for just 4 MS (Germany, France, Spain and Italy): Are the firms in other countries immune from financial problems OR are the governments of these countries less willing to bail out firms in financial difficulty? It is not for the COM to tell MS how to spend their money wisely. However, there must be an upper limit to the amount of authorised aid -> the social costs of letting the company go bankrupt. On the other hand, there is cost for owners (redundancy payments) which can be avoided, if they can save the company. It should be up to the beneficiary company to argue the case and provide convincing evidence. The authors welcome simplified procedure proposed for the new guidelines for urgency aids. Urgency aids (to be repaid in 6 months) replace rescue aids (to be repaid in 12 months). But they are not happy, that no restructuring plan is required for SMEs. The money contributed by owners must be at least 25% for small enterprises, 40% for medium-sized enterprises and 50% for large enterprises. The new guidelines also do not require MS to grant socially optimum amounts of aid. The aid per employee varies from 4,000 EUR to 755,000 EUR  [3]  . The market shares vary from 0.8% to 61%. Number of employees varies from 20 to 64,000. Phedon Nicolaides: Re-introducing the Market in the Market Economy Investor Principle, European State Aid Law Quarterly 2003, 5p. COM invented this principle almost 20 years ago (1983) to deal with injections of public capital, which cannot be prohibited by virtue of Article 295 EC (Art. 345 TFEU) to determine whether public investments contain state aid. The author considers 3 observations: the term market economy investor is a misnomer; ex-post assessment may undermine the principle itself; it is necessary to re-introduce market. Firstly, the COM compares the actions of the public authority with those of a typical private investor in a similar situation (in terms of the size, risk and terms of investment) see landmark cases C-234/84 Belgium v. COM, C-40/85 Belgium v. COM, C-305/89 Italy v. COM, C-278/92 Spain v. COM, T-228/99 WestLB v. COM). In some cases (recovery of debt, rescheduling of debt OR closure of factories) the ECJ invented term private creditor (T-152/99, C-334/99 C-342/99, C-256/97). In these conditions there are no comparable market benchmarks (every case is different): Creativity and ingenuity are as important as toughness and persistence in negotiations. That is why successful corporate bankers command huge salaries. Since public authorities are not known for their foresight and investments skills, it is hard to believe that public officials can negotiate as well as private investors. It is not a case of comparing agreed rates with market rates. Secondly, as the landmark WestLB judgement clarifies, a private investor will demand a return on his investment that reflects all the benefits obtained by the recipient of his funds and will take into account all foreseeable future contingencies. Private investor always looks forward: bygones are bygones. The author criticizes the judgement T-98/00 Linde v. COM, because a reasonable investor would never obliged himself to provide the privatised company with certain (chemical) product for a period of ten years at market prices. The German authorities argued, that when the agreement was made it was hoped that a second user of that chemical would build a plant in the area (PN: how reasonable was that expectation?). But the CFI found further payments to prevent much larger cost justified. The author agrees with the judgement C-334/99 Germany v. COM: public authorities may not create costs for themselves which can justify the granting of additional state aid later on, because ECJ correctl y observed that Germany has included in the cost of closure the repayment of state aid that had been granted earlier. Thirdly, private money is not the same as public money. Private investor is willing to tolerate less. There are 3 solutions: the MS should have independent investor advisor to assess the deal; the MS should use private intermediary for negotiations; to adjust upwards the rate of return demanded for public funding (in comparison to private investor). The proposed measures are not discriminatory (Art. 345 TFEU), because public investment is not the same as private investment. The officials are not dealing with their own money, so the due diligence is not the same. The market economy investor principle has been narrowed to only private investor principle. Once the market drops out, it is difficult to identify any hidden state aid. R. Meiklejohn (ed.): State aid and the single market, 1999, European Commission, 206 p.  [4]  (in the syllabus from the first semester only Synopsis and Chapter 1: The Economics of State Aid were present: p.7-32) http://www.tu-dresden.de/wwbwleeg/publications/hirschhausen_roeller_european_economy_state_aids_0399en.pdf This publication contains 7 studies by several authors on several issues. Because the documents is quite old, I will summarize only briefly the synopsis: Economics of State Aid (Meiklejohn) State aid should prevent market failures. Perfect competition is based on radical assumptions (perfect information and foresight, perfect factor mobility, no economies of scale, no externalities). In real world government intervention may increase total welfare. We consider 8 market failures: public goods; merit goods; increasing returns to scale; externalities (positive and negative); imperfect or asymmetric information (SMEs and innovative firms looking for capital on capital markets); institutional rigidities (e.g. labour market); imperfect factor mobility; subsidisation of foreign competitors. Income redistribution constitutes an additional reason for government intervention. Intervention must be carefully considered to minimise distortions of competition, evasion, abuse OR the creation of perverse incentives. Government expenditure has to be financed, which is likely to lead to some loss of efficiency in other parts of the economy. The instrument can be chosen from wide panoply including: regulation; direct government provision of certain goods or services; taxation OR state aids. (effectiveness) Trends and Patterns Recent developments Market definition (Fingleton, Ruane, Ryan) The Treaties expressly demand geographical extent of the market (trade between MS). In antitrust we analyse: demand side substitutability, supply side substitutability, temporal aspects (product market definition) AND geographic boundaries (geographic market definition). The narrower the market definition the more likely it is that a firm will be found to be dominant. We can compare characteristics of different products, own-price elasticity of demand, cross-price elasticities, ability of firms to switch production (time necessary to do that and sunk costs). For geographic market definition transport cost and trade barriers are taken into account. Elzinga-Hogarty test and study of correlations of prices and price movements in different areas have both important drawbacks. According to the authors it is necessary to distinguish between inputs and final products. The situation differs according to whether output market and input market are national or international (4 combinations). Therefore it is necessary to define the geographic relevant market also for upstream market (where it buys its inputs) and neighbouring markets. Taxonomy of aids: activity-specific; firm-specific; industry-specific; region/area-specific. In state aids methodology, greater weight should be given to potential competition. The recipient of aid can also change its geographic market strategy. If a recipient can easily switch its production, spill-over into other markets is possible (even for activity-specific aids). Input and output markets must be defined, even if the recipient is vertically integrated. The potential of widening the geographic market (cf. internal market) must be taken into account. Also we must assess how costs and benefits are distributed = the degree of price competition can be a guide to the distribution between producer surplus and consumer surplus. Restructuring and Privatisation The case of new German Là ¤nder The international context Further documents to look at: State Aid Action Plan 2005-2009 (SAAP) quoted in the presentation http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0107:FIN:EN:PDF Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General block exemption Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32008R0800:EN:NOT http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/block.html State Aid Reform http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/reform/reform.html State Aid Scoreboard, Reports + Studies http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/studies_reports/studies_reports.html

Conceptualization of Culture and Language in Post Colonial Literature Essay

Culture and Language are the major issues in the post colonial theory. My assignment will deal with these three factors in terms of colonial perspectives. The post colonialism mainly explores the ideas such as cultural diversity, geographical dimensions, Diasporas, race, ethnicity, marginality, hybridity, national identities, cultural transformation, changes and politics in language etc†¦ Considerations of hybridity run the range from existential to material, political to economic, yet this discussion will not be able to tease out the extensive implications of each consideration. Rather, this discussion aims to explore the notion of hybridity theoretically, synthesizing the vast body of literature to critique essentialist notions of identity as fixed and constant. According to my understanding of Hybridity, there are three ways in which hybridity might serve as a tool for deconstructing the rigid labels that maintain social inequities through exclusion in race, language and nation. By exploring how the hybrid rejects claims of bonds within race, language, and nation, I understood that cultural studies like these are imperative in considering the politics of representation. For the purposes of this discussion, the cultural hybridity refers to the integration of cultural bodies, signs, and practices from the colonizing and the colonized cultures. The contemporary cultural landscape is an amalgam of cross-cultural influences, blended, patch-worked, and layered upon one another. Unbound and fluid, culture is hybrid and interstitial, moving between spaces of meaning. The notion of cultural hybridity has existed far before it was popularized in postcolonial theory as culture arising out of interactions between â€Å"colonizers† and â€Å"the colonized†. However, in this time after imperialism, globalization has both expanded the reach of Western culture, as well as allowed a process by which the West constantly interacts with the East, appropriating cultures for its own means and continually shifting its own signifiers of dominant culture. This hybridity is woven into every corner of society, from trendy fusion cuisine to Caribbean rhythms in pop music to the hyphenated identities that signify ethnic Americans, illuminating the lived experience of ties to a dominant culture blending with the cultural codes of a Third World culture. Framing Cultural Hybridity in post colonial context; Among postcolonial theorists, there is a wide consensus that hybridity arose out of the culturally internalized interactions between â€Å"colonizers† and â€Å"the colonized† and the dichotomous formation of these identities. Considered by some the father of hybrid theory, Homi Bhabha argued that colonizers and the colonized are mutually dependent in constructing a shared culture. His text The Location of Culture (1994) suggested that there is a â€Å"Third Space of Enunciation† in which cultural systems are constructed. In this claim, he aimed to create a new language and mode of describing the identity of Selves and Others. Bhabha says: It becomes crucial to distinguish between the semblance and similitude of the symbols across diverse cultural experiences such as literature, art, music, Ritual, life, death and the social specificity of each of these productions of meaning as they circulate as signs within specific contextual locations and social systems of value. The transnational dimension of cultural transformation migration, diaspora, displacement, relocation makes the process of cultural translation a complex form of signification. The naturalized, unifying discourse of nation, peoples, or authentic folk tradition, those embedded myths of cultures particularity, cannot be readily referenced. The great, though unsettling, advantage of this position is that it makes you increasingly aware of the construction of culture and the invention of tradition. In using words like â€Å"diaspora, displacement, relocation,† Bhabha illustrates the dynamic nature of culture, and the flimsy consistency of the historical narratives that cultures rely upon to draw boundaries and define themselves. As a result, culture cannot be defined in and of it, but rather must be seen within the context of its construction. More significantly, Bhabha draws attention to the reliance of cultural narratives upon the other. In illuminating this mutual construction of culture, studies of hybridity can offer the opportunity for a counter-narrative, a means by which the dominated can reclaim shared ownership of a culture that relies upon them for meaning. This theoretical erspective will serve as the foundation for the considerations explored in this paper, employing hybridity as a powerful tool for liberation from the domination imposed by bounded definitions of race, language, and nation. RACE: Racial hybridity, or the integration of two races which are assumed to be distinct and separate entities, can be considered first in terms of the physical body. Historically, the corporeal hybrid was birthed from two symbolic poles, a bodily representation of colonizer and colonized. These mixed births, mestizo, mulatto, muwallad, were stigmatized as a physical representation of impure blood, and this racism long served as a tool of power that maintained that even in this blending of two bodies, just â€Å"one drop† of black blood would deem the body impure and alien, an abomination. Institutionalized racism created a perpetual state of ambiguity and placelessness for the hybrid body and prevented cultural inclusion via race. However, the expanse of immigration since colonialism and the spectrum of shades of visible difference point to an increasingly hybrid populace in which these classifications of black and white no longer carry the same power of representation, yet the old labels persist. This labeling is significant as it elucidates the continuing power of racial labels in a society set on fixing bodies in racial space by binding them to labels, which are understood to contain fixed truths. I argue that utilizing the conceptual tool of hybridity to deconstruct these labels allows a means by which hybrid individuals can come together in powerful solidarity, rather than allowing their ambiguous place in racial space to render them invisible. Harnessing racial hybridity to project the simultaneously unique but common experience of hybridity can be a means by which the individual subject can join to a marginal community through stories and partial memories. Furthermore, racial hybridity must harness the dualistic experience of passing, or being mistaken for a race other than one’s own. All identities involve passing to some extent, in that a subject’s self can never truly match its image, but racial passing implicitly deconstructs the boundaries of Black and White. In passing, hybridity might function not as a conflict or struggle between two racial identities, but instead as constant movement between spaces, passing through and between identity itself without origin or arrival. The freedom to move between identities carries its own power in defying the claims of essentialized racial identity. Furthermore, the bounded labels of race do not account for the historical and geographic narratives that lie behind each body and inform their identity. In â€Å"Black Africans and Native Americans†, Jack Forbes explores the disconnect between racial labels and the consciousness of the bodies behind them using Native Americans and Africans as examples by which â€Å"groups are forced into arbitrary categories render their ethnic heritage simple rather than complex†. As a result, hybridity calls into question the boundaries of racial consciousness as a hybrid consciousness defies the imposed limits of race. The management of these identities becomes its own sort of performance, as the body negotiates each consciousness in different spaces. Again, the ability to play multiple roles, to â€Å"pass† in different arenas, carries significant power. In embodying the inability to bind identities to race, racial hybridity both in the physical body and in consciousness offers a means of deconstructing the boundaries of dichotomous racial identities. In addition to race, language has long been bound in definitions as a symbol of nation and a mode of exclusion. As a means to connect with other social beings, communicating with language is a meaningful performance in that speaking requires two parties, one to perform language and an audience to observe and absorb language. During colonialism, as the colonizer’s language dominated national institutions, the sense of being outside and â€Å"othered† was instilled in the colonized as their language and means of communication was stripped away. Now in a time after colonialism, can the colonized ever reclaim a language long lost, or has the colonizer’s language become their own? Has ownership of the colonizer’s language expanded over time? Fanon’s theorizing addresses the power of language in the formation of identity as he says, â€Å"To speak . . . means above all to assume a culture, to support the weight of a civilization,†. He suggests that speaking the language of the colonizer stands in as acceptance or coercion into accepting a role in culture. Yet in accepting a role, whether by choice or force, the meaning of the culture shifts and evolves. No longer does it â€Å"belong† to the colonizer, as it relies upon the colonized to give it shape. Similarly, with the introduction of a new set of users performing a language, the language no longer exists as it was; it has shifted in meaning. Beyond the thematic implications of language, hybridity has inspired an immense movement in literary discourse and understandings of the very way language is managed and owned. Herskovits developed the notion of syncretism, a theory attempting to explain why certain cultural forms are carried and others lost. Similarly, Claude Levi-Strauss developed the term bricolage to describe mixed forms within narratives. Creolization describes the linguistic blending of dominant and subdominant cultures. These examples illustrate the broad realm of studies that have developed simply around the use of hybridized language. In an analysis of the rise of the â€Å"hybrid genre† in postmodern literature, Kapchan and Strong say, â€Å"Hybridization has become one such analytic allegory, defining lines of interest and affiliation among scholars of popular and literary culture, perhaps quite unintentionally. The extent to which these authors use the metaphor of hybridity consciously and concisely differs. That they use it, however, qualifies hybridity as one of several tropes, or forms of metaphoric predication, that most epitomize the scholarship of the last decade,† . Not only does this observation imply that the body of hybridized literature is growing, harkening to the rising voices and representations of the hybrid, but that hybridity is becoming normalized as an accepted form of literature and the purist notion of genre is diminishing. Furthermore, the use of a colonizer’s language by the colonized to speak of the crimes of colonialism is its own transgression and act of resistance. In taking ownership of the language, changing the way that it is used, the boundaries of language as belonging to a specific place or race are dissolved. Jahan Ramazani’s Hybrid Muse is an analytical review of the poetry that has arisen from the hybridization of the English muse with the long-resident muses of Africa, India, the Caribbean, and other decolonizing territories of the British Empire (2001). A hybrid himself, Ramazani suggests that the use of indigenous metaphors, rhythms, creoles, and genres has allowed a new form of poetry that not only speaks of the violence and displacement of colonialism, but embodies it in its very form. These hybrid poetries can be viewed as a gateway to understanding those once deemed unfamiliar, and hybridity of language becomes a way by which to deconstruct borders and relate to collectives across cultural boundaries. Further, hybridity must interrogate the notion that nationality is essential zed in a distinct culture that geographic borders somehow embody inherent knowledge or truth about the people they contain. Mamdani asks, â€Å"How do you tell who is indigenous to the country and who is not? Given a history of migration, what is the dividing line between the indigenous and the nonindigenous? . He addresses the nationalist concern over entitlement to nation, and the indigenous wish to lay claim to culture. I understood that theories of hybridity, in clarifying the shifting and indefinite nature of culture, can serve as a tool that complicate the nationalist exclusionary practice of determining who does and does not have claim to a nation. From health care to immigration, h is arguments resonate loudly with current events. Similarly, we must consider the ways in which the â€Å"things† that give culture meaning are unfixed and variable, negating essentialist arguments about inherent meanings of culture. In The Predicament of Culture, James Clifford (1988) analyzes sites including anthropology, museums, and travel writing to take a critical ethnography of the West and its shifting relationships with other societies. He demonstrates how â€Å"other† national cultures are in fact fictions and mythical narratives, and we must ask the question of representation and who has the authority to speak for a group’s identity. In his article â€Å"Diasporas†, he suggests that â€Å"The old localizing strategies by bounded community, by organic culture, by region, by center and periphery may obscure as much as they reveal†. Diaspora is defined as a history of dispersal, myths/memories of the homeland, alienation in the host country, desire for eventual return, ongoing support of the homeland, and a collective identity importantly defined by this relationship. In this consideration of culture, we understand the vast connotations of displacement, from asking which history the diasporic should identify with to asking if it is even possible to return to a homeland one never knew or left long ago. Second, in the representation of culture, be it by petrifying culture in a museum or nailing it to an anthropological account, the risk lies in taking these subjective moments as truths or knowledge. Furthermore, the far-reaching diasporic symbols and narratives that snowball into this thing we call national culture suggest that culture is itself a traveler collecting artifacts from various locations along the way, and its walls are too insubstantial to be used as a means of exclusion. Third and perhaps most significant, hybridity in a postcolonial world muddles the very definitions of culture by which nations define themselves. Given that nationalism is founded upon a collective consciousness from shared loyalty to a culture, one would assume this culture is well-defined. Yet the â€Å"solid† roots of historical and cultural narratives that nations rely upon are diasporic, with mottled points of entry at various points in time. An investigation of the roots of cultural symbols like folk stories, religion, and music would reveal sources varied and wide-ranging. Furthermore, culture is defined in relationship to other cultures. Edward Said’s Orientalism (1979) offers a strong description of the system by which nations appropriate from others to define themselves. He suggests Orientalism â€Å"has helped to define Europe as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience†. Using a theoretical framework influenced by Gramsci’s notion of hegemonic culture and Foucault’s notion of discourse, Said draws significant attention to the intricate and complex process by which the West must use the East to construct itself, its culture, its meaning. In an illuminating excerpt describing the process of Orientalism, he writes: To formulate the Orient, to give it shape, identity, definition with full recognition of its place in memory, its importance to imperial strategy, and its ‘natural’ role as an appendage to Europe; to dignify all the knowledge collected during colonial occupation with the title ‘contribution to modern learning; when the natives had neither been consulted nor treated as anything except as pretexts for a text whose usefulness was not to the natives; to feel oneself as a European in command, almost at will, of Oriental history, time, and geography to make out of every observable detail a generalization and out of every generalization an immutable law about the Oriental nature, temperament, mentality, custom, or type; and, above all, to transmute living reality into the stuff of texts, to possess actuality mainly because nothing in the Orient seems to resist one’s powers. † In a st ream of fragments, Said shows the diverse processes by which dominant cultures are formed at the service of Others. Using words like â€Å"shape,† â€Å"definition,† and â€Å"transmute,† he describes the act of defining nation and the artificial nature of these boundaries. Said offers a theoretical means by which to reject nationalist divisions between an us and Them, a West and Other. This conceptualization of the ways in which nations determine not only their own national identities, but the identities of Other is powerful in revealing the inherently hybrid roots of national culture. Studies of national identity are thus essential in deconstructing xenophobic nationalist claims to nation and the resulting miscegenation of immigrant Others. CONCLUSION This discussion draws from the body of postcolonial literature to suggest that studies of cultural hybridity are powerful in probing the bounded labels of race, language, and nation that maintain social inequalities. By examining how the hybrid can deconstruct boundaries within race, language, and nation, I understood that hybridity has the ability to empower marginalized collectives and deconstruct bounded labels, which are used in the service of subordination. In essence, hybridity has the potential to allow once subjugated collectivities to reclaim a part of the cultural space in which they move. Hybridity can be seen not as a means of division or sorting out the various histories and diverse narratives to individualize identities, but rather a means of reimagining an interconnected collective. Like the skin on a living body, the collective body has a surface that also feels and â€Å"Borders materialize as an effect on intensifications of feeling and individual and collective bodies surface through the very orientations we take to objects and others,† In the description that Formations our orientations can be shifted, our feelings towards Others transformed, there is a possibility of redefining our exclusionary systems of labeling. Furthermore, breaking down immaterial borders through explorations of hybridity offers the possibility of more effective public policy, one that refers to the broad expanse of its diverse population. Frenkel and Shenhav did an illuminating study on the ways in which studies of hybridity have allowed management and organization studies to manage their longstanding western hegemonic practices and to incorporate postcolonial insights into the organizational literature revolving around the relationships between Orientalism and organizations. The willingness of institutions to reform their long held ideologies in light of a changing world, as well as to consider their work through alternative lenses, is an essential practice in deconstructing the bindings of narratives-as-knowledge. In the boundary-shifting process, there is power in the notion of deconstruction in the service of reconstruction, breaking down boundaries in order to form a more inclusive sense of the collectivity. Furthermore, hybridity asserts the notion that representations of collective identity must be analyzed contextually. When we examine a representation of culture, be it in a film, poem, or speech, we should ask: Who is doing the representing? What are the implications of the representation? Why are they engaging in the process of representation? What is the historical moment that informs the representation? How are they being represented? In addition to the questions explored in this paper, I would recommend applying theories of hybridity to a realm beyond race and nation, in order to consider alternative boundaries such as gender and sexuality. The work of hybrid theorists from Bhabha to Said suggests that there is a vast intellectual landscape for cultural inquiries like these. Our mission must be to continue this work and to delve deeper. Cultural studies have great potential to liberate us from the socially-given boundaries that so stubbornly limit our capacity for thought and discussion, but we must take time to join in a collective critique of the knowledge we ingest and disperse. After all, the greatest power lies in the heart of the collective.

Classical View of Modern Society: A Comparison

As we approach the third millennia, the world grows into complexity. The world is now on the modern era with different changes from its cultural and intellectual movements. The world is facing a modern enlightenment. Nonetheless, there were also some improvements on how the modern society works but there were also a lot of varied and complex problems and challenges that emerge.Although, many people still believe that man can solve these problems and overcome these challenges thru meaningful analysis and introspection. Some search the answer from the theories of classical philosophers. They believe that this world will not be on what it is now without these people. Yet, the question still lies on their validity of the assertion s of the philosophers. Are these assertions ad theories relevant and appropriate in the modern times?However, we and these philosophers have varied experiences. Yet, their in depth knowledge of society bids us to believe them and study them. Like Marx, who died a hundred years ago, still had many followers. Marx on his early age had observed the plight of the masses against the bourgeoisie in the capitalist society. He, just like Friedrich Nietzsche, believed in the reconstruction of the society and in redefining the role of an individual. He argued that man’s will was not due to his like or to his needs, rather, society dictated him on the things that he should like or he should need.Society and man interacted, so according to him there is a need that a society, in which a man lived, should be fair and would be the instrument on predisposing justice on all the people. Marx further asserted that not a man could claim that his existence is largely due to himself, but rather all people existed because of mutual relationship and interdependency. He believed that all humans are interconnected in various ways, such as a social network, that whatever one does would surely affect others.However, through out his life, Marx had commented on the ambiguity and the disorderliness of the society. He had seen and observed the resistance and struggles between the different classes or strata of the society. He had observe that people with equal classes such as the bourgeoisie formed an alliances with each others to further their ends. Marx had observed that somewhat there is a line or an immense gap that had divided the people from intermingling with each other.He asserted that there was a categorizing force that bonded people with equal social status. As a result, the proletariat class was oppressed and injustice was done to them. Oppressions, according to Marx, might trigger bloody civil revolutions, and unrest in the society would prevail. In order to prevent this from occurring, Marx proposed a communist society, as what he described in his book together with Friedrich Engels, The Communist Manifesto.Engels, a co-author, deemed that the The Communist Manifesto was exclusively the product of Marx’s brilliance, and the book was Marx’s. In the book, Marx and Engels first summoned up history. In their exposition through the dialectic philosophy, they both expressed that in the world there existed two opposing forces[1]. They had described that there existed those who oppressed and those that were oppressed. The main point on which the The Communist Manifesto revolved was the establishment of a communist society.A communist society, as what both described is a liberated society were people are all treated equally. Moreover it is a society that does not discriminate nor classify people because social status is no longer in existence. Moreover, communism proposed a society wherein people will no longer acknowledge his or her possessions rather his or her properties belong to everyone. Marx and Engels further stressed the need for centralization and organization of all the properties and efforts of the state for a common ground.The book proposed equal sharing and division of labors, equal all otment of profits and income. Moreover, in the long run, Communism also believed in the diminishment of the state and its ruler because Marx believed that if an ideal society (communist society) existed, the people would no longer be in need of a facilitator or an organizer to dictate or facilitate living. According to them, the state would only serve as a guide meanwhile that a communist society is not yet achieved[2].Meanwhile, another notable German philosopher was Max Weber, who unlike Marx traced the origin of capitalism and its role to the society. If one would read the title of Weber’s work and not the text, one may laugh because one cannot relate easily capitalism and the protestant ethic. However, Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism was a huge success because he had found sensible reasons on how the protestant ethic might have contributed to the origin of capitalism.Weber, who was considered one of the fathers of modern sociology, was ver y different as compared to Marx. Marx, although a Jewish, denounced the belief in the inexistence of God. He asserted that god does not shaped man according to his form, yet man conceptualized the absolute as a model- who is perfect and divine- due to his quest of attaining also that same stature. On the other hand, Weber had researched a lot on how religion had affected the life of man. He had wrote more descriptive and analytical essays after the The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. He had shown the effects of religion to the communal and shared cause of a society[3]. He had discussed that religious background define the wants and the needs of each person.For example, he had found out that the Hindus and the Buddhist were religious groups who taught that life is all about gaining material wealth or money. Yet they had other goals, like unity to the divine and freedom from the repeated cycle of rebirth. These assertions were parallel to the basis on how he analyzed th e origin of capitalism. Weber asserted that he did not claim that all the reasons of the birth of capitalism were mainly due to the protestant. He just cited some evidences that verified and attested his claim. The Calvinist, a protestant sect, according to him had that attitude of pursuing material wealth and worldly success. This was because- according to him as Calvinist believed-was the manifestation of God’s grace to the Calvinist.The Calvinist believed that God showed many signs in this earthly being of what will be their destination in the afterlife. Calvinist believed that if God made them rich, there is a large possibility that they will not suffer eternal damnation in the future. So in connection with this, they find ways on how to improve their status in life usually wanting to beat their fellow Calvinists in terms of material wealth[4].  Ã‚   So Weber asserted that this kind s of attitudes triggered the start of capitalism. Weber also considered the fact that th ere was also other factor which determined the start of capitalism. However, Weber considered religion to be a very immense factor in shaping society. These considerations lead him to immense study about different religions and their roles in different society.Unlike Marx, Weber in his economic theories still saw the importance of social class and did not promote its abolition. Weber believed that man’s work and capabilities were different and varied from each other so he stated that each man’s achievement and wealth will surely be different from each other. He rejected the ideas of Marx, saying that such an ideal society is not achievable.   It was very clear in the opening of his essay, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, that he favored capitalism.However, Emile Durkheim, a modern sociologist, in his book the The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, argued that there are existing social facts that determined society. These social facts according to h im were not related to an individual but were in existence and affect the entirety of life of an individual and the society as a whole. He is considered the father of modern sociology because of his endeavor to tackle society as purely sociology and away from psychology and philosophy. In his book, he described that religion is one of the social facts where an individual cannot go away from.In an individual’s search for identity and his role in the society, he is often confused with ethics and morality. Often, an individual was mystified on making decisions whether to do the good or to the bad. So Durkheim considered morality and ethics as one of the social facts that needed particular attention because most of an individual’s action was derived from them. In his book, he had expounded the role of religion on binding the individuals. He also described the collective morality that an individual received as he is affiliated to a certain religious group.He further his exp lanation saying that a religion was not simply based on the discernment of the right from the wrong, yet individuals learned the sacrosanct and the right by participating in worship and other religious activities. He described that these religious activities were the ones that defined the morality of an individual.Moreover, Marx, Weber and Durkheim seemed to have complementary views with regards to society and they have different ways on how they described its evolution and growth. However, all of them presented their ideas with concrete evidences and all of them deal with reality. However, Marxist view of society was very ideal and was very hard to attain. Specifically his propositions with regards to the abolition of the state and the thing which he said as common cause, those things were not achievable due to the existence of greed and self indulgence of an individual.However, Weber described that individual’s variety is the linking force that binds individuals. He discuss ed that there is no need to abolish the social leveling of individuals for abolishment will be an injustice to the capitalist or to those people who worked so hard in attaining their social status. Moreover, Durkheim agreed with Weber. Durkheim argued that education is the key in removing the self-indulgencies of an individual. He further asserted that education will limit the possession of an individual. Durkheim believed that proper education and discipline would hammer commitment and would foster the obligation of an individual to the society.   Durkheim’s assertion was well fitted and his arguments are most valid in terms of describing the modern society.BibliographyBottomore, T (ed), Karl Marx, 3rd edn,Blackwell, Oxford, 1979.Geras, Norman,   The Controversy about Marx and Justice, in A. Callinicos (ed.), Marxist Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford,1989.Kà ¤sler, D, Max Weber: An Introduction to his Life and Work, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1988.Là ¶ with, K, Max Weber and Karl Marx, Allen & Unwin, London, 1982McLellan, D, Marx Before Marxism, Macmillan, London, 1970.Marx, K, ,F Engelsb& M Malia, The Communist Manifesto. Signet Classic, New York, 1998.Weber, M, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Routledge, New York,1992.[1] T Bottomore, (ed), Karl Marx, 3rd edn,Blackwell, Oxford, 1979 pg.9. [2] Kostof, p. 18. [3] M Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Routledge, New York,1992, pg.3. [4]D Kà ¤sler, Max Weber: An Introduction to his Life and Work, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1988, pg 22.