Referendums: Arguments For and Against

Referendums: Arguments For and Against What are the arguments for and against the holding of popular referendums? Under what circumstances, if any, should they be held? The referendum has its origins in direct democracy, and can therefore be dated back to the 5th Century BC in the Greek city state of Athens. The concept of a referendum has changed and developed in line with democracy and can now be found in a number of differing forms throughout the developed world. A referendum is broadly defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as â€Å"a general vote by the electorate on a single political question†; however this definition fails to make distinctions between the many types of referendum which exist, or the modern day importance of referendums. In an initial classification there are three types of referendum as defined by the Britannica Concise Encyclopaedia. Obligatory referendums; which are required by law, optional referendums; which are put on the ballot when a sufficient number of voters sign a petition demanding that a law passed by the legislature be ratified by the people, and voluntary referendums; when legislatures submit to voter s to decide an issue or to test public opinion. There are a number of widely credited arguments both for and against the holding of popular referendums, however, there are only a few key ideas encapsulated in these arguments. Those in favour of referendums generally tend to point out that they; promote political participation and increase voter knowledge on issues as well as helping to strengthen democracy and further legitimate the government. Whilst arguments against referendums concentrate on ideas; that the public are ill equipped to make important political decisions, and that the information they do have is distorted through media influence, that referendums only provide an idea of public opinion at that one point in time, and that referendums weaken and remove power from the representative institutions elected by the public. The holding of popular referendums is key in a democratic system where the people are becoming, not only disengaged but disinterested in the political process as a whole. The use of referendums can help to counter this affect, provided that clear guidelines are set for when a referendum should take place. The word democracy comes from the Latin demos meaning the people and kratos meaning power or rule (OED); rule by the people. The practicalities of this literal definition, often referred to as direct democracy, are almost impossible in our world today, where in the UK in 2005 there were 44,245,939 people registered to vote (www.idea.int)[1]. However, representative democracy is a â€Å"limited and indirect form of democracy† (Heywood 2007:74) which relies on, in most cases, an electoral mandate for legitimacy. This electoral mandate has been called into question on a number of occasions in modern political history, most notably in the US presidential election of 2005 between George W Bush and Al Gore, and again in the UK General Election of 2005. Referendums could be seen in a modern political context as a stepping stone between direct and representative democracy. It is fair to say that in the majority of developed political societies people have the opportunity to vote into office representatives whom they believe to share policy views with. However, it would be impossible for any political party to represent all the views of its members and supporters, as a result parties may include certain policy promises in their manifestos that their voters do not want to see implemented (Caramani 2008:254). This, along with the fact that people vote for parties for such a wide range of reasons, mean that it is not possible to conclude that peoples policy preferences are the same as the party they vote for (Setala 1999: 14-16). Therefore, a referendum allows the public to show a direct opinion on a specific policy matter they would otherwise be impossible. Linked to the idea that referendums strengthen democracy with regards to policy decisions, there is also the theory that they legitimate government between elections. The period between major governmental elections is, in many countries, several years. In this time period governments can, for the most part, make decisions without any public consultation. There is therefore a danger that although these officials are elected as representatives, it is only the opposition parties and the checks and balances outlined in constitutions that prevent them from deviating from their original promises. Referendums allow the government to not only gauge public opinion on policy but also to make clear that the decisions they are making are in line with public attitude on issues concerning them, therefore providing another check against the power of government. Opponents to referendums argue that instead of strengthening democracy and legitimising government they in fact weaken the political system by removing power from elected bodies. Representative democracy is founded on the principle that elected officials represent the views of the people and make decisions on their behalf; therefore a referendum undermines this principle. Sir Patrick Nairne observed that â€Å"if Members of Parliament are elected to settle national issues of major policy brought before them by the Government, is it right to throw such issues back to the voters to settle† (Qvotrup 2005:23). This argument concerning the weakening of bodies is, although worth acknowledging, very limited in its view on referendums. It concentrates for the most part on the idea that referendums remove decision making power from elected bodies and would therefore render them both less effective and less powerful. However, this is an extreme view that fails to recognise that referend ums can be used to aid governments as well as the people, and provide a vital link between the two, as has already been argued. In the majority of political systems across the world we are witnessing a worrying downward trend in voter turnout. This can be attributed to a number of causes including; partisan dealignment, disenchantment with the political system and indifference to politics. Referendums can be used to help promote political participation by enabling the electorate to become better educated and informed and therefore reduce the feeling of alienation (Heywood 2007:250). By providing people with the opportunity to participate in referendums they are presented with the opportunity to educate and inform themselves on political issues. There is clearly a link between an informed electorate and higher levels of political participation, as Verba, Schlozman and Brady (1995) argue. This correlation arises from the fact that a more politically educated electorate is able understand the workings of government, and the issues affecting them; therefore seek to bring about change. Switzerland was one of the f irst countries to introduce referendums to make decisions on proposed legislation. Although turnout figures in Switzerland are not very high, around 45% (www.idea.int)[2], it can be argued that the Swiss people are more politically active than turnout figures show due to the fact that there is such a large number of referendums not everyone votes in all of them, and also that they are more involved with political parties and in other ways than most other countries. Aside from elections there are very few ways in which citizens can directly influence political decisions. There are provisions in most democratic countries for the electorate to have some personal contact with their representative, however for the most part people do not make use of this tool because they believe it to be ineffectual; issues raised in these arenas rarely have an effect on the outcome of policy. People are also able to join political parties yet; again, they are faced with the same problems of ineffectuality. A referendum therefore provides an answer to increasing ways for the electorate to positively participate in politics. A binding referendum permits the public to make the final decision on a specific policy, although these types of referendums are not widely used, it is rare for a government to go against the public even in a non-binding referendum. In 1975 the UK, both electorate and government, was divided over whether or not it should continue its membership in the European Economic Community. The overwhelming â€Å"Yes† vote to stay in Europe was upheld by the Labour government of the time, although it was not a binding referendum, and was hailed as a â€Å"historic decision† by Prime Minister Harold Wilson (www.bbc.co.uk/news)[3]. The counter arguments to increased political participation and voter knowledge through referendums are that; in fact, referendums can cause voter fatigue and decrease participation, and that the public are ill equipped to make important political decisions. The first of these arguments relies on the premise that the public would be able to vote on all or a large number of policies. However, this move back to direct democracy is not desirable for the public or the government; presenting the public with such a large number of opportunities to vote could indeed cause voting fatigue. There is a compromise to be found between allowing the public to vote on all policy and not allowing them to vote on it at all. The latter of these criticisms on referendums concern voter knowledge. It is ignorant to assume that the electorate are either not informed, or are unable, to educate themselves on political issues put to them in referendums. If people are able to vote and presumably make an informed decision on which political party they wish to represent them they are equally able to do so in a referendum. Critics argue that information is distorted through the media prior to referendums, and this is a problem worth considering. During the first referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland two of Rupert Murdochs biggest selling newspapers The Irish Sun and The Sunday Times were seen as going â€Å"hell for leather on a No vote† (www.guardian.co.uk)[4]; similarly the media coverage on the 1975 Common Market Referendum was heavily biased to the â€Å"Yes† campaign, it has been estimated that twenty times the amount of money was available to this campaign than to the â€Å"No† campa ign (www.europeansinglecurrency.com/referendum)[5]. Although in these instances the media seemed to have an influence on the final outcome there are other, more fundamental, factors which influence peoples decisions, the American political scientist John Zaller encapsulates this idea; â€Å"Every opinion is a marriage of information and predisposition† (Zaller 1992:6). For referendums to be used effectively it is important that the circumstances in which they should be held are clearly defined and upheld by law. When considering this point one must take into account that referendums should not used in a way that, as many opponents argue, undermines the authority of the elected bodies in a representative democracy. An answer to this is that referendums should only be used in matters of constitutional importance and not for other policy decisions. It is, after all, constitutions which safeguard the fundamental rights of the electorate as well as preventing the misuse of power by elected bodies (Dahl 2000: 124-127). However, only allowing people to vote on constitutional changes is very limiting, especially if the issue directly influences the way in which they live, and there may also be instances in which the government wishes to hold a referendum on another issue, therefore a wider definition for circumstances must be found. It would be almost impo ssible to define exactly which policy areas the electorate should be able to vote on in referendums. There are obviously issues on which it would be inappropriate to have a referendum, taxes are an obvious example; there are complex issues on which the public would probably not have the time or adequate resources to inform themselves on and which have no real affect on them, for example defence policies. Therefore the best course of action would probably be to allow the elected body to decide in these instances which policies it is sensible to put to a referendum. Australia, in fact follows these basic guidelines for holding referendums to great success. Compulsory national referendums are â€Å"held to approve government-proposed changes to the Australian Constitution†, the constitution specifies this; furthermore the government can also conduct optional referendums or ‘plebiscites to decide on matters outside of the constitution (www.wikipedia.org)[6]. This system of conducting referendums is ideal because the electorate are guaranteed a vote on constitutional issues as well as being given the opportunity, when appropriate, to vote on other policy matters. Referendums provide a vital direct link between government and the electorate which is otherwise unseen in representative democracies. They can help to promote political participation as well as creating a better informed electorate; they also strengthen democracy in modern society. Yet referendums, despite all of this are often criticised for the way in which they weaken elected bodies and do not provide a true gauge on public opinion, largely due to media influence. However, as has been argued none of these arguments hold much weight, especially in the face of a system where the use of referendums have clear guidelines, as in Australia, to be used for constitutional amendments and wherever else is seen as fit by the elected bodies in power. Referendums are a tool which should be used more widely in todays political systems of democracy as they are a manageable and positive step towards a hybrid political system which effectively combines representative and direct democracy. Bibliography Britannica Concise Encyclopaedia (2007) (London: Britannica Concise Encyclopaedia, Inc.) Caramani, Daniele (2008) Comparative Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Dahl, Robert. A. (2000) On Democracy (Yale: Yale University Press) Heywood, Andrew (2007) Politics third edition (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan) Oxford Dictionary of English (2005) 2nd edition revised (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Setala, Maija (1999) Referendums and Democratic Government: Normative Theory and the Analysis of Institutions (Basingstoke: Macmillan) Verba, Sidney, Kay Lehman, Schlozman and Henry Brady (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press) Zaller, John (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) [1] â€Å"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Voter Turnout International† Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance 2005 < http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?country=GB> (13 Nov. 2009) [2] â€Å"Swiss Confederation Voter Turnout† International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance 2007 < http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?id=42> (13 Nov. 2009) [3] â€Å"1975: UK embraces Europe on Referendum† 1975 < http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/6/newsid_2499000/2499297.stm> (13 Nov. 2009) [4] â€Å"NI votes NO in Irish referendum† 2009 < http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/01/ireland-referendum-rupert-murdoch> (13 Nov 2009) [5] â€Å"Was the 1975 Referendum Conducted Fairley† A British Referendum 2003 < http://www.europeansinglecurrency.com/referendum.htm> (13 Nov 2009) [6] â€Å"Federal Referendums† Referendums in Australia 2009 < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_Australia> (13 Nov 2009)

Epic of Beowulf Essay - Heroes †Then and Now :: Epic of Beowulf Essay

Beowulf - Heroes Then and Now Heroes today have changed from those of Beowulf's day. Back in the time of Beowulf heroes were mainly the protectors of the country such as warriors and kings. The roles have changed today were heroes consist of celebrities and sport players. The roles have changed because our society has changed as well. In the time of Beowulf the kings were of the utmost of importance. Without a king the country was sure to fall into ruins. The king's duty was to protect the country. He did this by keeping up with the wars of the surrounding country and finding warriors to protect the country. The king was highly respected and he had a very important job. Without the king there was no hope for the country. Today really is not all that different, instead of a king we have a president. Our president must still keep up with the foreign affairs including wars in order to protect our country. He must also be able to foresee any affect that foreign affairs might have on the country in the long run. It is out president's responsibility to ensure that our military divisions, including the airforce, navy, and army, are prepared and able to defend our nation or our nation's allies. In the epic, Beowulf, heroes were also warriors. These warriors were supposed to protect the country against "monsters" and invasions. The warriors were strong men who could physically make an attack or prevent an attack in order to protect their country. Beowulf was a warrior who was a hero to the country where the Danes lived. Beowulf was able to protect and serve the Danes by killing Grendel. Grendel was an evil monster who had been killing the people that had been sleeping in the hall that he haunted. Beowulf became a hero by not only killing Grendle but also by tearing off his shoulder arm and claw with his bear hands. This is an amazing feat that an ordinary man could not accomplish. To kill a monster with one's bear hands is simply unheard of! Today our heroes do not normally consist of a warrior as much as a sports player. They too, like the warrior, do things that the ordinary man could not do. Accomplishing unordinary feats is how they earn the respect of the nation. Their job is also equally important as the warrior because they allow people to escape their problems and lives for a while they watch the sport.

Ethical Philosophies of Machiavelli and Subramanian Essay

One of the greatest comparisons of all time is to contrast Niccolo Machiavelli’s â€Å"The Prince† with V. K. Subramanian’s â€Å"The Chanakya: Kautilya. † Critically, a look can be taken into several different elements of each author’s work to best compare and contrast them. To that end, a look will be taken at the political, social, and ethical philosophies of Machiavelli and Subramanian to determine how they differ and in which ways the philosophies are similar. Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince† in the early 1500’s as a way of adding his insight from what he had seen of politics and hereditary principality—even though â€Å"it was plagiarized during Machiavelli’s lifetime†¦[and] was never published by him†¦[making] the text [itself as] still disputable† (Machiavelli 11). While current versions of â€Å"The Prince† are attributed to him, this fact of plagiarism and publishing fraud make the work even more intriguing, given the subject matter itself. Of the work itself, Machiavelli said that â€Å"I pour myself out as fully as I can in meditation on the subject, discussing what a principality is, what kinds there are, how they can be acquired, how they can be kept, why they are lost; and if any of the fancies ever pleased you, this ought not to displease you; and to a prince, especially to a new one, it should be welcome† (Machiavelli 11). Machiavelli dedicated the work itself to Lorenzo de’ Medici, even after he was put to torture by the family for treachery. Machiavelli’s methods are one of unique significance as he is writing, having been there, in the thick of things. Essentially, â€Å"The Prince† is meant as a guidebook on how to rule in all princely matters for Lorenzo de’ Medici. Machiavelli wrote about how hereditary principalities worked, how to keep that inheritance, and even how a prince could gain a new principality, and how a prince should rule his people and act, as a prince, and politically. While Machiavelli essentially confined his writings to obtaining fortune, keeping and obtaining power, and virtue as a leader, a look can be taken into his writings to discover the philosophies beneath his ideas. In comparison, V. K. Subramanian’s â€Å"The Chanakya: Kautilya† was published in 1980 about and are translated from are translated from three works known as the â€Å"Chankyasutras,† the â€Å"Chankyanitidarpan† and the â€Å"Arthshastra† and are based upon the time in history around 300 BC. The intro of Subramanian’s work notes that â€Å"Chanakya, also known as Kautilya and Vishnugupta was the famous Indian Machiavelli who was responsible for the overthrow of the last ruler of the Nada Dynasty and the enthronement of Chandragupta Maurya†¦there is an interesting story about Chanakya’s first encounter with Chandragupta, which ultimately ended in their collaboration and capture of power† (Subramanian 1). Subramanian’s work, then, is a direct reflection of Machiavelli’s own. What makes them similar, however, despite the men within the tales, is the philosophies shared between the two. Machiavelli’s political philosophy is perhaps the easiest to pinpoint as the very purpose of his work revolved around the necessity of a prince to reign successfully. Machiavelli, actually, mainly focused on the political aspects of maintaining and gaining principalities. He notes that â€Å"let any one now consider with what little difficulty the king could have maintained his position in Italy had he observed the rules above laid down, and kept all his friends secure and protected; for although they were numerous they were both weak and timid, some afraid of the Church†¦and thus they would always have been forced to stand in with him, and by their means he could easily have made himself secure against those who remained powerful† (30). Machiavelli is urging his prince to take note of the past and understand that had the king protected his weaker neighbors, he would have not only gained them as allies—but also could have gained them as part of his reign. And, at all costs, he should protect his allies as he would protect his own lands. Politically, being a stronger power, he would have been made into the â€Å"leader,† who they would be indebted to and would follow with more loyalty than any money could purchase. And, to Machiavelli, the art of gaining allies and principalities, even de facto ones, was the art to be achieved. Even more so, Subramanian’s fourth maxim entitled â€Å"Advisors, Aides, Counselors, Ministers,† notes that â€Å"after equipping oneself fully, one should seek an ally (aide), one without an advisor has no certainty of counsel, one wheel does not move (the vehicle), the true aide serves alike in prosperity and adversity, a self respecting ruler should appoint as counselor, one who is inferior to him, and respects him†¦deflection to the enemy takes place due to negligence† (22-25). In this, Subramanian agrees wholeheartedly with Machiavelli’s statements. To be a successful ruler, allies must be taken and protected, first and foremost, before true rule can begin. The reason being, that with allies, a force become much stronger, incrementally, with each ally added. Furthermore, each ally must be protected and cared for to ensure their cooperation—but with that cooperation comes an extended kingdom. Indeed, Machiavelli’s social philosophy can be found within his writings on obtaining fortune. Machiavelli writes that â€Å"principalities are either hereditary, in which the family has been long established; or they are new†¦. such dominions thus acquired are either accustomed to live under a prince, or to live in freedom; and are acquired either by the arms of the prince himself, or of others, or else by fortune or by ability† (21). Machiavelli is commenting, simply, that the way in which a prince gains land is two-fold: either he inherits it or he fights for it. The manner in which the prince gains and obtains his land, however, is what makes the prince either beloved by his people or hated. For Machiavelli, gaining the most principalities possible by virtuous means was the ideal result. And, as he instructed his prince, it was best to be good, socially, if any hopes of maintaining that principality are held. In fact, Machiavelli comments that, for example, â€Å"Louis the Twelfth, King of France, quickly occupied Milan, and as quickly lost it; and to turn him out the first time it only needed Lodovico’s own forces; because those who had opened the gates to him, finding themselves deceived in their hopes of future benefit, would not endure the ill-treatment of the new prince† (23). Moreover, â€Å"it is very true that, after acquiring rebellious provinces a second time, they are not so lightly lost afterwards, because the prince, with little reluctance, takes the opportunity of the rebellion to punish the delinquents, to clear out the suspects, and to strengthen himself in the weakest places† (24). Thus, not only is it important for a prince to be clear in his occupation in a land, to become most beloved, he must first get rid of the troublemakers—thus leaving the peaceable, and willing to be occupied. If a prince does not take this step, he is left in hostile territory with people willing to stage an overthrow. On contrast, Subramanian writes out a few of the maxims of Chanakya, citing that â€Å"economic prosperity creates prosperity for the people, if the people are prosperous, even a leaderless state can be governed, people’s fury is the greatest of furies†¦[and] to be without a master is better than having an arrogant master† (22). In this, the two authors cannot be more different from the other. Machiavelli believes that the first step of any prince should be to take a firm grasp upon his principalities, to conquer new ones, and to rout the dissenters by force before they can rally for an overthrow. Machiavelli believes that by getting rid of the rebellious people before they can act, a leader can sustain and mark his position within his land, taking charge before the people even really know that it has happened. Then, once all the rebellion has been stamped out, a leader can begin to make his land prosperous. However, Subramanian cites a very different kind of social philosophy, making note that a leader might as well not exist if he intends to be a tyrant to the people, that a people have more respect for a man intent on prosperity, first, and rebellion last. Because, in an attempt to rout the dissenters, a leader would make a dent on the value the people hold for him—and thus their fury would remain. To really be a true leader and be beloved by his land, a leader must intend on affluence and prosperity as his bottom line. Finally, Machiavelli’s ethical and moral philosophy requires the most interpretation to highlight significantly. As Machiavelli writes about virtue in a leader, instructing a prince on how to act and behave, an ethical philosophy is formed. On contrast, Subramanian’s ethical philosophy stems from his ethical roots maxim that states â€Å"righteousness is the root of happiness, wealth is the root of righteousness, the state of the root is wealth, victory over senses is the root of the state, humility is the root of sense control, worship of elders is the root of humility, wisdom results from the worship of elders, with wisdom one can prosper, the prosperous one becomes the victorious one†¦[and] the victorious one obtains all the riches† (21-22). Despite it’s cryptic fortune-cookie nature, Subramanian’s writings do indeed have a fine message on ethical philosophy, here. In explicating the words, Subramanian is saying that to be a good leader, on must first be righteous, but to be righteous, one must first have wealth, to have wealth, one must first have victory, to have victory, one must first have humility, to have humility, one must listen to their elders to obtain wisdom, and with that wisdom a leader can prosper and be victorious in all they seek to achieve. The value here, is that Subramanian notes the significance of wisdom in all things. Without wisdom and following and heeding the elders who have come before, a leader stands no chance of being successful. Morally, a leader is obligated to his people to be triumphant so that the land can prosper, but without wisdom, a leader is nothing to his people but a tyrant. Subramanian says what Machiavelli does not. To Machiavelli, leading a people, by first disposing of the bad ones, is the best way for a prince to prosper in his lands. While he encourages his prince to be sound and wise, he first sends out the encouragement that the prince must always guard his assets, for fear of being overthrown or taken down by a greater force. To Machiavelli, obtaining land and prospering was, essentially, about war. To win that war, a prince had to be wise, and indeed, listen to his elders as well, but not in the ethical sense. Machiavelli meant for the prince to watch out for himself, first and foremost, and then, once the land became prosperous, Machiavelli encouraged the prince to be good to his people so that they would love him and understand that they were prosperous because of him. To Machiavelli, the ethical philosophy came last, after conquering and protecting one’s principalities. Overall, one of the greatest comparisons of all time is to contrast Niccolo Machiavelli’s â€Å"The Prince† with V. K. Subramanian’s â€Å"The Chanakya: Kautilya. † Taking a look at several different elements of each author’s work critically revealed a great level of significance as to their philosophies on politics, socially, and even ethically. Politically, Machiavelli and Subramanian follow the same philosophy, which intends a leader to find and protect allies first and foremost. As to social philosophy, however, the two authors cannot be more different. Machiavelli intends his prince to take charge and stamp out rebellion, while Subramanian cites that prosperity and kindness should be shown towards the new land. And finally, ethically, the two authors also differ. Machiavelli is intent on a prince who focuses on war and conquering new lands, and in this way a leader can gain wisdom and insight—however, to Subramanian, wisdom only comes by following one’s elders. Morally, a leader is obligated to his people to be triumphant so that the land can prosper, but without wisdom, a leader is nothing to his people but a tyrant. Works Cited. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Trns. W. K. Marriott. New York: Plain Label Books, 1910. Subramanian, V. K. Maxims of Chanakya: Kautilya. India: Abhinav Publications, 1980.

A Continued Study Of The Real Life Story Behind - 2311 Words

Diana Dean ENG 1102 Sandra Rourke December 7, 2014 A CONTINUED STUDY OF THE REAL LIFE STORY BEHIND â€Å"WHERE ARE YOU GOING, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?† AND OF SERIAL KILLERS IN GENERAL The name of the man behind Joyce Carol Oates’s short story, â€Å"Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?† is Charles Schmid, Jr. or â€Å"Smitty† as he was called by most everyone who knew him. I use both names interchangeably. The names of Schmid’s victims were Alleen Rowe whom he killed on May 31, 1964, with the help of two friends, John Saunders and Mary French; and Gretchen Fritz, and her sister, Wendy Fritz, whom he killed on August 16, 1965. My outside research on Charles Schmid, Jr. included reading the book, â€Å"Cold-Blooded, The Saga of Charles Schmid, the Notorious ‘Pied Piper of Tucson’† written by John Gilmore; reading the book, â€Å"Catching Serial Killers: Learning from Past Serial Murder Investigations† written by Earl James; and searching â€Å"Charles Schmid, Jr.† and â€Å"serial killers† on the Internet. How the minds of serial killers work is a very interesting subject indeed. I marvel at how a person could take the life of another human being – and enjoy it. Motivations behind one wanting to kill another can stem from feeling dismissed or rebuffed, the need for power and the need for perfection. It is also possible that a serial killer is trying to overcome some sort of physical limitation. In Charles Schmid’s case, he stood a mere 5’3†, yet he was in extremely good physical shape and excelledShow MoreRelatedThe Yellow Wallpaper By Charlotte Perkins Gilman936 Words   |  4 PagesIn the short story The Yellow Wallpaper, the author Charlotte Perkins Gilman uses this story give a voice to the women that were dealing with oppression from men. Women during the time when this story was written were almost exclusively under the dominance of males. They were mainly house wives, and did what the male forced them to do. Many women were working in the house, and not allowed to leave, consequently making them lonely and depressed. Because of this, women were not as educated as menRead MorePortrait Of The Artist As A Young Man1620 Words   |  7 PagesPortrait of the Artist as a Young Man is an excellent novel, written by James Joyce, about the life of Stephen Dedalus and how he overcame the barriers of his family and his religion to pursue his life as a writer. Drawing on details based on his own early life, Joyce provides us â€Å"with insight into how his own imagination worked† (Gose, 267). Extensive use of stream of consciousness, which represent the character’s inner thoughts and perceptions, and like human thoughts jumping from one thought toRead MoreWhy Is Elephants Can t Dance? : Inside Ibm s Historic Turnaround By Louis V. Gerstner780 Words   |  4 Pagesyour company and take failures as opportunities to grow. 2. The Amazon Way: 14 Leadership Principles Behind the World’s Most Disruptive Company by John Rossman Rossman gives an overview of amazon’s leadership principles and how amazon tackles large projects. This book focuses on the 14th leadership principles that guided and shaped the culture of the company. It’s filled with insightful stories that will inspire you and drive your professional goals. 3. How to Win Friends and Influence PeopleRead MoreMass Media Such As Television, Newspapers, And Internet1457 Words   |  6 Pagesoutlets draw attention away from real issues such as political decision-making and government events and instead distract the public with celebrity scandals and irrelevant reality star stories. The media is known to abuse their power when being driven by profit motivation, which means that they do not necessarily report what the people need (Graber and Dunaway, 2015). Media outlets are controlling the information that the public receives which ultimately affects real life issues. According to NorrisRead MoreDo Dreams Hold Meaning?1284 Words   |  5 Pagesfind an answer that could solve their real-life problems. But, in reality, â€Å"the meaning is in the eye of the beholder- not in the dream itself,† (Goleman, 1984). While dreams do hold meaning to the waking life, they are filled with hidden symbolic meanings as interpreted by the dreamer. Many people have the same type of dreams, so when researchers give a broad interpretation of what a certain thing/person/action represents, they are basing it off a mass study of what others felt as wellsimilar resultsRead MoreFreudian Interpretations Of Dreams By Sigmund Freud1663 Words   |  7 Pagessymbols for different reasonings behind a dream. In the book, Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud, he provides an in depth explanation on his beliefs behind the meaning of each occurring dream that we experience. Freud has tons of concepts that he claims for the reasonings behind each dream that have. Whether if we experience a nightmare or just a normal dream. The concepts in Interpretation of Dreams that are primarily focused on in Franz Kafka’s written short story, â€Å"A Dream†, are the. AccordingRead MoreSocial Networking: Online vs Offline Identities1154 Words   |  5 Pagesstored parts of his soul into different inanimate objects called horcruxes, which caused him to lose control of himself and become the infamous, Lord Voldemort. This gave him the ability to live even though his physical body was gone and his soul continued to thrive in his set of carefully selected objects, patiently waiting for the right time to strike. While the world of Harry Power is only a work of fiction, social networking sites have given some ordinary persons the ability to create their ownRead MoreThe Is An Internet Moral Panic Essay1568 Words   |  7 Pagestheir teens will take a risk online by writing back if they receive a message from a stranger which has created an enduring phenomenon (Rothman 59). The moral panic of catfishing was spread by parents and media outlets. Firstly, the news released new stories about various young teens being lured into romantic relationships online with individuals who were lying about who they were. The most importantly the news emphasized the way catfishing has detrimental effects on teens such as; causing them mentalRead MoreAnalysis Of The Book Deaf By Mark Drolsbaugh1616 Words   |  7 Pagesa book titled Deaf Again. In this book, Mark narrates his life story from a hearing child to deaf adult and all of his hardships. Mark was a hearing child born to deaf parents. As he matured, his hearing began to worsen and soon he was labeled as deaf, communicating became harder. He would make mistakes in class and be ridiculed for it. He did not understand the reason for the ridicule and eventually stopped putting effort in his studies. A pediatrician told his parents to look into speech therapyRead MoreObedience, By Stanley Milgram853 Words   |   4 Pages Obedience is practiced everyday throughout everyone s life. It has been engraved in everyone growing up. Students are taught at an early age to obey the higher authority’s commands in school, at home, and in public whether it is the teacher, principal, police officer, and even other parents. Additionally, parents too have to practice obedience. They must be follow orders from their bosses, and they must obey the laws. As a result, obedience becomes second nature, which exposes everyone to problems