African creation myths Essay Example for Free

African creation myths Essay 1. Perhaps the answer that would best suit the question why life is so hard and then you die is how death is portrayed in these stories. There is suffering and hardship in one’s life because of disobedience of the hardships and commands of his gods. Death ultimately becomes the only â€Å"salvation† after so much hardship.   Had the living things and man obeyed the orders of their god, death would not have overcome these lives. In the story of the Plant of Life, the second wife, in her jealousy of not being considered by her husband despite the death of the first wife decided that in order to end her suffering must kill the plant that has taken the time and affection that would have been hers. Hence, ultimately, it is no wonder that in the end, the wife bears the consequent death of all living things. 2.  Ã‚   Basically these African myths hold women in the same way that women are being viewed today. Women are seen as being responsible for the ills that happened to society and life in general.   For example, in the story of the Plant of Life, the second wife was blamed for being the source of death when â€Å"she saw the plant and was jealous and cut it down with a hoe.† (Plant of Life). Such story shows how of little value women are because if the god did not play favourites among his wives, the story would not have ended that way. As a whole, women are viewed as being the cause of tragedies. 3. This myth basically starts out as a story of creation of the world and its five elements.   However, as the story intertwined itself it became a story not of creation but of destruction as each element became defeated by the other until at last Doondari, the god who created these things came down to earth and became the eternal one.   A very good point of interest here is how the story incorporated the attributes of men like sleep, blindness, worry and death and how these attributes became defeated when all of them became proud. It would seem that the writer wanted to emphasize that pride became the reason for the fall of its attributes and in the end, it was the god who has to put everything in its place. 4. One interesting thing about this myth is how Shida Matunda got afraid when the jealous wife killed the plant which what became of his favorite wife when she died. He is a god and yet he had no hold over life when in fact, he created the world and its living things. It would seem that as a god, he too depended on â€Å"higher beings† than himself and that he attributes life on these beings such as the plant which became the plant of life. 5. Between the myth of the Disobedience of Man and the story of creation in Genesis, one common factor emerges as to why one man disobeyed his Creator.   In this African myth, the root of the disobedience is the woman who failed to follow the orders of her god not to till the soil for food while in Genesis, Eve did not take heed in God’s warning not to eat the Forbidden fruit lest they will be punished. Hence, when they disobeyed the order of their gods, they were punished: the first beings in this African myth were sent with Death while Adam and Eve were banished out of the paradise that God created for them. 6. Indeed there is a great similarity between the myth Revolt Against God and the great Flood in Genesis although the manner of wiping out the face of the earth vastly differs with the version in Genesis.   In the myth of the Revolt against God, the gods wiped out the earth through fire whereas in the version of Genesis, the world was wiped out by the Great Flood.   Perhaps the reason why there is a similarity between the two stories is because we all came from the same roots.   Just like in the religions of   Christianity and Islam that traces its roots to Abraham, these stories of cleansing the earth may have also come from one original source and just branched out after generations of passing it. 7.   Ã‚  The gods in these African myths are not at all like gods but rather seemed like counterparts of men.   Although they have created the world, the living things and men, they never ceased to be like human beings who still feel the emotions of human beings or maybe they are simply reflections of the image and likeness of the beings they have created.   However, these African gods tend to be fickle-minded sometimes and would do whatever they feel like doing at the heat of the moment and that analyzing these myths, one can surmise that they are just exercising their power over their creations.

Origins And History Of Tribunals

Origins And History Of Tribunals Tribunals continue to play a very important role in today handling over a million cases each year, thus improving the overall efficiency of the justice system. They are responsible for dealing with most disputes between the citizen and the state about the formerà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢s right and entitlement. Tribunals have been defined by Curzon, Dictionary of Law, 1994, p387 as Bodies outside the hierarchy of the courts with administrative or judicial functions. This means that while a courts justice is dispense by an independent judiciary, tribunals are HISTORY. Length of time in existence. How/ why it came about. What was created because is dispensed Description of Tribunals panels judge etc. what governs it. Franks Committee Sir Andrew Leggatt Advantages Disadvantages Conclusion Notes. Administrative tribunals resolve disputes between, for example, the citizen and an officer of a government agency or between individuals in an area of law in which the government has legislated the conduct of their relations. Origins and history On 1 November 1955, the British Government appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Sir Oliver Franks to consider and make recommendations on administrative tribunals and inquiries. The report of that committee, published in July 1957, led in due course to the establishment of a permanent standing advisory body called the Council on Tribunals. How did this all come about? It goes back to the closing years of Winston Churchills last administration, when the Government was shaken by a serious scandal, reaching a climax in 1954. In fact, the story really begins in 1938, shortly before the outbreak of war in Western Europe. The Air Ministry was urgently seeking sites for the Royal Air Force to use as airfields and bombing ranges. It acquired a stretch of poor quality chalk downland in Dorset in the south west of England, known as Crichel Down. The Ministry had powers of compulsory purchase. But in the event it did not need to use them as the landowners were prepared to sell. During the war the land became a practice bombing range. In 1949, after the war was over, the land passed into the hands of the Ministry of Agriculture. A decision was made to put the land to agricultural use. Plans were drawn up to equip the land with a view to farming it as a single unit, in pursuance of the Governments policy of maximising food production. The land proved to be much more productive than had been thought before the war. One local landowner, whose wifes family had owned part of Crichel Down before its acquisition by the Air Ministry, wanted to buy it back. Although there was no strict requirement in law, there was an expectation that where land had been acquired under compulsory powers for a particular purpose, and that purpose had come to an end, the land would be offered back for sale to the original owners. But that did not happen in this case. The land was handed over to the Crown Estate, which negotiated its rental to a farmer of its own choosing. The disappointed landowner complained to his Member of Parliament. Rumours of bribery and corruption within the Ministry began to circulate. The Minister set up an independent inquiry by an eminent senior lawyer. Although the inquiry cleared officials of corruption, it was fiercely critical of the way the matter had been handled within the Ministry. The Minister felt impelled to resign, paying the political price for the misconduct of his officials or so it was seen at the time. The incident revived pre-war concerns about the extent of ministerial powers and the high-handedness of government officials. It was followed by the establishment of the aforementioned Franks Committee on administrative tribunals and inquiries. But curiously, although the Crichel Down case was widely regarded as a principal reason for the appointment of the committee, it in fact fell outside the committees terms of reference. Instead, the committee was asked to look at the working of tribunals and inquiries established under statute for the purposes of Ministers functions. It is worth noting that that nowadays cases like Crichel Down would almost certainly have been the subject of investigation by the Parliamentary Ombudsman, who has power to conduct investigations into allegations of maladministration by government departments leading to injustice to individuals. But back in 1954 there was no Parliamentary Ombudsman. That had to wait till the Parliamentary Commissioner Act of 1967. The Franks Report proved a turning point in the history of administrative justice in this country. It completely changed perceptions of tribunals. Where they had once tended to be regarded as an extension of the executive arm of government, Franks placed them firmly on the judicial side. The Franks principles of openness, fairness and impartiality became the watchwords for how tribunals ought to operate. Franks gave brief examples of their application: Take openness. If these procedures were wholly secret, the basis of confidence and acceptability would be lacking. Next take fairness. If the objector were not allowed to state his case, there would be nothing to stop oppression. Thirdly, there is impartiality. How can a citizen be satisfied unless he feels that those who decide his case come to their decisions with open minds? The Council on Tribunals was set up in 1959 to try to ensure that those principles are applied in practice. As of now, there are some 80 or so different tribunal systems under the Councils oversight. Origins and history On 1 November 1955, the British Government appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Sir Oliver Franks to consider and make recommendations on administrative tribunals and inquiries. The report of that committee, published in July 1957, led in due course to the establishment of a permanent standing advisory body called the Council on Tribunals. How did this all come about? It goes back to the closing years of Winston Churchills last administration, when the Government was shaken by a serious scandal, reaching a climax in 1954. In fact, the story really begins in 1938, shortly before the outbreak of war in Western Europe. The Air Ministry was urgently seeking sites for the Royal Air Force to use as airfields and bombing ranges. It acquired a stretch of poor quality chalk downland in Dorset in the south west of England, known as Crichel Down. The Ministry had powers of compulsory purchase. But in the event it did not need to use them as the landowners were prepared to sell. During the war the land became a practice bombing range. In 1949, after the war was over, the land passed into the hands of the Ministry of Agriculture. A decision was made to put the land to agricultural use. Plans were drawn up to equip the land with a view to farming it as a single unit, in pursuance of the Governments policy of maximising food production. The land proved to be much more productive than had been thought before the war. One local landowner, whose wifes family had owned part of Crichel Down before its acquisition by the Air Ministry, wanted to buy it back. Although there was no strict requirement in law, there was an expectation that where land had been acquired under compulsory powers for a particular purpose, and that purpose had come to an end, the land would be offered back for sale to the original owners. But that did not happen in this case. The land was handed over to the Crown Estate, which negotiated its rental to a farmer of its own choosing. The disappointed landowner complained to his Member of Parliament. Rumours of bribery and corruption within the Ministry began to circulate. The Minister set up an independent inquiry by an eminent senior lawyer. Although the inquiry cleared officials of corruption, it was fiercely critical of the way the matter had been handled within the Ministry. The Minister felt impelled to resign, paying the political price for the misconduct of his officials or so it was seen at the time. The incident revived pre-war concerns about the extent of ministerial powers and the high-handedness of government officials. It was followed by the establishment of the aforementioned Franks Committee on administrative tribunals and inquiries. But curiously, although the Crichel Down case was widely regarded as a principal reason for the appointment of the committee, it in fact fell outside the committees terms of reference. Instead, the committee was asked to look at the working of tribunals and inquiries established under statute for the purposes of Ministers functions. It is worth noting that that nowadays cases like Crichel Down would almost certainly have been the subject of investigation by the Parliamentary Ombudsman, who has power to conduct investigations into allegations of maladministration by government departments leading to injustice to individuals. But back in 1954 there was no Parliamentary Ombudsman. That had to wait till the Parliamentary Commissioner Act of 1967. The Franks Report proved a turning point in the history of administrative justice in this country. It completely changed perceptions of tribunals. Where they had once tended to be regarded as an extension of the executive arm of government, Franks placed them firmly on the judicial side. The Franks principles of openness, fairness and impartiality became the watchwords for how tribunals ought to operate. Franks gave brief examples of their application: Take openness. If these procedures were wholly secret, the basis of confidence and acceptability would be lacking. Next take fairness. If the objector were not allowed to state his case, there would be nothing to stop oppression. Thirdly, there is impartiality. How can a citizen be satisfied unless he feels that those who decide his case come to their decisions with open minds? The Council on Tribunals was set up in 1959 to try to ensure that those principles are applied in practice. As of now, there are some 80 or so different tribunal systems under the Councils oversight.

Tracing Sexual Difference: Beyond the Aporia of the Other :: Philosophy Philosophical Essays

Tracing Sexual Difference: Beyond the Aporia of the Other ABSTRACT: A reading of Luce Irigaray suggests the possibility of tracing sexual difference in philosophical accounts of personal identity. In particular, I argue that Irigaray raises the possibility of moving beyond the aporia of the other which lies at the heart of Paul Ricoeur's account of self-identity. My contention is that the self conceived in Ricoeur's Oneself as Another is male insofar as it is dependent upon the patriarchal monotheism which has shaped Western culture both socially and economically. Nevertheless there remains the possibility of developing Ricoeur's reference to 'the trace of the Other' in order to give a non-essential meaning to sexual difference. Such meaning will emerge when (i) both men and women have identities as subjects, and (ii) the difference between them can be expressed. I aim to elucidate both conditions by appropriating Irigaray's 'Questions to Emmanuel Levinas: On the Divinity of Love.' I. Introduction Here I appropriate two questions from Luce Irigaray's 'Questions to Emmanuel Levinas: On the Divinity of Love' in order to disruptively refigure Paul Ricoeur's account of self-identity, without assessing Irigaray's reading of Levinas. Irigaray suggests the possibility of tracing sexual difference in philosophical accounts of personal identity. By 'tracing' I mean to follow the marks left by that which is no longer present to that which is never entirely spoken, i.e. sexual difference. I argue that Irigaray makes possible moving beyond the aporia of the Other which lies at the heart of Ricoeur's account of self-identity in Oneself as Another. This aporia is a self-engendered paradox which, as I have demonstrated elsewhere, Ricoeur is not able to go beyond: he cannot name the Other/other (whether l'Autre as a general category for the Other or l'autrui as a term for another person). My contention is that in appropriating Irigaray's questions, we can begin to refigure Ricoeur's account of self-identity, extend his use of 'the trace of the Other' and conceive the non-essential meaning of sexual difference. As it is Ricoeur's account of self-identity seems to eclipse sexual difference in being dependent upon the patriarchal monotheism which has shaped western cultures both socially and economically. Yet according to Irigaray sexual difference will be conceiveable once (i) both men and women can gain identities as subjects, and (ii) the difference between them can be expressed. Arguably Ricoeur's notion of narrative identity, to which I will return, could express this difference and these distinct identities.

children Essay -- essays papers

children Childhood and the Treatment of Children Children all over the world are treated differently at different times, during different centuries. Some children are raised by both of their parents in a good environment, with good conditions, and with a good education. Those kids are well taken care of and are happy if love is added to all that. The place that they live in becomes perfect. There are other kids, though, that have no loving parent, or no parents at all; no beautiful warm home, or no home at all; no healthy food, or no food at all and no good education, or no education at all. They have to work all day just to survive and get a little bit of something to eat. These children, unlike the other kids, are treated badly, abused and used. As time changes, people change: sometimes for the worst and sometimes for the better. Even now, children are mistreated in other countries and even here in America. Pip is left without parents to be raised by his sister. His sister, Mrs. Joe, is twenty years older than Pip. She is raising Pip â€Å"by hand†, meaning she lays her hand on him whenever possible, which is all the time. Pip is treated very badly, but at least he has a friend who would stand up to him; Joe is Mrs. Joe Gargery’s husband. Joe wants Pip to have a good education even though he himself didn’t have one, but Mrs. Joe, on the other hand, thinks it’s not a good idea and a waste of time. Pip does things like other kids do; he plays, eats, and goes...

Englishmen 17th century :: essays research papers

FIRST ESSAY: Thomas Hobbes described the life of most Englishmen in the 17th century as â€Å"nasty, brutish and short.† How far does the evidence presented in Past Speaks chpt. 2, suggest that little had changed by the mid 18th century?   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Chapter two of Past Speaks, covers many different articles that discusses the many social classes that were present in Britain at that time. When Thomas Hobbes described the life of the Englishmen as â€Å"nasty, brutish and short.† he was partially correct. On the contrary he was also mistaken. Thomas Hobbes made a generalization of the Englishmen, and failed to mention some of the upper and profitable people of the British society. Obviously the wealthy and prosperous people were not included in this generalization that is made. Farmers from Norfolk were very successful, as stated in Past Speaks chapter 2, â€Å"Pointing out the practices which have succeeded so nobly here, may perhaps be of some use to other countries possessed of the same advantages, but unknowing in the art of them.† Arthur Young, a traveling one-man bureau, wrote about these farmers and successful cattle-breeding men. He speaks of a man by the name of Robert Bakewell, who turne d out to be a very wealthy man. Bakewell experimented in the breeding of cattle. He managed to breed a large amount of cattle that could produce more meat and less bone, in which he ended up shipping overseas to neighboring countries. Thomas Hobbes again, did not include these men in the comment he had made.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Henri Misson, visiting sportsmen to England did write on the sports and diversions of England. Misson writes â€Å"Anything that looks like fighting is delicious to an Englishman. If two little boys quarrel in the street, then passengers stop, make a ring round them in a moment, and set them against one another, that they may come to fisticuffs.† This piece does support Thomas Hobbes comment on the difference of Englishmen from the 17th to the 18th century. This seemed as little or nothing had changed with the society. Another quote from Past Speaks â€Å"these by-standers are not only other boys, porters and rabble, but all sorts of men of fashion; some thrusting by the mob that they may see plain†. This is evidence that not only the lower social class, but the upper class as well were enthused. This is evidence to Hobbes remark.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Thomas Hobbes however did not believe in Democracy.

Differences and Similarities of Christianity and Judaism Essay

Many people today still believe that Christianity and Judaism are both the same religion. This is not so, despite the fact that they both share certain similarities; Christianity and Judaism are both different religions. It is my pleasure to shed some light on the differences and similarities of both religions’ views on salvation. In this research I will first define salvation in its literal form. Secondly, I will take a closer look into the history and development of both religions and shed further light on how they differ. Finally, I will go on to further compare and contrast both religions and show where they differ and where they are alike. At the end of this research, people will have a greater understanding of both Christianity and Judaism and be able to identify how different they both are. According to Matt Slick, â€Å"Salvation is being saved from the righteous judgment of God upon the sinner.† Most people in the world believe that salvation means being saved from the devil or from themselves, but this is not a fact. Your salvation depends on the judgment God has on you. All who sin against God falls under his judgment, this judgment is known as damnation, and this is where God condemns to eternal hell anyone who has offended him by breaking his law. Matt Slick went further to say, â€Å"This does not mean that God is unfair. It shows that God is holy. God must punish the sinner. But, he has provided a way of escape so that people will not face his righteous judgment. This means that God is both holy and loving. He must manifest each quality equally. So being saved from the wrath of God is called salvation.† The bible states that salvation is found in Jesus and only in him, who is also known as God in flesh and also who died for our sins and rose from t he dead. 1 Cor. 15: 1-4 says, â€Å"Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word I preached to you, unless you believe in vain. For delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.† All of us have sinned against God and deserve judgment. But Jesus never  sinned ( 1 Pet. 2:22). It is through Jesus we all gain salvation based on evidence in the scriptures and this is how salvation works. To define it simply, Christianity is one of the world’s major monotheistic religions. Christians believe in Jesus Christ and follow his teachings. they believe Jesus is God’s own son, sent by God to become human. As the son of God, Jesus is divine, but he was also a human being who lived among us on earth, over 2,000 years ago. Followers of Jesus are part of God’s people, whose heritage includes the Jewish people and the Christian Church throughout the world today. Christianity strongly supports salvation and everything it stands for. According to Patheos Library, an online religious community, â€Å"Christianity developed out of Judaism in the 1st century C.E. It is formed on the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and those who follow him are called Christians.† Christianity’s origin came out of Palestine and they believe in God (Trinity), which means God in three forms, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The publication posted on Patheos Library went further to state, â€Å"Christianity has many different branches and forms with accompanying variety in beliefs and practices. The three major branches of Christianity are Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism, with numerous subcategories within each of these branches.† It was not until the latter part of the 20th century that most adherents of Christianity were in the west, even though it had spread to every continent and is now the largest religion in the world today. The traditional Christian beliefs include the belief in the one and only true god, who is one being and exist as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Christianity also believes in Jesus as the divine and human Messiah who was sent here on earth to live and dwell with man and save the world from sin. The Christian church has many ethics that governs the activities of the church and aid in ensuring that its members walk in the correct path and grows closer in faith and closer to God. The Christian church ethics stands firm against abortion and believes this practice is of the devil. Christianity also disagrees with same sex marriage as well, based on the fact that in creation, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. This has been a very controversial topic for many years, as many do believe that same  sex marriage should be accepted as human rights activist backs up this claim. There has been not one case in the bible where same sex marriage or same sex relationships were encouraged or practiced freely, and it’s based on this that Christians do not believe in the practice. A brief look into the culture of Judaism should shed some light on the culture and help persons to differentiate better. According to, thinkquest.org, â€Å"Judaism is the religious culture of the Jewish People and is one of the world’s oldest religions. Judaism makes up the cultural system of Jewish law, custom, and practice of the whole individual and community. It is a system in which everyone is under God’s rule. Judaism originated in the Middle East and has spread throughout all parts of the world because of both voluntary migrations and forced exile or expulsions. The total world Jewish population is about 15 million, most of whom live in the United States, Israel, and the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republic.† A very important topic when discussing faith in Jewish text is that of Romans in the New Testament. A 20th century western definition of faith is often used to support theologies that claim to be based on the Hebrew Scriptures. For instance, within modern Christianity there is a range of belief regarding faith. The idea that faith is totally separated from â€Å"works† based on verses such as Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 3:28 and others taught by some protestants. Also the idea that works must be performed to â€Å"earn salvation.† According to, yashanet.com, an online publication, â€Å"When dealing with the texts of the â€Å"New Testament,† the English language word â€Å"faith† must be interpreted in the Hebrew context it was originally conceived in by the author. As such, the word â€Å"trust† may be a better one to use, at it conveys a combination of belief and action.† The Jewish view of faith, including that of Paul, is established in ideas such as, â€Å"Faith is active and includes the â€Å"works† of following Torah. The foundational statement of faith in Judaism is the â€Å"Shema,† from Deuteronomy 6:4. The term â€Å"hear† (as in â€Å"Hear O Israel †¦Ã¢â‚¬ , means t_o hear and respond obediently._ Faith and obedience are  woven together. This is clearly reflected in the words of Yeshua, Paul and James.† According to, Ariela Pelaia, â€Å"Judaism is a monotheistic faith, meaning that Jews believe there is only One God. Often this God is beyond our ability to comprehend, but God is nevertheless present in our everyday lives. How individual Jews choose to understand this manifestation of the divine varies. Some connect with God through prayer, others see the divine in the majesty of the natural world, others may not think about God on a daily basis. Each individual’s relationship with God is unique and personal.† The Jewish religion teaches that everyone, whether Jewish or non-Jewish, is created â€Å"b’tzelem Elohim,† which is Hebrew for â€Å"in the image of God.† It is with this reason every person is equally important and has an infinite potential to do good in the world. The Jewish community also believes that Jews are uniquely connected with each other, regardless of where they live in this world. The Torah is Judaism’s most important text. It contains stories and commandments that teach us about life and death. It contains the 10 Commandments as well as the 613 commandments (mitzvot). All Jews consider the 10 Commandments to be the most important commandments in the Torah, though not all Jews adhere to the 613 mitzvot (one of the main differences between the different branches of Judaism). The Torah also tells us that the Land of Israel (Eretz Yisrael) was apart of the covenant made between God and the Jewish people on Mount Sinai. Even though Judaism and Christianity have a lot in common, they do both share some major differences that clearly set them apart. Traditionally, Jews recite prayers three times daily, with a fourth prayer added on Shabbat and holidays. Most of the prayers in a traditional Jewish service can be said in solitary prayer, although communal prayer is preferred. Jews also have certain religious clothing which a traditional Jew wears. Christians believe that all people should strive to follow Christ’s commands and example in their everyday actions. For many, this includes obedience to the Ten Commandments. Other Christian practices include acts of piety such as prayer and Bible reading. Christians assemble for communal worship on Sunday, the day of the resurrection, though other liturgical practices often occur outside this setting. Scripture readings are drawn from the Old and New  Testaments, but especially the Gospels. The place of origin for Christianity is Jerusalem while Judaism reigns from out of Israel and Christianity believes in Jesus Christ as founder and messiah, and for Judaism its Abraham, Moses. Christian practices includes, Prayers, Sacraments, worshipping in Church, reading the Holy Bible, acts of charity, Communion-partaking in the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, under the appearance of Bread and Wine. The practices of Judaism differs in that, Orthodox Jews recite prayers 3 times daily, with a fourth prayer added on Shabbat and holidays. Shacarit prayer in the morning, Mincha in the afternoon, Arvit at night. Musaf is an extra Shabbat service. When it comes down to the source of scripture, Christianity uses the Holy Bible, a collection of canonical books in two parts (Old and New Testament). For Judaism it’s the Tanakh (Jewish Bible), Torah. When it comes down to life after death, the Christian view of this is that Man is appointed to die once, and after that come judgment. Those that are redeemed, live on in Heaven, those that rejected God suffer for eternity in Hell, while Jews believes in a World to come, Reincarnation (some groups); temporal suffering in Hell; eventual return to Paradise(Garden of Eden), unifying with God Works Cited (Spain, Islands, Arab countries, Turkey) Ashkenaz (Central/Eastern Europe, Germany, France) Greek, MIzrachi: Jemen, Conservative, Reconstructionist, and Reform. â€Å"Christianity vs Judaism – Difference and Comparison | Diffen.† Diffen – Compare Anything. Diffen. Discern. Decide.. N.p., 11 Apr. 2012. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . BBC Religion . â€Å"BBC – Religion: Christianity.† BBC – Homepage. N.p., 21 Jan. 1013. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . Books Of Romans. â€Å"Jewish views of salvation, faith and freedom.† YashaNet HomePage. N.p., 23 Apr. 2010. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . Krell, Marc. â€Å"Afterlife and Salvation.† Patheos | Hosting the Conversation on Faith. N.p., 22 Oct. 2009. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . ORACLE. â€Å"Judaism: Introduction.† ThinkQuest : Library. N.p., 31 Dec. 2008. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . Religion Facts. â€Å"Comparison Chart: Christianity vs. Judaism – ReligionFacts.† Religion, World Religions, Comparative Religion – Just the facts on the world’s religions.. N.p., 19 June 2009. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . Religion Facts. â€Å"Christian Salvation – ReligionFacts.† Religion, World Religions, Comparative Religion – Just the facts on the world’s religions.. N.p., 12 Sept. 2009. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . Slick, Matt. â€Å"What is salvation? | Discuss what is salvation. | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry.† CARM – Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. N.p., 13 Feb. 2010. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. . iconoclasms, zantine. â€Å"History of Christianity – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.† Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., 23 Nov. 2011. Web. 11 Apr. 2013. .

The Impact of the End of the Cold War on Us Foreign Policy

Discuss the impact of the end of the Cold War on US foreign policy Introduction: When the world famous liberal thinker Francis Fukuyama in his masterpiece declared that we were witnessing the end of the history, he was greeting the new political structure and also the new international environment, which is peaceful[1]. However, developments that occurred after the collapse of the Soviet Union showed us that the dissolution of the Soviets was unexpected. The international society was not ready for peace and Fukuyama’s optimistic assumptions were far from becoming real. Moreover, the international society currently started to realise that the tension and the potential of mass destructive war during the Cold War era had provided a much more stable and securitize world order for any other periods of the history. Recent developments that occurred after 9/11 attacks showed us that the world is not much securer due to the characteristics of this new type of threat which is commonly known and referred as terrorism. As being the flagship of the Western powers during the Cold War, the US is facing with much more pressure than before. Post- Cold war developments proved that although the US has the leadership features and military superiority against conventional threats or in other words ‘known’ enemies, it is still lacking of showing the same attributes in the Post-cold War era. This paper is going to analyse the impact of the end of the Cold War on US foreign policy. In order to do it so, it will provide historic background information on Cold War era and also the developments occurred after. Later on this paper will focus on the shifts that occurred in the American foreign policy after the Cold War. Basics of the Cold War Policies: For almost five decades the Cold War was the main stage for the evolution of international relations. Many institutions, political or military organisations and even international norms and regulations of the Cold War are setting the base even for the modern day politics. Hence the legacy of the Cold War era is still shaping the political, economic and social relationships within, and also in between the states. Although there is no specific agreement between the historians on when it began, the Cold War is the name given to approximately 50 years long conflict between the Communist block led by Soviet Union and the Western nations led by United States of America. Cold War was a conflict, which did not include any direct military engagements between these two parties. On the other hand, it was fought by various types of means including diplomatic, economic and mostly by propaganda. In general basics of the Cold War era can be grouped under 4 categories. These are: 1) Bipolar System: The primary outcome of the Second World War probably was the emergence of two superpowers which created a new and never been before experienced system anytime in the history of international relations called bipolar system. A bipolar system includes two evenly matched powers in this case The US and the Soviet Union. Once allies during and opponents after the Second World War, these two victorious states have became the main actors of the world politics for over 50 years. 2) The US Foreign Policy of Containment: The Soviet Union and its supporters were declared as the enemy of the free world by the Western states mostly by the US during the Cold War. Although it has been argued that the first indications of hostility between these two states have emerged during The Yalta and Potsdam conferences[2], the first arguments on the soviet threat have taken place between the American decision makers in late 1940s[3]. The main idea during these arguments was focusing on the essential importance of containing the Soviets, both politically and geographically in order to save and protect the US interests in overseas. In his reply to the US Treasury Department, George Kennan a former American diplomat, mentioned the expansionist policies of the Soviets and suggested that the US should follow an active foreign policy approach in order to ‘contain’ the Soviets in its current (by late 40s) geographic borders[4]. In following years, when the Truman Doctrine came into action the idea of containment has also become one of the main strategies of the US against its opponent, the Soviets. 3) Crisis without Major Conflicts: Dissimilarity between the two blocs have produced a series of international crises during the Cold War such as the Soviets intervention in Germany/Berlin (1948), Korean War (1950-1953), Cuban Crisis (1962), Although both parties did not fight or exchange fire against each other. However, they did support the fighting groups and pick sides during these crises according to their national interests. 4) Second Strike Capability & Mutual Assured Destruction: Both superpowers of the Cold War era were also nuclear powers. They had highly effective and destructive nuclear weapons in their arsenal. Their nuclear capabilities were the main reason for the tension in the international society, during the Cold War. On the other hand, however this capability of theirs was also the reason why they were no major conflicts or military clashes between these super powers. Each party had the ability to respond to a nuclear attack with powerful nuclear retaliation against the attacking party[5]. This ability is called second-strike capability. Obviously as a result of this nuclear capacity both parties could have completely created a nuclear destruction not only for each other but also for the rest of the world as well[6]. That is why non- of the superpowers dared to attack the other one with its nuclear powers in order to eliminate the opposition, hostility, competition etc. The competition and increasing awareness on democratic rights did force the Soviets to stand back and make some major policy changes in 1980s. The Soviet Premier of the time Gorbachev tried to set some political and social reforms in the soviet society in order to ease the pressure and help Soviets to continue to survive in the international arena. Moreover, the Soviets did not only make shifts in their internal policies but also in their foreign policy understanding as well. For instance withdrawal from Afghanistan, signing of various nuclear deterrence agreements with multi parties including the US are some of the key changes that occurred in the 1980s. However, the reforms of Gorbachev did not prevent the Soviets to stop its collapse and eventually after a series of events in 1991 the Soviet Union formally announced its dissolution[7]. The First Ten Years: Although the indications were present well before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world was not completely ready for the end of the Cold War. The US was left alone without any major balancing opponents. Furthermore, after the dissolution of the Soviets the numbers of newly established independent states have increased significantly. All these new states were lacking of self-governing capabilities and also the Western vision, which was the victorious ideology of the Cold war. Moreover, some researchers courageously support the idea that international environment during the Cold War was much more safer and less hazardous system for the global security issues. Historian Paul Dukes criticizes the former American decision makers of the Cold War for only â€Å"trying to save the day† but not working for the future[8]. He suggests that due to the lack of long-term policies of the US administrators, the world had to face with too many new issues and problems at the same time with of the Cold War[9]. If we generalize the facts before we start analysing the American foreign policy approach to the end of the Cold War, we can see that there are now much more various types of threats then it used to be. The lack of long-term policies has got the world into an uncertainty. Not only the US but also most of the states got caught out without any preparation to the circumstances of the end of the Cold War. That is way the first decade after the Cold War had a crucial importance for the US to establish, promote and also to maintain its supremacy and leadership around the world. We have seen the effects of the reforms occurred during the 1980s in the Soviet Union on the previous chapters. When these reforms combined with the ne Soviet policy of compromising have eased the tension and created a new dialogue between two superpowers. The first real challenge of the post-Cold War era was the Gulf War. Despite its historic connections in the UN Security Council meeting the Soviets (later Russian Federation) agreed to take economic sanctions against Iraq[10]. Although it seemed like the first positive international attitude towards a multi polar political system, the US policy makers misinterpreted the facts and started to crate a hegemonic power. The first real post-Cold War indication for America’s attempts to build a hegemonic power is the so-called New World Order (NWO) doctrine of the Senior Bush’s administration. The NOW came as a response from the US after the invasion of Kuwait by Iraqi military forces[11]. On September 11, 1990 former US president G. H. Bush addressed the nation prior to a joint session of Congress and underlined the ideals that the US is willing to fight for[12]. Some of the points that Bush underlined are: ? A new structure of international system based on international law and norms under the leadership of the West (particularly the US) ? International cooperation on the issues of nuclear disarmament and the promotion of collective peace ? An integrated international financial structure International cooperation on regional issues. In other words lesser sovereignty and much more international/humanitarian interventions[13]. Bush’s NWO have been criticised by various social scientists. In his 1992 article Joseph Nye categorises the NWO as a traditionally realist documentation, due to key points that was emphasised in it such as the leadership of the US [14]. Howev er, another political scientist Freedman argues that the NWO gives special importance to the UN and other multinational institutions and that is why it should be seen as a statement of liberalism and also the promotion of liberal values and norms[15]. No matter whose opinion is correct, Bush’s NWO is a fine statement of the US foreign policy makers on the Western leadership in the world politics. There is a significant increase on the numbers of US supported ‘humanitarian interventions’ since the end of the Cold War. One of the main reasons for this suitable environment for humanitarian intervention is the emergence of the newly established former communist states. Since the declaration of the NWO the US got more involved in world politics not only under the Bush administration but also under Bush’s successors. Many of these humanitarian interventions, took place under the president Clinton’s administration especially in the Balkans. In order to understand the logic of these interventions it is essential to point out the main focuses of the Clinton administration. A few weeks after he took the office President Clinton mentioned the new challenges of the post-Cold War world on a speech at the American University. These challenges and goals are: ? â€Å"To restore the American economy to good health; ? to increase the importance attached to trade and open markets for American business; to help the developing countries grow faster; ? to promote democracy in Russia and elsewhere; ? to demonstrate US leadership in the global economy[16]† The former communist states experienced series of problems during their transition periods. They not only suffered from disintegration but also they were also â€Å"forced to redefine their national interest and roles in the light of the radical c hange in the international balance of power†[17]. As a consequence of establishing a sovereign nation state, especially in the Balkans, nationalistic movements grew and tuned into violent acts. The lack of an opposing superpower helped the US to carry out the flag and start creating its global leadership. The US and its Northern Atlantic allies lunched series of military and civilian actions in order to ease the violence especially in the Balkans. During the Clinton administration US led coalition forces carried out more than 20 military missions in Yugoslavia to put an end to the ongoing violence. Main critics for the US supported missions came from a very familiar place. Although NATO eased the tension in the Balkans with its operations, the Russia was critical of the NATO operations in the Balkans. Russia prepared a resolution proposal to the UN Security Council to condemn NATO actions in Yugoslavia, though, the proposal was defeated 12-3 during the Security Council meeting, with only Russia, Namibia and China voting in favor of the resolution while NATO member countries along with the temporary members of the Security Council voted against it[18]. Hence, in general due to the sudden changes in the world politics it can be assumed that the uncertain environment and the need of a leading power led the international society to show full support on the US policies and foreign actions. Post-post Cold War? : The tragic events of the September 11, 2001did not create a new era such as post-post Cold War. However, they did assist to end a decade of positivity[19]. The attacks have generated a new era and a dimension not only for the US policies but also for the rest of the world as well specifically on the issues of global security. Although the G. W. Bush administration got the full support of international society after the attacks and even during the Afghanistan intervention, with the start of the campaign against Iraq and Saddam Hussein regime the US started to lose its supporters. The US lost its soft power over the other states and even after President Obama took the office in 2008 elections it looks like the decline will continue. Conclusion: Since the declaration of the Truman Doctrine until the collapse of the Soviet Union, the tension between two major blocks led to many crucial events, which have changed the context of the international relations and also re-framed the understanding of the world politics. The effects of these major events, which occurred during the Cold War, are traceable in contemporary world politics and also in the working structure of today's international society. On the other hand, it should be noted that no matter how important are these Cold War based policies, the collapse of the Soviet Union has brought up a new dimension to the international relations. In general the international society faced with new radical changes with the end of the Cold War. The World has seen the implementation of various types of new policy changes in both Western and Eastern blocks. For example instead of fighting with communism the US changed its role as the promoter and the fighter of the democracy and also the global security[20]. Furthermore, the former communist states focused and forced to rethink on issues of transition and liberalisation as well[21]. The US leadership started to lose its connective power within the first decade of the post 9/11 era. Unfortunately the Bush administration misread the consequences of both post-Cold War and also September 11 attacks. The administration acted much more unilaterally then its predecessor and also its successor. The support on the US supremacy/ leadership will continue to decline unless the US foreign policy makers start to interpreting correctly the current world system. The World is no longer a secure place. International cooperation and partnership is an essential element in order to fill in the vacuum that created after the Cold War. Reference List Cameron, F US Foreign Policy after the Cold War, Routledge, Second Edition, 2006 Crockatt, R ‘The end of the cold war’, in J Baylis & S Smith (eds), The Globalization of World Politics, Oxford Press, Second Edition, 2001 Dukes, P ‘A long view of the cold war’, History Today, vol. 51, issue. 1, 2006, retrieved on 20 September 2011, Evans, G & Newnham, J The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations, Penguin, 1998 Freedman, L ‘ Order and Disorder in the new world’, Foreign Affairs, Winter 1992 [22] Fukuyama, F ‘The end of history’, in G Tuthail & S Dalby(eds), The Geopolitics Reader, Routledge, Second Edition, 2006 Hass, R. N. ‘Defining U. S. foreign policy in a post cold war world’, The DISAM Journal, Fall 2002/Winter 2003 Kennan, G. F Memoirs 1925-1950, Pantheon, 1983 Kessler, B. R ‘ Bush’s new world order: The meaning behind the words’, Air Command and Staff Collage, ACSC Research Department NSW, 1997 Mingst, K Essentials of international Relations, Norton & Company, Second Edition, 2003 Nye, J. S ‘What new world order? Foreign Affairs, Spring 1992 Petherick C. J, ‘Bush announces new world financial order’, American Free Press, December 2008, retrieved on 21 September 2011, Sokoloski, H. D Getting MAD: Nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction, Its Origins and Practice, Strategic Studies Institute, November 2004 ‘T he Yalta and Potsdam conferences’, BBC UK, retrieved on 20 September 2011, ‘Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’, Encyclopedia Britannica, retrieved on 21 September 2011, Williams, I ‘Balkan crisis report: The UN’s surprising support’, Institute for War and Peace, 19 April 1999, retrieved on 21 September 2011, ———————– 1] Fukuyama, F ‘The end of history’, in G Tuthail & S Dalby(eds), The Geopolitics Reader, Routledge, Second Edition, 2006, pp. 107 – 114 [2] ‘The Yalta and Potsdam conferences’, BBC UK, retrieved on 20 September 2011, [3] Mingst, K Essentials of international Relations, Norton & Company, Second Edition, 2003, p. 40 [4] Kennan, G. F Memoirs 1925-1950, Pantheon, 1983, p. 356 [5] Evans, G & Newnham, J The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations, Penguin, 1998, p. 487 [6] Sokoloski, H. D Getting MAD: Nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction, Its Origins and Practice, Strategic Studies Institute, November 2004, p. 5 [7] ‘Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’, Encyclopedia Britannica, retrieved on 21 September 2011, [8] Dukes, P ‘A long view of the cold war’, History Today, vol. 51, issue. 1, 2006, retrieved on 20 September 2011, [9] ibid. [10] ibid. [11] Mingst. op. cit. , p. 54 [12] Petherick C. J, ‘Bush announces new world financial order’, American Free Press, December 2008, retrieved on 21 September 2011, [13] Kessler, B. R ‘ Bush’s new world order: The meaning behind the words’, Air Command and Staff Collage, ACSC Research Department NSW, 1997, pp. 2-4 [14] Nye, J. S ‘What new world order? ’ Foreign Affairs, Spring 1992, p. 84 [15] Freedman, L Order and Disorder in the new world’, Foreign Affairs, Winter 1992, p. 22 [16] Cameron, F US Foreign Policy after the Cold War, Routledge, Second Edition, 2006, p. 19 [17] Crockatt, R ‘The end of the cold war’, in J Baylis & S Smith (eds), The Globalization of World Politics, Oxford Press, Second Edition, 2001, p. 93 [18] Williams, I ‘Balkan crisis report: The UN’s surprising support’, Institute for War and Peace, 19 April 1999, retrieved on 21 September 2011, [19] Hass, R. N. ‘Defining U. S. foreign policy in a post cold war world’, The DISAM Journal, Fall 2002/Winter 2003, p. 31 [20] Crockatt, op. cit. p. 93 [21] ibid.