Rising seas Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Rising seas - Essay Example Currently, the trend of this rise has increased, compared to the past years. Beginning 1850, sea levels rose at a high rate because of high industrialization experienced during this period, which led to increase of greenhouse gas emissions. Scientific predictions show that global temperatures will continue to increase in future, thus further rise in sea levels (Milliman and Haq 11). The adverse effect of this phenomenon is that coastal towns, docks, and piers may be submerged if this trend continues. In addition, an increase in wave energy may be experienced. Therefore, a response to address this situation is imperative to avert the looming adversity. There are different ways in which this situation can be solved. However, preventing further global warming will serve to stop the rise in sea level. Nonetheless, the solutions require the expertise of engineers, including soft-engineering processes and hard-engineering processes. Since this problem is already here with us, the solutions will aim at controlling the risen sea level. However, prevention strategies may as well be employed to reduce global warming, which is core in this situation (Pilkey and Young 137-139). Directing seawater to different areas such as depressions, which are below sea level, will help to lower sea level. This could be achieved by digging canals directed to these depressions, where the seawater will drain. Most of depressions in the world have a higher rate of evaporation than other areas. Therefore, this is advantageous, as the seawater will be drained into these depressions continuously without filling up fast, due to the high evaporation (Milliman and Haq 11). By redirecting rivers and streams either partially or completely to drain their waters in a different place will also reduce the sea level, as the water draining into the oceans will be lower. The development of massive reservoirs for rivers and streams to drain in is costly but achievable. Alternatively, the rivers and streams

The Experiences of Men Diagnosed with Breast Cancer Assignment

The Experiences of Men Diagnosed with Breast Cancer - Assignment Example Following the conduction of the study, the researchers recommended that public and health professionals should raise awareness on male breast cancer in order to encourage men to undergo testing in order to identify breast cancer and the related malignancies in their early stages (Boehmer 2012). Because of the rampant cases of late discovery of breast cancer in male patients, the study would act as a major contribution towards the enhancement of better public health. The study will be a key source material for other studies aimed at the topic of breast cancer in men. The research problem, in this case, has a clear definition of coming up with the adequate level of evidence to ensure effective medical care in the complex healthcare settings (Quach 2012). It is important to note that global health practice environment is becoming more complex, with professional requirements and patient demands increasing by the day. With such dynamic settings and demands, health professionals need adequate evidence in order to make the right health-related decisions. With this in mind, the problem is significant enough to justify the investigation. The literature review provides an adequate core evidence synthesis on the topic of the study. It involves an analysis of the available literature and thus, a judgment of the effectiveness of the practice. The literature review acts as a predetermined plan of minimizing bias in researching the topic of the study, as well as a process of ensuring rigor in making findings. The literature review of the research study creates a good basis for the stating of the hypotheses and the research questions that are involved in the study. However, the study does not clearly state the research questions. However, it able to depict the researchers’ won speculation that male patients diagnosed with breast cancer depict signs of psychological problems, such as depression.

What Is Mento Essay Example for Free

What Is Mento Essay Mento is a distinct style of Jamaican music that emerged in the early 1900s and is not to be confused with Jamaican calypso. Mento, much like other Caribbean folk music, is a blending of African rhythms, Latin rhythms, and Anglo folksongs. Mento draws its traditions from African slaves brought to Jamaica and some European folk culture. Slaves were sometimes made to play music, singing European folk songs which largely influenced the development of Mento. Inevitably, the slaves would infuse their own traditions with the music and it became common practice to sing Mento songs about social lives of the people. In Jamaica, Mento is sometimes referred to as country music, because of it light hearted and simplistic lyrics as well as the omitting of electric instruments. A Mento band typically consists of a banjo, an acoustic guitar, hand drums and rumba box and is characterized by a 3:3:2 rhythms with an emphasis on the fourth beat in each bar. Mento came to real prominence in the 1940s and 1950s before being displaced by ska, rock steady and reggae. It wasnt until the early 1950s that true Mento recordings first began to appear on 78 RPM discs. This decade was mento’s golden age, as a variety of artists recorded Mento songs in an assortment of rhythms and styles. It was the peak of mentos creativity and popularity in Jamaica and the birth of Jamaicas recording industry. These recordings reveal Mento to be a diverse musical genre, sometimes played with reckless abandon and other times with orderly precision. In addition to mentos African and European roots, by this time, it had also encompassed pan-Caribbean influences, as well as from American jazz. Although it was informed by a world of music, mento is clearly, uniquely Jamaican. And as Jamaicas original music, all other Jamaican music can trace its roots to mento . Mento is still listened to in Jamaica today, but mostly be heard in tourist destinations. Early recordings of traditional mento are difficult to find. Some early mento practioners were Slim and Slam, Count Lasher and Everard Williams.

Charles the Great: Should Charlemagne be called great?

Charles the Great: Should Charlemagne be called great? Charlemagne has from his time of rule between the years 768 to 814 left a marked and undeniable impression upon the historical world, encouraging global and timeless debate as to whether he warrants his image as the Father of a Continent.  [1]  Throughout the duration of my project I intend to explore the concept of Charlemagne as a great man by looking at the historiography surrounding him, considering his actions and seeing whether they justify his magnificent reputation. This question has attracted much scholarly debate both during and since the time of Charlemagne and I hope to display how the historians have interpreted Charlemagnes title, and whether their opinions have changed as time has progressed and their research has developed. I will consider three main areas of his reign which have in my opinion instigated the most discussion. The first will be his constant involvement in warfare and the achievements and failures he attained and endured as a result. The second will look at the disintegration  [2]  theory, calling into question the capability and effectiveness of Charlemagnes government and administration, and consequently his ability as a ruler. The final area of deliberation will question the significance of the imperial title, and how he came to acquire such a prestigious title, encompassing his policies of education and reformation. I will attempt to find historians that both agree and disagree with all themes. In addition to these main points that I hope to also observe Charlemagnes involvement with finance and legislation, including his relationship with the church, all of which I hope will provide me with enough evidence from historians by which I can determine whether Charlemagnes reputation ca n be defended or not. The German historian, Franà §ois-Louis Ganshof who was writing in the late twentieth- century, is very explicit in his opinion that Charlemagnes kingdom and rule decomposed shortly after 800, mostly as a result of the inadequacies of his army. According to him it was Charlemagnes death which actually helped to save his reputation from disgrace, as he suggests that had he lived any longer the defeats he would have endured would have been especially damaging.  [3]  There are many scholars who directly oppose this line of thought however, particularly Donald Bullough who was writing around the same time as Ganshof and professed that by the time of his death in 814 Charlemagne was the most powerful Christian ruler in the world  [4]  These differences of opinion felt around the same time demonstrate how varied the debate is upon Charlemagne and whether he truly deserved his magnificent title, which has survived and been upheld throughout the ages. The Frankish kingdom under Charlemagne was, indeed, very powerful, and by 814 Charlemagne had many over-sea territories under his firm control. This however was not always the case, and throughout his 40 year reign, Charlemagne was confronted with much unrest. Roger Collins, writing in 1998 tells us that Charless Saxon wars were the most protracted and most bitterly fought of the numerous campaigns of his reign, having begun in 772 and continuing until 804, with repercussions still being felt thereafter.  [5]  There is no general consensus to be found which agrees that he Charlemagne was wholly successful or not in the different areas of his rule, but I hope to see whether time, situation or perhaps agenda of the historians are valuable enough evidence for the continued debate as to whether Charlemagne was a great man. The reputation of kings and leaders is often measured in terms of the amount of land gained throughout a reign or time in power. In terms of Charlemagne, this again opens up new avenues of great historical debate. Was the expansion of territory during his reign extensive enough to justify his repute as the most powerful Christian ruler in the world? Many historians disagree that it was, and R. Schieffer confirms that after years of apparently unstoppable rise, the limits of Carolingian power suddenly became apparent  [6]  around the time of the year 800. Alongside Schieffer, reasons for this opinion centred upon Charlemagnes inability to expand his territories significantly into Spain or into the eastern empire. For example, The Royal Frankish Annals, described as the most unassuming work of history written during this age  [7]  , tells us in 782 that Charlemagnes army were killed almost to a man when the Saxons, persuaded by Widukindà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ rebelled as usual.  [8]à ‚  This does not suggest a successful army led by a great warrior king. In addition debate on this topic has been largely focussed around the substantial lacking of a competent and willing army, as H. Fichtenau suggests, The poorer people complained that they were compelled to render almost continuous military service until they were completely impoverished.  [9]  This also informs us that Charlemagnes subjects were coerced into fighting for their king, possibly questioning his reputation at the time and skill as a military leader. In this sense, it is easy to argue that Charlemagne does not deserve the brilliant reputation that he has been remembered for. Fichtenau continues in suggesting that Charlemagne cared very little about his people to make them do continuous military service which may be a reason why he could not easily raise an army. Is this the attitude of a great leader, in response to the terms of the treatment of Charlemagnes service men? T. Reuter completely disagrees with Fichtenau suggesting that warriors were well looked after, bene fiting from gifts of food, clothing, gold, and silver, horses and arms  [10]  . This reveals a competent leader aware of the people serving under his name and rewarding them justly. Charlemagne managed to conqueror a substantial amount of Italy and hold on to what he had when faced with attempted invasion, in particular against the Saracens and troublesome Saxons. Einhard recorded that Ganshof, whose view upon Charlemagne is often critical, even records that; outstanding achievements, which can scarcely be matched by modern men.  [11]  Certainly the achievements that Charlemagne enjoyed in wartime are abetting as a part of his great remembrance. There is certainly much to suggest that Charlemagne did deserve his reputation in relation to his triumphs on the battlefield. His acquirement of the Avar treasure in 791 and the invasion and subjugation of the land of Bavaria to his rule where remarkable high points in his reign of warfare; Becher goes on to tell us that with Bavaria, Charlemagne acquired a new and apparently powerful neighbour,  [12]  which would assist him in advancing his reputation across the continent. Bullough is in cohorts with Becher on this opinion as he claims that Charles reputation and prestige among his neighbours had clearly not diminished as advancing years forced him to leave the command of armies in battle to others.  [13]  Agreeing with this view is Collins who adds in his work, which offers an essentially political account of the major developments of Charles reign  [14]  , that Charless naval activities in his final period are particularly notable, and saw the Carolingian Empire turned into a major maritime power.  [15]  In my opinion, Charlemagne did well to defend his kingdom successfully and expand to cushion his existing borders. Ganshof shows that he was a well renowned man and admired by other kings from neighbouring territories. I believe that Charlemagne not only managed to maintain his inherited lands, which is a great achievement in itself considering the vastness of the kingdom, but managed to build and gain land and respect, with which comes great reputation. His role in warfare suggests that he was a great and distinguished military leader and it would appear that his victories and skill in battle is one of the few topics where the historians generally agree that it enhanced his reputation amongst his peers and beyond. The argument of the decomposition  [16]  theory, chiefly driven by Ganshofs, has also encouraged much contest between historians, both historically and modern. Charlemagnes final years, chiefly following the Imperial Coronation of 800, are characterised by Ganshof as being dominated by a process of disintegration. It is my view that this idea holds a certain truth to it, demonstrated particularly in the aftermath of Charlemagne receiving the imperial title, but only to a certain extent. There were arguably some areas of his rule that experienced some level of limitations post-800, particularly his administrative apparatus, his military successes and also his Imperial Programme. Ganshof sets the parameter for this issue, although he does also indicate that there was a Balance Sheet,  [17]  implying that he did not believe that there was either uniform failure or success. He does often mention, however, that any successes Charles managed to achieve, mainly concerning his foreig n and internal policies, were in his mind, notably disappointing,  [18]  holding an overall picture of failure. Opposing this idea, King states that the Emperor had coped perfectly satisfactorily in his last years,  [19]  supported by Collins who adds that he believes that Ganshofs judgement seems mistaken.  [20]   Charlemagnes government is one of the most disputed aspects within his reign. Many historians agree that the way in which he orchestrated his government was poor, including Matthew Innes who declares that the lack of attention to the nuts and bolts of administration and to the mechanisms by which Charlemagne was able to govern à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ is striking  [21]  . His point is furthered in saying that some historians have gone so far to claim that the Carolingians lacked any clearly defined concept of the state  [22]  . In the last years of Charlemagnes reign for example, the Carolingian state had symptoms of bad government  [23]  . The idea argued by Ganshof that the last reigning years suffered decomposition would surely suggest that Charlemagne does not deserve his great reputation. Ganshof states that Charlemagnes achievements in the last years fell short of those envisaged in 802  [24]  We know that during 801-814 for example there are instances of malfunctioning of public services  [25]  of which the capitularies year after year denounce the same abuses  [26]  . The capitularies created under Charlemagne often had to be re-issued, and we may infer from this that perhaps he did not have the authority which would ensure his requests were carried out. Fichtenau maintains that it cannot be denied that Charles the great failed to solve this problem  [27]  . Donald Bullough is in agreement with this point as he does not feel confident that either Charles or his close advisers had developed a clear and consistent attitude to the empire in the east.  [28]  Davis who was writing in the late 1920s confirms that the capitularies and his commissions produced the merest ripples on the surface of the deep waters of customary law.  [29]  His work predominantly focuses on the belief that the very name by which [Charlemagne] is best known is the product of French invention  [30]  with a view to link themselves with greatness, rather than a result of Charlemagnes prominence. The majority of the criticism directed at Charlemagnes government foc uses around the years after 800, however Charlemagne managed to achieve great things such as managing to make his subjects take an oath of fidelity taken in the name of the emperor  [31]  which Ganshof describes as new and imperial  [32]  . Perhaps even more importantly he created a new codification of law which insisted upon creating a written record of laws for the first time. Therefore it is evident that the government serving under Charlemagne did manage to do great and commendable things. It was from the government that Charlemagne managed to patronize the arts, and scholarship and learning. Although there were negatives within the government, I believe the achievements far outweigh them. The Imperial Coronation is a major event in Charlemagnes rule and yet another area which has induced forcible disagreement amongst historians since its occasion in 800. The main argument is centred on the significance of the title in relation to the rest of his rule, and calls into question his role as protector of the Church among other factors. With the imperialization of Charlemagne  [33]  in 800, many historians have questioned whether Charlemagne changed the way he ruled after his coronation. The areas on this question chiefly explored throughout history are multi faceted, but I have identified three main parts to examine. These include changes that were implemented in the government, if any, Charlemagnes personal outlook on the title, and his role as protector of the Church. It is interesting to see how much, or indeed, how little, these three constituents changed after the Imperial coronation of 25th December, 800. We can identify certain techniques that Charlemagne employed in order to carry out his will. In 802 he called a council at Aachen and dispatched his missi in order to examine the religious and moral state of affairs throughout the kingdom. Wilson described his government as a strong, centralised government [with] internal stability  [34]  , which leads us to believe that he was powerful enough to impose any changes effectively upon his dominions. Historians have claimed in their work that there were also changes to the content and style of capitularies after 800. The most famous and extensive of capitularies were the Admonitio Generalis, 789, the Herstal of 799, and capitulary produced at Aachen in 802, dubbed as the Programmatic Capitulary by Ganshof. Historian King tells us how each of these capitularies are released following much unrest in Charlemagnes kingdom, and that most of the rulings are concerned with canon law, monastic life and the like.  [35]  It is to be noted however, that these things are indeed recurrent theme[s with] the problems dealt with in 802 or 789 or 779  [36]  and the ideas are simply repeated over time. Collins informs us that the Admonitio Generalis we can see Charlemagne explicitly claiming responsibility for the moral and spiritual welfare of his realm  [37]  . The content was greatly influenced by a range of councils dating back from the fourth to sixth centuries, and therefore much of it was repetition of ideas and wishes from over the years. Although this is true, Collins admits that the concluding regulationsrepresent new injunctions  [38]  and have not been taken from any earlier documents. Nevertheless no dramatic change in content can be seen. King adds that the previously sought goals in the capitularies had not been altered: order, justice, piety, peace, concord, each conceived in Christian terms, each expressive of Gods will.  [39]  Despite this, we are told that these issues were sought the more determinedly  [40]  by Charlemagne after 800. In opposition to King and Collins, Ganshof argues that in face there was a significant change to the content and style of the capitularies after 800, and also the way in which Charlemagne thought perceived them. He interprets the 802 capitulary issued from Aachen as a bid to create a Christian republic on earth under Charlemagnes authority. He puts particular emphasis on the way it is written, and how some passages are in first person which he claimed was unusual. The parts in first person may be interpreted as issues which Charlemagne held most dear to him, and Ganshof argues that this is due to the Emperor being driven by Imperial responsibility.  [41]  The introduction of the capitulary refers to Charlemagnes intentions of sending out missi, to spread the word of god and encourage people to obey him, and Ganshof uses this as evidence of an Imperial programme of rule. The oath of fidelity is a particularly significant feature of the Programmatic Capitulary, the counterpart to t he Emperors recognition of his own enhanced obligations before God.  [42]  Two years after his coronation, it appears that Charlemagne imposed a greater insistence on the strict enforcement of the established laws  [43]  , and possibly the most significant detail is that the oath was to be taken in the name of the Emperor, not the King. Ganshof implied that a distinction is being made between the Imperial and former royal title. He adds that the language used to draw out the oath in the capitulary is explicitly more spiritual, and this distinguishes it from other oaths sworn in the 890s with Charlemagne as king. I believe that the debate to Ganshofs argument rests in the suggestion that perhaps the sixty-year-old Emperor  [44]  was simply becoming increasingly more aware of his old age. Charlemagne greatly desired salvation and in order to ensure this he knew his responsibility to his people and their beliefs was an important constituent which would seal his fate. Perhaps Charlemagnes focus in his capitularies came more from the anxieties of an old man for awareness of passing years  [45]  , and not as a direct result of his Imperial Coronation, as Ganshof has suggested. Perhaps Charlemagne perceived the Imperial title as a way to enforce other wishes more firmly as Wallace-Hadrill claims that the imperial title meant little or nothing to him outside Rome.  [46]  For example, with his newly acquired status he was able to claim that there were religious dimensions to his military campaigns, which would encourage more people to serve him. Davis tells how Charlemagne; did not go out of his way to seek the Imperial dignity, but accepted it as a responsibility which could not be refused; he employed it, not as a stepping-stone to further aggrandisement, but to legalise power already acquired, to allay the purposeless strife of race against race within his existing dominions, to evoke the consciousness of spiritual brotherhood which afterwards proved so mighty a factor in European development.  [47]   Wallace Hadrill confirms that Charlemagne was fight[ing] for the faith  [48]  , and not solely because of his newly adorned title. In addition, this supremacy enabled him to crown his son Louis, which he hoped would secure his legacy after his death. I believe that the greatest significance of the Imperial coronation lies in the debate as to whether Charlemagnes attitude towards the Church changed after 800. In my personal opinion, there is much evidence from many of the historians which suggests that it did, but still there lies a counter argument. I believe that following the coronation in Rome Charlemagne recognised his responsibilities to God and pursued them with a driving passion  [49]  , and his ambition to create a truly Christian society  [50]  was substantially magnified. There is much evidence to suggest that this is exactly what Charlemagne thought God required of him, and the fact that he was crowned on Christs birthday is appropriate to this. It adds to the belief that Charlemagne saw himself as Christs representative upon earth, and because of this, saw himself as Gods worker among men. The Paderborn Epic  [51]  also may hold evidence to this claim, as the poem refers to Charlemagne as an instrument of St. Peter. The oath of fidelity, released with the capitulary of 802, has been said to have been re-phrased to give it a more religious character and was the counterpart to the Emperors recognition of his own enhanced obligations before God.  [52]   After 800, Charlemagne became worthy of the highest secular dignity that existed under God, and we know that he also continuously claimed responsibility forthe spiritual welfare of his realm.  [53]  Was this however completely owing to the coronation or due to his awareness of an approaching death as an old man? There are continuous implications suggesting that Charles had a terrible awareness that Gods judgment will be conditioned by the conduct of his subjects  [54]  and in his remaining months he spent his time in prayer and alms-giving and spent some of his last hours in correcting books.  [55]  Perhaps therefore this priority of religion had more to do with his hopes for personal redemption and salvation from God, and to attain this, he knew he had to do Gods bidding, and spread the word of Christianity for a Christian republic on Earth. Also toward the end of his reign we know he arranged for the distribution of the treasures and silveramong the twenty-one metropoli tan churches that now existed in his empirefor the good of his soul.  [56]  Nevertheless, it remains certain that Charlemagne was concerned with the problems of the Church and thought it was his duty to protect with his whole mind.  [57]  It is evident that his struggles with Saxony were primarily due to their resistance of Christianity, in preference of paganism. It remains uncertain as to whether his increased Christian mission in his last years were more due to the coronation, and his recognition of being the protector of the church, or simply due to his hopes for salvation after death. Becher however tell us that in gaining the Imperial title, Charlemagne achieved his goal of standing at the head of the Christian world.  [58]   Charlemagne is presented as a king of well-rounded ability and his patronage of the arts compliments his government and religious advances particularly well. The capturing of the Avar treasure meant there was a greater disposable income and as a result of the influx of income patronage of the arts, encouraging scholarship and learning amongst his people, soars in his period. Fichtenau and Wallace-Hadrill suggest there was no significant push in the development of the arts for the first few years in Charlemagnes sovereignty. Rosamond McKitterick continues to say that the patronage of learning could be regarded as one of the obligations of royalty,  [59]  perhaps suggesting that it was not something newly enforced by Charlemagne. On the other hand, she then suggests that his patronage was designed to promote his royal power as a Christian king and to consolidate the faith  [60]  which is shown by the creation of the two schools; the peripatetic school, which Charlemagne travell ed with, and the Hofschule, his court school. Most of the courts activities revolved around religion and the Hofschule even created a new addition to the gospels.  [61]  In addition, Charlemagne began to commission paintings such as the Al Fresco which still survives today in the chapel in Frankia. It overlooks the vault and illustrates Christ sitting in majesty. This represents to us a recurring theme that the arts tended to reflect; Charlemagnes comparison to Christ. Charlemagne however seemed to show a genuine interest in the developments of the arts as he was very interested in music and what was sung in his chapel.  [62]  Charlemagne used his patronage of the arts to improve the image in which other people saw him and successively improve his reputation. Einhard, a dedicated scholar who served both under Charlemagne and Louis the Pious claimed that the Kingà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ was a very intelligent man.  [63]  Rosamond McKitterick suggests that it was a period of remark able efflorescence of culture initiated by Charlemagne  [64]  which is shown by the influx of poetry, art, and books produced during his reign. This can allow us to understand more clearly why the scholars in Charlemagnes era were eager to help the king; scholars from all around the globe sought to help him, including Alcuin of York and Paul the Deacon from Italy. The ability to summon such great men from other kingdoms suggests the reputation that preceded Charlemagne. His devotion to scholarly texts, prayer and almsgiving shows the depths of Charlemagnes faith and his desire and motivation to improve his subjects lives. Personally I think that this is an invaluable insight into the character of the king, as we are able to see how driven and determined Charlemagne was to both better the lives of his people, but also his personal reflection of what his duties meant to him. Charlemagnes attention to the arts tended to be quite extravagant and we may infer that he looked upon the subject as a form of propaganda. It suggests that he was very astute in his decision-making of what to commission in order to improve his reputation. It is clear to see that Charlemagne reputes himself with great integrity and achievement and his accomplishments were of great merit. The viewpoints regarding Charlemagnes claim to greatness are of great variation. Finding the distinction between a myth and a truly remarkable man has been difficult to determine throughout the scope of work available to me. Many historians, including Richard Winston who was writ

Kupor :: essays research papers

In Texas politics, one of the most important things to understand is the iron triangle. The iron triangle figuratively symbolizes the relationship between interest groups, the bureaucracy, and legislative committees. Each of the three entities is at a corner of the triangle. It is regarded as an accurate representation of the way in which many routine policy decisions are made. The interest group is at the top, the bureaucracy is at the bottom left, and the legislative committee is at the bottom right. Starting at the interest group and going clockwise, the interest group provides the bureaucracy with information and support for agency budget. The bureaucracy provides the legislative committee with information. The legislative committee provides the interest group with legislation. Going counter-clockwise, the interest group provides the legislative committee with campaign contributions and information. The legislative committee provides the bureaucracy with legislation and budget s upport. The bureaucracy provides the interest group with rules and regulations. An example is the interest group being from the oil and gas industry, the bureaucracy is the railroad commission, and any committee. The lobbyists from the oil and gas industry send campaign contributions and information to the committee. Information could be about anything from supply and demand to turnover rates. The committee sends legislation and budget support to the commission, which are money and rules on how to regulate the oil and gas industry. The rules and regulations are then sent up to the interest group from the industry. The other way, the industry lobbyists send information and support to the commission, which sends the information to the committee, which then sends legislation to the industry.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The process of co-optation is closely related to this iron triangle. Co-optation is defined as the transition from guardian of the public interest to defenders of private interests. This happens for three reasons. First, once a regulatory agency is established, the public tends to lose interest. Second, the regulators tend to come from the industry being regulated, bringing with them the industry’s perspective and bias as opposed to the public interest. Third, regulators have personal relationships with representatives from the industry who are generous to members of the agency. Basically, the regulatory agencies come to represent the interest of the industry they were created to control as opposed to the public interest. The part of the iron triangle where this occurs is where the interest group sends the agency information and support.

The Religious Dimension of Daniel Defoes Robinson Crusoe Essay

The Religious Dimension of Robinson Crusoe  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚      Robinson Crusoe’s discovery of the work ethic on the small island goes hand in hand with a spiritual awakening.   Robinson Crusoe is not a very profound religious thinker, although religion is part of his education and transformation.   He claims he reads the Bible, and he is prepared to quote it from time to time.   But he doesn’t puzzle over it or even get involved in the narrative or character attractions of the stories.   The Bible for him appears to be something like a Dale Carnegie handbook of maxims to keep the work on schedule and to stifle any possible complaints or longings for a different situation.   Still, the religious dimension is central to Robinson Crusoe.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Robinson Crusoe’s interpretation of his life links the financial success directly and repeatedly with his growth in religious awareness.   This is not an intellectual conversion but, simply put, an awareness that he has, in some ways, received God’s grace and is under His care.   The growing profitability of his efforts is proof of such a spiritual reward.   This awareness fills him with a sense of guilt for his former life and a great desire to be relieved of that guilt.   The desire to be relieved from that feeling of guilt, in fact, is much stronger than Robinson Crusoe’s desire to be delivered from the island. Now I looked back upon my past life with such horror, and my sins appeared so dreadful, that my soul sought nothing of God but deliverance from the load of guilt that bore down all my comfort.   As for my solitary life; it was nothing; I did not so much as pray to be delivered from it or think of it; it was all of no considerations in comparison to this; and I added this part here to ... ... The inhabitants of the New World were there to be ignored, like Friday’s father, used as servants, like Friday, or killed, like the cannibals.   The important part of the Puritan encounter with the New World was what Robinson Crusoe shows us, the spiritual testing of the solitary Protestant spirit, a life-long ordeal in which he achieved success (or the closest thing to a manifestation of success) by stamping his will on the new land, staking out territory as his property through backbreaking toil, without any concessions to anyone or anything, least of all to the land or to its original inhabitants.   That was the Puritan’s calling; that was the reason God has placed us on this earth: to put to our personal uses the material and people available, to ignore what does not fit in with such projects, and to remove quickly and ruthlessly anything that stands in our way.

Ancient Rome vs Ancient Greece

In Rome, there are three social classes, arranged according to wealth; Patricians, Plebeians, and Slaves. Patricians are the upper class citizens; they are very wealthy and highly educated. They make up the majority of the senate and therefore control the laws. Plebeians are the poor, lower-class citizens. They greatly outnumber the Patricians, make up most of the army, and pay most of the taxes. They are not allowed to marry Patricians or take part In government. Slaves are at the bottom of the Roman social order; they make up over 25% of Romeos population, and are essential to Its survival.Wealthy citizens often own many slaves, which they use to complete various tasks around the home. They consisted of prisoners of war, Plebeians whom were In debt, or children born of slaves. Slaves often work on farms, In mills, at shops, doing city construction, or are servants. Roman writer, Seneca, believes that masters should treat their slaves well, as a well-treated slave will work better f or a good master rather than Just doing enough begrudgingly for someone who mistreats their slaves.Slaves can receive freedom from their masters if they mom up with enough money, or are released upon the master's death. Women are not considered equal to men. Their primary duty is to care for their family. The amount of work that they do is correlated to the amount of wealth they have, with rich women usually having servants to do most of their work. Women from lower class families have to do daily chores on their own, or assisted by daughters. This usually includes washing dishes, sweeping floors, and cooking. Rome is home to some of the finest pieces of art in the world.This includes architecture, paintings, sculptures, and mosaics. The sculpture is the most important piece of artwork, with thousands of sculptures located all over Rome. If you're looking for entertainment, Roman citizens often gather in The Coliseum to see fights between gladiators, slaves, prisoners, and wild anim als. These fights are very violent, and therefore enjoyable. They only end when the loser is dead. Chariot racing at The Hippodrome is also very popular in Rome. The Coliseum, The Pantheon, and Circus Maximum, are mongo some of Romeos grandest buildings.Greece: The Greek social structure is broken Into three groups; citizens, emetics, and slaves. A citizen Is born of Athenian parents, and they are the most powerful group In Greece. After compulsory service In the army, they often became government officials, and took part in Jury service. A emetic Is of foreign birth and has migrated to Athens to trade or practice craft. They must pay taxes and are sometimes required to serve In the army, despite this, they can never achieve the full rights of a excellent. ThisIncludes the ability to own houses, and the ability to speak In court. Slaves were servants and laborers without any legal rights. Slaves can be prisoners of war, or bought from slave traders. These social statuses only apply to men, as women adopt their social status from their husband. Women In Greece are not permitted to take part in public life, making it a prime destination for the whole family! Greece is the sculpture is our preferred form of artistic expression, as it shows an expression of individuality, and the beauty of the human body.Aphids, Polytheists, and Myron are three of our most prized sculptures. One of the most distinguishable art feature of Greece, are our columns. They are crafted in three different styles; Doric is the simplest of these three styles. Ionic is thinner and more elegant with a scroll-like design. Corinthian is the rarest but most elaborate column, with many complex designs; it is often decorated with acanthus leaves. In Greece, there is no shortage of entertainment. We have invented the theatre, a place in which audiences come from all around to watch comedies or tragic plays.Greece is also home to the Olympic Games, the world's premier sport event. Held in honor of Z eus, athletes from around Greece compete in various events in front of thousands of spectators. There are also many marvelous building in Greece, such as The Parthenon, a temple overlooking Athens. The Erection is a temple north of the Acropolis, dedicated to Athena and Poseidon. The Temple of Olympian Zeus is a temple in the center of Athens, with enormous columns. Greece is the premier destination of the World, so why not come by?