A Muse Amidst the War: The Life of Estelle Ishigo Essay

Estelle Ishigo is a Caucasian woman who lived during the World War II. Unlike her fellow women who have also lived during her time, Ishigo showed an exceptional amount of bravery and determination to outwit the challenges and tests of war. Instead of abandoning her Japanese American husband Arthur, Ishigo opted to accompany him together with other Japanese Americans. A painter and an illustrator, Ishigo sketched what she has seen and experienced during her stay in the internment camps in Pomona, California and Heart Mountain in Wyoming. These talents of Ishigo were utilized to serve those in need. In Heart Mountain Camp, Ishigo was allowed by the War Relocation Authority to illustrate images of the people during war. Most of Ishigo’s works were used to depict not only the actual events and people affected by the war, but the emotions they carry as well. Ishigo was successful in describing through her works the scenario in the internment camps. Most of her subjects were the Japanese Americans—how they managed to live and survive the war. Interestingly, the Japanese Americans were still full of courage, hope, and dignity to build a home under such crucial circumstances. These emotions were very much evident in Ishigo’s ilustrations. The life in the internment camps was actually as hard as living as a soldier of war. The War Relocation Authority had described the internment camps as a barracks covered by tar paper and no cooking or plumbing facilities. The Heart Mountain Relocation, being surrounded by barbed wire, was inadequate to provide the interns budget, toilets, and beds. In addition, the cold weather made it much harder for the interns to live within the camps. Curfew has also been observed which caused some reported shootouts. Work Cited Ishigo, Estelle. Lone Heart Mountain. Heart Mountain High School Class of 1947 (1989)

Filipino writers Essay

Region Literary Types Prominent Author Bicol Literature -extraordinary vitalityof richness in depicting historical events, specific persons and social conditions in Bicol Region. – characterized by clarity and grace of expression evident in song and dance. – friction writing in Bicol has not flourished. Handiog (epic) – First important work in Bicol. Liturgical Play (play) – combination of miming and punning with religious to cover up doubled edge statements against Spaniards. Comedia – as a social and political critique enhanced by his creation of an ineffectual character quite like tragic hero. Anti Cristo (drama) – technical artistry gained appreciative comments from drama critics at University of the Philippines. Maria Lilia F. Realubit Mariano Perfecto Sabas Armenta Justiniano Nuyda Asisclo Jimenez – Known for his gift of mimicry and comic version of life. Manuel Fuentabella – noted for his lyricism and sensitivity. Angelo De Castro – writes with perceptivity and fatalism. Valerio Zuniga – projects human feelings clearly in his work. Mariano Goyena del Prado – writes with poetic awareness and dramatic choice of words. Ilocano Literature – best illustrates the literature of the region in various stages Dallang – Ilokano Literature Lam-ang and Namongan – earliest known poem, mention of Christian baptism and marriage and names of other characters shows strong evidence of hispanization. Translation of Cardinal Bellarmine’s Catechism – first book printed in Iloko, earliest source of information about Pedro Bukaneg. Passion and Panagbiag – religious work Moro Moro and Zarzuela (Comedia) – first presented by Isabelo Uray Narigat No Paguimbagan/ Improvement Despite Obstacles 1911 (novel) Nasamitken Narucbos nga Sabong daguiti Dardarepdep it Agbaniaga/ Sweet and Fresh Flower of a travellers Dream1921 Mining Wenno Ayat it Cararua/ Mining or Spiritual Love 1941 Banawag – weekly magazine Maingel it Kabambantayan (The hero of Wilderness) – life of Ilokano pioneers who seeks greener pastures in Cagayan Puris it Barukong (Thorn in the Breast) – studies between the fued between the Iloko and other regional groups. Dagiti Mariing Iti Parbangon (Who are awakened at Down) – deals with fisherman because poetry seeks employment in government. Nasudi nga Agnanayon (Forever Pure) and Ta Dida Ammo it Aramidda – are the social study of Sapanish era. Ramut iti Ganggannaet (Roots in Foreign Soil) – about Filipino Identity The Other Women Marcelino A. Foronda Jr. – gives substantial account of Ilocano literature Fray Francisco Lopez Pedro Bukaneg – father of Iloko Literature. Leona Florentino – National poetess of the Philippines. Isabelo de los Reyes – folklone studies and religious and political article. Facundo Madriaga Marcos E. Milton Marcelo Pena Crisologo Former President Ferdinand Marcos – reffered it as the bible of Northern Philippines. Arsenio T. Ramels Contante Casabars Marcelino Foronda Jr. Marcelino Foronda Jr. Virgilio R. Samonte Sugbuanon Literature provides information and insights into the character and culture of the largest linguistic sector in the Philippines. Abundant and varied. According to Saturio Villarino, it is characterized by adaptions from Spanish and English poetry. Inspired by vernacular translations of foreign novels. Ang Suga (The Lamp) – bitter consequences of Filipinos sensitivity towards the Spanish Occupation. Lalawa (Image) – collection of didactic short stories portraying to society problem character. Dili Diay Yawan-on (Not truly evil) and Fausto Dugenio’s Sayaw (The Dance of Life) Syudad sa Sugbu (V Ramos St., Cebu City) And Temistocles Adlawan’s Ang Gindak-on sa Dagat (The Breadth on the Sea) – most significant stories during the last 30 years Miawas ang Taub (The Tide Overflowed) – longest Sugbuanon novel, composed of 80 up to 90 characters. Ang Palad ni Pepe (Pepe’s Fortune) – phenomenally successful novel serialize in Bisaya Ang Anak ni Pepe (Pepe’s Child) – sequel to Pepe’s Fortune Adlaw sa Panudya (Day of Reckoning) – master piece of Tiburcio Baguio with Francisco Candia Balitaw – comic representation of love Drama Balitaw – developed from balitaw, which story line with spoken dialogue is woven around at least two balitaw sequences. Duplo – debate in verse with only two characters. Balagtasan sa Balitaw – incorporation of duplo and balitaw, courtship plot became frame work. Kolilisi – private type of drama performed by neighbors to divert bereaved family. Bagamundo – related type of folk play where a vagabond stranger arrives at the gate of kolilisi. Pamalaye – private performance, old Sugbuanon ritual formalizing an engage to marry. The Quarell between the East and the West Bachelors – story from Marawi City Nicolas Rafols Vicente Rama Domingo Estabaya – outstanding among the school writers Dionisio Gabriels Dalan V. Rama Natario Bacalso- outstanding novalist duing this time Flaviano Boquecosa – outstanding novalist duing this time Tiburcio Baguio Radiomoda Mamitua Saber

Capital Punishment Should Be Abolished

| |   | | | In my opinion instead of banning Capital punishment, frequency of capital punishment should be brought to minimum. It should be strictly applied in case of Rape murder (mass murder) because nobody has given him right to destroy somebody’s life and they should fear every now and then that this crime will not be tolerate rapist and murderers. But not for robbery or other low level crime because you can earn your wealth again ; 10-15 year of imprisonment will give him good lesson. | | | |   | | | â€Å"An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth† which we all today known as capital punishment. I think it should not be banned. Though this form of punishment is inhuman and cruel, there is no other alternative but to enforce it. Just as one removes a rotten apple to save the basket full of apples, similarly we must get rid of the unwanted elements so that we can preserve the society. | |   | | | Hi, I think capital punishment should not be banned. Criminals are all their way to go beyond the unexpected mark. Once they are being left or being ignored at, they may cause a massive genocide. Second thing is that they will not have any fear for any punishment which may lead to increase in crime in the society and will hinder in social harmony and social peace. | | |   | | | According to me capital punishment should not be b anned. Criminals think that they will be threw into the prison if they commit any crime. There is no mistake in their thinking because the rules of the INDIAN CONSTITUTION had made like that. They don’t bother about jail although the punishment time is either 7 years or 14 years because jails are like their vacation spots. (example in the case of kasab). This is one of the reason for increasing in crime rate. But If India had followed the concept of capital punishment there would be no Mumbai attacks, no murders, no kidnappings. The fear of death (because of capital punishment) should shiver the criminals for thinking of crime. Then India absolutely can be peaceful country. | |   | | | According to me capital punishment should be given to every criminal who has committed a crime. By giving capital punishment to every criminal and it becomes a lesson for them and they possibly think about that what they are doing. For this govt has to take strict actions and make our India crime-less country. | |   | | | If it is abolished then our society will in trouble, toda y, not so much but still criminals have fear of capital punishment if its take back by GOVT the the courage will increase in criminals and they will do crime fearless. So my suggestion when any body do crime like murder, rape, robbery then we must give capital punishment hardly such kind of people because nobody have rights for killing other people. | | |   | | | I think capital punishment should not be banned. As said by many persons who are we to take the life of others, we means civilization where this law of capital punishment has not come from sky but majority of our country men and women voted for capital punishment to prevail and if you are living in this country you are accepting the law and in law capital punishment also comes. Capital punishment should not be abolished rather our government should think about it n emphasize on it. Capital Punishment should be given to those who have done heinous crimes like murder. There must be fear in the mind of people then only we can get healthy atmosphere to live. It will reduce the crime rates in the countries otherwise we will have our newspaper full of crimes in the future as we have now. So to get rid of these things I think Capital punishment should not be abolished. I appreciate opinions coming from different people but capital punishment is not punishment at all, it is revenge in its good form as people think. Punishment is, no matter how unimaginable the crime is or whether we are bound by sentiments or not is scientifically a procedure to correct mind of CRIMINAL. Whether a person killed thousands or not is unrelated as Punishment talks about correction and not past, if we talk about past don’t call it PUNISHMENT it is revenge only! Secondly law is going thousands of years back when religion and psychology are going into future. People think more massive crimes a person commits the more punishment he deserves because we cannot bear the end results at all, true but the fact is that society uses two opposites GOOD and BAD. GOOD should be victorious over BAD, but terrible crimes like mass murders, rapes, burning people, children etc. Are committed by mentally insane people. No normal person has desire or interest or energy or even thought will ever come, so we are biologically safe first! People like Teresa, Jesus have inherent traits that make them peaceful. Ok they might have conscious will but they did not use it because they need not. On other hand criminals need to use additional will and change their mind from instincts and urges and this is not called REAL GREAT! psychopaths are born with distorted mind, is it their fault? They have no emotion called love. Love comes from brain. If any one has doubt they can just observe whether emotions are made with hands or come from within us without effort. If so a person who cannot love humanity has fault in nervous system. If a person takes anesthetic will he get pain? Still the person may remain wide awake with no pain in part injected with anesthetic. On similar lines criminals know what they are doing (barring a few who are completely mad and insane and do not know reality) but cannot feel love or empathy just like anesthetic REMOVES PAIN. So one second assume we are not born with this EMOTION or this emotion is minimal? One can tell their own answers? |   | | Well, capital punishment in India is given in â€Å"the rarest of rare cases†. This includes. Raging war against the nation, murder abetting the suicide of a child or insane person and likewise. If this is so then why delay in the case of Ajmal Kasab and Afjal guru? Hadn’t they have done this offense? They came, butchered our democracy, plundered Indian lives and mystically send a message to our netas and babus and obviously to us we’ll iterate this. What can you do? Don’t you think this is a derogatory to our democracy, to our so-called cultured society and to our crippled law. I think trialing these guys is a totally a waste of our money and time. Just hang these guys till death because these lunatics don’t have respect to the lives of innocents. So, why to have mercy on them. I vehemently appeal to our netas and babus not to test our patience and provide them capital punishment. I admit there should not be any trial to these guys, just directly hang them, and I also appeal to our law-makers to bring the case of rape in this jurisdiction. |   | | Hi, ‘m Sukanta. I have already written my view here long day back. But I think some people didn’t get my point or didn’t read my opinion . People like Anuradha, commented on 31st March (plz dont take it in a negative way) , I think are not practical and live in a fantasy ideal world, where (they think) if you forbid a person not to do crime, just listens to you and stop doing crime. Ok. To you all such persons, I am putting few questions again. Please answer straightly, not in a round about way and without repeating idealistic writings like â€Å"we should kill†¦. â€Å", â€Å"then whats the difference between them and the judges† etc. My questions are- 1 ) Tell me just one way to change the minds of people like Kasav, Daud Ibrahim, Afjal Guru and so on or how can you kill the crime within them ? 2 ) How can you be sure enough that they wont do any crime again ? 3 ) How can you be sure that farther no plane will be hijacked demanding their release ? ) Who will bear the cost of super expensive foods and security ( as Kasav is getting right now )? 5 ) Can you think of any other punishment if your father/ mother/brother/sister or your boy friend/ girlfriend / wife/husband will die in such a horrific incident ? If so, then plz mention the punishment you would like to give them . Thank you. | | | Hey people, in India where I live (Chandigarh) crime rate is increasing by the clock, and I believe there might be equal number of capital punishments, well its not like that punishment is given when the accused are caught and proved guilty. Firstly, getting through this phase is very difficult, and even if the accused is punished of ‘ Daffa 302 ‘ the hanging is not made. There has not been a single hanging since 2004 in India. Well, with this attitude I reckon the criminals would not be afraid of the system. Well, Capital punishments is virtually abolished !. |   | | As per my perception, capital punishment is only on papers in India right now, as it is clear from the fact that Indian courts have sentenced near about 29 death sentence in last decade out of which only one person has been executed till date and the remaining are just on papers. In a recent judgement given by Session judge, kathua (jk) in which six out of seven accused were granted death penalty (seventh one has already expired) but as is the condition prevalling in india, this sentence is also just on paper, to execute them is too hard on the part of concerned authority. Apart from that afzal guru has been awarded capital punishment since 2006. But till date there is no execution of that sentence because execution of afzal guru is now only a question of executing a crimnal, but a senstive poltical issue. Various neferous poltical beaurecrates in India and especially in kashmir are earning there bread on this vary issue ana centre is also aware of the fact that if afzal guru is hanged during there tenure, there poltical graph would come down in kashmir by a fair amount. So we can say that if person who have been granted death sentence are not hanged and if the sentence awarded to them is just on paper, then what is the fun of awarding this sentence, it’s better that it should be banned now. Dear friends, I believe that for the sake of saving few criminals we cannot let hundreds and thousands of innocent people to die. Even if we have to take strict action against them, even if it is a capital punishment we shold come forward and support it. We have seen that due to the lack of proper and strict actions, thousands of innocent people are raped and murdered every year and the criminals walk freely without any fear of getting punishment. As one of my friend took the example of saud i Arabia, We can also make India a safer and better place to live with the imposition of capital punishment. |   | | Capital punishment must not be removed because i think it is the right way to give lesson to other criminals that his crime may lead him to death many peoples had written the sayings â€Å"kill the crime not the criminals† but they had not mentioned the way to do that. Shall we start appointing â€Å"MAHATMA BUDHH and swami vivekanand† instead of police? â€Å"Tit 4 Tat† is fit here†. i want to ask the people asking for mercy that if a convict kills your most loving one then also u will ask the honorable judge for showing mercy to him†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ And for them i want that they must watch the movie â€Å"A WEDNESDAY†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. From my perspective, capital punishment should not be abolished as it will definitely help us to create a sense of fear in the minds of criminals. â€Å"Kill crimes not criminals† is a marvelous proposal but those stand for this theory should clarify how it can be put into practice. In order to save th e innocent people from being punished, I strongly feel that, all loopholes in the judicial system should be closed. Only capital punishment awarded to hard-core criminals can set an example for other like minded persons and help the polity to bring down the whopping number of ever increasing criminal deeds. One more point, those liberal minds, who shed tears for the criminals must taken into account the pathetic state of the victims. Moreover, countries with stringent criminal and judicial systems always show a decreasing trend in such heinous acts as murder and theft. Take the example of Saudi Arabia where Islamic code of law is strictly implemented, the number of such dubious crimes are very low there. So capital punishment should be there in the larger interest of the country at least as a ‘necessary evil’. |   | | I do not think that capital punishment is the only solution to decrease crime in the society. Already there are many cases are still pending and our judiciary and government is sleeping. Todays in lakhs court cases are pending and the accused are moving freely without any problem. In my view govt should make a strict rules against accused and finalised their case only in six months and give a hard punishment without capital punishment. | Hi everyone. I totally agree that capital punishment should be given, if a person have committed any heinous crime, but before that a transparent investigation should be done. Today most of the time main culprits (usually people with huge amount of money) uses poor as their weapon and commit heinous crimes and cannot ever get caught, because they bribe everybody and every system, and not only this they bring out false proofs against that poor guy and thus that poor fellow becomes victim. And our judiciary give punishment to that poor as it depends on proofs, doesn’t matter however false it may be. I just want to ask why the poor became victim, just because he was poor or he has just trusted somebody? Capital punishment should be given to that criminal who has shadowed himself and used a poor person as his weapon. Indeed he should be hanged. |   | | I agree with the statement ‘we should kill crime not criminals’. But how can the crime be reduced without this type of punishment. It is not possible to create an awareness so that the criminals move away from the crime. We can take the example of the terrorist itself. Providing awareness doesn’t seems to create any alteration in their minds. So in my opinion,only way would be the capital punishment. Punishment should be meant to leave a message of fear in the hearts of whoever trying to commit a brutal crime. This fear can obviously prevent them doing brutal crimes. As my friend said earlier,over 30 countries have abolished capital punishment and do not have any increase in crime. But at the same time it have not shown any decrease in rate. Whereas in countries having strict capital punishment have low crime rates. If regarding the punishment of innocent,its up to judiciary. They have been shown guilty in front of judiciary. Thats why they are been given punishment like dat So in my opinion,capital punishment should not be abolished |   | | Hi everyone. A very good line said by Priya â€Å"We should kill crimes, not criminals†. I’m agree with this line. It is the best way if we are able to kill crimes without killing criminals. This could be possible only when there is stringent law and people are abide by the laws. But if there is need to kill criminals to reduce crime then it’s also quite fair option. We should follow â€Å"Tit for Tat Policy†. Those who have committed heinous crimes like murder, rape and the politicians who have cheated our country and the people should be given capital punishment immediately. These types of person doesn’t deserve to get a place in our society. |   | | I think for some crime capital punishment should be there. In India, people are not respecting laws any more. Whether he is a rich guy or poor. They some how have started believing that they will escape from arms of law. If we take the case of Jessica or Priyadarshini Matto, in both cases judgement took so many years by that time criminals were roaming freely in the society. What is guarantee that these people will not engage in any other crime? In US capital punishment is allowed and people over there are more disciplined just because the laws are so stringent. In India also present day situation is so horrible that strictness is need of the hour. . Every human vll enjoy the freedom at the most of all side provided to him until n unless there are no strict rules. !. |   | | I m completely satisfied with kapil you can not let criminals to be in a state of fearless after commiting crime. Capital punishment should not be banned. One who is guilty shud be punished and if his/her crime goes beyond limit then he/she is worthy of capital punishm ent. By doing so we can reduce crime rates. These are ‘rakshax’ and capital punishment is there ‘vadh’. |   | | According to me, capital punishment should not be abolished. here is no reason to save the life of such a person who is a cause of misery and fear in society. capital punishments are not meant for small crimes. If the crime committed is not intense they are punished in terms of fine and imprisonment. if they are to improve themselves, they would definitely do that by this. if people go to extent of murdering or other criminal activities, they are definitely becoming violent and has no fear of law. such a criminal is sure to do many more harms to society and the nation as a whole. No nation need such criminals and so this world is not a place for them.   | | We should kill crime and not criminals†¦ I agree.. But how can we kill crime in our society? It is possible only by killing the culprits.. A punishment should serve as a shuddering exa mple for others thus preventing them from doing anything unfair.. I strongly believe that India should become a more disciplined country like Singapore where a small mistake like spitting in the roadside can lead to heavy fines.. In short,our Government should take steps to take stringent measures towards anything | We should kill crime and not criminals†¦ I agree.. But how can we kill crime in our society? It is possible only by killing the culprits.. A punishment should serve as a shuddering example for others thus preventing them from doing anything unfair.. I strongly believe that India should become a more disciplined country like Singapore where a small mistake like spitting in the roadside can lead to heavy fines.. In short,our Government should take steps to take stringent measures towards anything unfair,whoever be the culprit,be it an ordinary person or one of our much respected ministers.. Purify our country†¦. |   | | only if the punishments are severe, crimes will get reduced. lse, we could find none other way to protect ourself from crimes . . . so i am strongly agree with that capital punishments are to be booned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |   | | Have a good day to All , This is Vimal. According to my view capital punishment is the only solution to reduce the crime rates. Because i have an evidence not only me all of us knew this. Countries like Dubai Saudi A rabhiya the crime rates are very less only because of severe punishments , and capital punishments for most of the crimes. killing the criminals only kills the crime. unless crime will not be killed. To have a healthy country we should reduce the crime. o reduce crime capital punishment should be needed|   | | Criminals have no right to take aways someone’s smile n if they are guilty of affecting someone’s life then they are worthy to go through such similar pain. May be the fear of going through the same might stop them doing something brutal. Relieving them from capital punishment is alleviating them for going for wrong doings. | Crime is everywhere. In our neighborhood, in the neighboring state, wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society? No, definitely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. I support death penalty because of several reasons. Firstly, I believe that death penalty serves as a deterrent and helps in reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty is irreversible, but it is hard to kill a wrongly convicted person due to the several chances given to the convicted to prove his innocence. Thirdly, death penalty assures safety of the society by eliminating these criminals. Deterrence means to punish somebody as an example and to create fear in other people for the punishment. Death penalty is one of those extreme punishments that would create fear in the mind of any sane person. Capital punishment should be abolished Critics of capital punishment put forward several arguments. 1. The application of the death penalty is so arbitrary that it violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Harry Blackmun claims there is an irreconcilable conflict between two requirements in capital sentencing. On the one hand, the Eighth Amendment demands that sentencing discretion in capital cases be structured according to fixed, objective standards to eliminate arbitrariness and discrimination. On the other hand, there is a humanitarian requirement that sentencing discretion be flexible enough to permit sentencers to individualize justice by taking mitigating circumstances into account that might justify a sentence less than death. 2. The death penalty discriminates against racial minorities and the poor. Statistics show that the death penalty is administered in a selective and racially discriminatory manner. 3. The eath penalty doesn’t deter crime. 4. The death penalty costs taxpayers more than life imprisonment. 5. The inevitability of factual, legal, and moral errors results in a system that must wrongly kill some innocent defendants. 6. Public support for the death penalty diminishes substantially when the public is fully informed about the penalty, the alternative of life im prisonment without parole, and the consequences of the death penalty. Capital punishment should not be abolished Proponents of the death penalty make arguments centering around the justifications of fairness, retribution, deterrence, economy, and popularity. . The death penalty isn’t arbitrary. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty isn’t cruel and unusual punishment and that a two-part proceeding — one for determining innocence or guilt and one for determining the sentence — is constitutional. Any conflicts between eliminating arbitrariness and allowing sentencers to individualize justice can be resolved, according to Justice Scalia, by dispensing with the requirement that sentencers consider an array of mitigating circumstances. . The death penalty isn’t discriminatory. In McCleskey v. Kemp (1987), the Court held that statistical evidence of racial discrimination in death sentencing can’t establish a vio lation of the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments. To win an appeal under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Court requires an appellant to prove the decision makers in his or her case acted with intent to discriminate. 3. Executions deter would-be criminals from committing crimes. 4. It is cheaper for the government to kill murderers than to keep them in prison for the duration of their lives. 5. The few mistakes that are made in carrying out the death penalty are offset by its crime prevention and economic benefits. 6. Polls show the vast majority of Americans favor the death penalty for murderers. 7. Society has a moral right to punish the most violent criminals by taking their lives. Some violent criminals are vile, wicked persons who deserve to die. Evaluating the debate over capital punishment A substantial body of empirical studies shows that the administration of capital punishment is arbitrary, that the costs of trials and multiple appeals make the death penalty more expensive than housing an offender in prison for life, that the death penalty does not deter violent crime, and that during the twentieth century more than 400 people were erroneously convicted in capital cases. Although the Supreme Court denied the racial discrimination argument in McCleskey v. Kemp, statistical evidence supports the claim that the burden of capital punishment falls upon the poor and the underprivileged. Studies show that a disproportionate number of individuals sentenced to death are members of minority groups and that nearly all individuals on death row are indigents. The argument that the death penalty should be retained because the majority of the people in the United States want it, equates the numbers in support of a position with the correctness of it. The rightness or wrongness of the death penalty logically is neither helped nor hindered by the numbers in support. Opinions don’t logically equate to factual knowledge. Deciding whether or not society has a moral right to take the lives of murderers and other violent criminals requires a value judgment. In support of their position, proponents of the death penalty cite the Judeo-Christian tradition of â€Å"eye for eye, tooth for tooth. † Opponents counter by emphasizing New Testament admonitions to â€Å"turn the other cheek† and â€Å"to love thy neighbor. † In a Nutshell Yes| No| 1. Financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is several times that of keeping someone in prison for life. 2. It is barbaric and violates the â€Å"cruel and unusual† clause in the Bill of Rights. . The endless appeals and required additional procedures clog our court system. 4. We as a society have to move away from the â€Å"eye for an eye† revenge mentality if civilization is to advance. 5. It sends the wrong message: why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong. 6. Life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent. 7. Other countries (especially in Europe) would have a more favorable image of America. 8. Some jury members are reluctant to convict if it means putting someone to death. 9. The prisoner’s family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state, as well as going through the emotionally-draining appeals process. 10. The possibility exists that innocent men and women may be put to death. 11. Mentally ill patients may be put to death. 12. It creates sympathy for the monstrous perpetrators of the crimes. 13. It often draws top talent laywers who will work for little or no cost due to the publicity of the case and their personal beliefs against the morality of the death penalty, increasing the chances a technicality or a manipulated jury will release a guilt person. 4. It is useless in that it doesn’t bring the victim back to life. | 1. The death penalty gives closure to the victim’s families who have suffered so much. 2. It creates another form of crime deterrent. 3. Justice is better served. 4. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. 5. It provides a deterrent for prisoners already ser ving a life sentence. 6. DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person’s guilt or innocence. 7. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. 8. It contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. 9. It gives prosecutors another bargaining chip in the plea bargain process, which is essential in cutting costs in an overcrowded court system. | Overview/Background The United States remains in the minority of nations in the world that still uses death as penalty for certain crimes. Many see the penalty as barbaric and against American values. Others see it as a very important tool in fighting violent pre-meditated murder. Two things have once again brought this issue to national debate. One is the release of some highly publicized studies that show a number of innocents had been put to death. The second is the issue of terrorism and the need to punish its perpetrators. Yes ? Financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is several times that of keeping someone in prison for life. Most people don’t realize that carrying out one death sentence costs 2-5 times more than keeping that same criminal in prison for the rest of his life. How can this be? It has to do with the endless appeals, additional required procedures, and legal wrangling that drag the process out. It’s not unusual for a prisoner to be on death row for 15-20 years. Judges, attorneys, court reporters, clerks, and court facilities all require a substantial investment by the taxpayers. Do we really have the resources to waste? ? It is barbaric and violates the â€Å"cruel and unusual† clause in the Bill of Rights. Whether it’s a firing squad, electric chair, gas chamber, lethal injection, or hanging, it’s barbaric to allow state-sanctioned murder before a crowd of people. We condemn people like Ahmadinejad, Qaddafi, and Kim Jong Il when they murder their own people while we continue to do the same (although our procedures for allowing it are obviously more thorough). The 8th Amendment of the U. S. Constitution prevents the use of â€Å"cruel and unusual punishment†. Many would interpret the death penalty as violating this restriction. ? The endless appeals and required additional procedures clog our court system. The U. S. court system goes to enormous lengths before allowing a death sentence to be carried out. All the appeals, motions, hearings, briefs, etc. onopolize much of the time of judges, attorneys, and other court employees as well as use up courtrooms facilities. This is time space that could be used for other unresolved matters. The court system is tremendously backed up. This would help move things along. ? We as a society have to move away from the â€Å"eye for an eye† revenge mentality if civilization is to advance. The â€Å"eye for an eye† mentality will never solve anything. A revenge philosophy inevitably leads to an endless cycle of violence. Why do you think the Israeli-Palestine conflict has been going on for 60 years? Why do you think gang violence in this country never seems to end? It is important to send a message to society that striking back at your enemy purely for revenge will always make matters worse. ? It sends the wrong message: why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong. Yes, we want to make sure there is accountability for crime and an effective deterrent in place; however, the death penalty has a message of â€Å"You killed one of us, so we’ll kill you†. The state is actually using a murder to punish someone who committed a murder. Does that make sense? Life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent. For those of you who don’t feel much sympathy for a murderer, keep in mind that death may be too good for them. With a death sentence, the suffering is over in an instant. With life in prison, the pain goes on for decades. Prisoners are confined to a cage and live in an internal environment of rape and violence where they’re treated as animals. And consider terrorists. Do you think they’d rather suffer the humiliation of lifelong prison or be â€Å"martyred† by a death sentence? What would have been a better ending for Osama bin Laden, the bullet that killed him instantly, or a life of humiliation in an American prison (or if he was put through rendition to obtain more information). ? Other countries (especially in Europe) would have a more favorable image of America. It’s no secret that anti-Americanism is rampant around the world. One of the reasons is America’s continued use of the death penalty. We’re seen as a violent, vengeful nation for such a policy. This is pretty much the same view that Europeans had of America when we continued the practice of slavery long after it had been banned in Europe. Some jury members are reluctant to convict if it means putting someone to death. Many states require any jury members to be polled during the pre-trial examination to be sure they have the stomach to sentence someone to death before they’re allowed to serve. Even if they’re against the death penalty, they still may lie in ord er to get on the panel. The thought of agreeing to kill someone even influences some jury members to acquit rather than risk the death. Some prosecutors may go for a lesser charge rather than force juries into a death-or-acquit choice. Obviously, in all these situations, justice may not be served. ? The prisoner’s family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state, as well as going through the emotionally-draining appeals process. One victim’s innocent family is obviously forced to suffer from a capital murder, but by enforcing a death sentence, you force another family to suffer. Why double the suffering when we don’t have to? ? The possibility exists that innocent men and women may be put to death. There are several documented cases where DNA testing showed that innocent people were put to death by the government. We have an imperfect justice system where poor defendants are given minimal legal attention by often lesser qualified individuals. Some would blame the court system, not that death penalty itself for the problems, but we can’t risk mistakes. ? Mentally ill patients may be put to death. Many people are simply born with defects to their brain that cause them to act a certain way. No amount of drugs, schooling, rehabilitation, or positive reinforcement will change them. Is it fair that someone should be murdered just because they were unlucky enough to be born with a brain defect. Although it is technically unconstitutional to put a mentally ill patient to death, the rules can be vague, and you still need to be able to convince a judge and jury that the defendant is in fact, mentally ill. ? It creates sympathy for the monstrous perpetrators of the crimes. Criminals usually are looked down upon by society. People are disgusted by the vile, unconscionable acts they commit and feel tremendous sympathy for the victims of murder, rape, etc. However, the death penalty has a way of shifting sympathy away from the victims and to the criminals themselves. An excellent example is the execution a few years ago of former gang leader â€Å"Tookie† Williams. He was one of the original members of the notorious Crips gang, which has a long legacy of robbery, assault, and murder. This is a man who was convicted with overwhelming evidence of the murder of four people, some of whom he shot in the back and then laughed at the sounds they made as they died. This is a man who never even took responsibility for the crimes or apologized to the victims — NOT ONCE! These victims had kids and spouses, but instead of sympathy for them, sympathy shifted to Tookie. Candlelight vigils were held for him. Websites like savetookie. org sprang up. Protests and a media circus ensued trying to prevent the execution, which eventually did take place — 26 years after the crime itself! There are many cases like this, which make a mockery of the evil crimes these degenerates commit. ? It often draws top talent laywers who will work for little or no cost due to the publicity of the case and their personal beliefs against the morality of the death penalty, increasing the chances a technicality or a manipulated jury will release a guilt person. Top attorneys are world-class manipulators. They know how to cover up facts and misdirect thinking. They know how to select juries sympathetic to their side. They know how to find obscure technicalities and use any other means necessary to get their client off without any punishment. Luckily, most criminal defendants cannot afford to hire these top guns; they must make do with a low-paid public defender or some other cheaper attorney. However, a death penalty case changes everything. First of all, a death penalty case almost always garners significant media attention. Lawyers want that exposure, which enhances their name recognition reputation for potential future plantiffs and defendants. Second of all, thousands of attorneys have made their personal crusade in life the stomping out of the death penalty. Entire organizations have sprung up to fight death penalty cases, often providing all the funding for a legal defense. For an example, look no further than the Casey Anthony trial, in which a pool of top attorneys took on a high profile death penalty case and used voir dire and peremptory challenges to craft one of the stupidest juries on record, who ended up ignoring facts and common sense or release an obviously guilty woman who killed her daughter. After the â€Å"not guilty† verdict was rendered, defense attorneys such as Cheney Mason went into long-winded speeches for the media about the evils of the death penalty. ? It is useless in that it doesn’t bring the victim back to life. Perhaps the biggest reason to ban the death penalty is that it doesn’t change the fact that the victim is gone and will never come back. Hate, revenge, and anger will never cure the emptiness of a lost loved one. Forgiveness is the only way to start the healing process, and this won’t happen in a revenge-focused individual. No 1. 2. The death penalty gives closure to the victim’s families who have suffered so much. Some family members of crime victims may take years or decades to recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Some may never recover. One of the things that helps hasten this recovery is to achieve some kind of closure. Life in prison just means the criminal is still around to haunt the victim. A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members. 3. It creates another form of crime deterrent. Crime would run rampant as never before if there wasn’t some way to deter people from committing the acts. Prison time is an effective deterrent, but with some people, more is needed. Prosecutors should have the option of using a variety of punishments in order to minimize crime. 4. Justice is better served. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, doesn’t it make sense that the punishment for the perpetrator also be death? 5. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. It’s time we put the emphasis of our criminal justice system back on protecting the victim rather than the accused. Remember, a person who’s on death row has almost always committed crimes before this. A long line of victims have been waiting for justice. We need justice for current and past victims. 6. It provides a deterrent for prisoners already serving a life sentence. What about people already sentenced to life in prison. What’s to stop them from murdering people constantly while in prison? What are they going to do–extend their sentences? Sure, they can take away some prison privileges, but is this enough of a deterrent to stop the killing? What about a person sentenced to life who happens to escape? What’s to stop him from killing anyone who might ry to bring him in or curb his crime spree? 7. DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person’s guilt or innocence. One of the biggest arguments against the death penalty is the possibility of error. Sure, we can never completely eli minate all uncertainty, but nowadays, it’s about as close as you can get. DNA testing is over 99 percent effective. And even if DNA testing and other such scientific methods didn’t exist, the trial and appeals process is so thorough it’s next to impossible to convict an innocent person. Remember, a jury of 12 members must unanimously decide there’s not even a reasonable doubt the person is guilty. The number of innocent people that might somehow be convicted is no greater than the number of innocent victims of the murderers who are set free. 8. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. Perhaps the biggest reason to keep the death penalty is to prevent the crime from happening again. The parole system nowadays is a joke. Does it make sense to anyone outside the legal system to have multiple â€Å"life† sentences 20 years or other jiverish? Even if a criminal is sentenced to life without possibility of parole, he still has a chance to kill while in prison, or even worse, escape and go on a crime/murder spree. 9. It contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. Prisons across the country face the problem of too many prisoners and not enough space resources. Each additional prisoner requires a portion of a cell, food, clothing, extra guard time, and so on. When you eliminate the death penalty as an option, it means that prisoner must be housed for life. Thus, it only adds to the problem of an overcrowded prison system. 10. ————————————————- It gives prosecutors another bargaining chip in the plea bargain process, which is essential in cutting costs in an overcrowded court system. The number of criminal cases that are plea bargained (meaning the accused admits guilt in return for a lesser sentence or some other concession) can be as high as 80 or 90 percent of cases. With the time, cost, and personnel requirements of a criminal case, there really isn’t much of a choice. The vast majority of people that are arraigned are in fact guilty of the crime they are accused. Even if you believe a defendant only deserves life in prison, without the threat of a death sentence, there may be no way to get him to plead guilty and accept the sentence. If a case goes to trial, in addition to the enormous cost, you run the chance that you may lose the case, meaning a violent criminal gets off scot free. The existence of the death penalty gives prosecutors much more flexibility and power to ensure just punishments. Introduction

Everyday Use by Alice Walker Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Everyday Use by Alice Walker - Research Paper Example Indeed, the difference between the sisters explains why Mama places much hope in Dee and puts her in the path of success while Maggie remains home, uneducated and lame. Nevertheless, by the end of the play, Mama realizes her mistake and redeems her docile and valuable daughter. The short story points out not only the difference between Dee and Maggie, but also Mama’s relationship with each of her children. The contrast between Dee and Maggie is overwhelming and reflects their different personalities. Mama, as the narrator of the story, dramatizes the difference even more: â€Å"Have you ever seen a lame animal, perhaps a dog run over by some careless person rich enough to own a car, sidle up to someone who is ignorant enough to be kind to him? That is the way my Maggie walks† (Walker 121). This pitiful description is the image Mama has about her daughter. Injured when the house they used to live in burnt down, Maggie still carries the impact of the accident with her. Ma ma explains her physical difference from her sister: â€Å"Dee is lighter than Maggie, with nicer hair and fuller figure† (Walker 121). This physical difference is closely related to their different personalities. This statement reveals: â€Å"We must remember from the beginning that the story is told by Mama; the perceptions are filtered through her mind and her views of her two daughters are not to be accepted uncritically. Several readers have pointed out that Mama's view of Maggie is not quite accurate† (Farrell). Indeed. Regardless of the lack of physical beauty Mama perceives, Maggie has an inner beauty that her mother fails to grasp. Apart from the physical difference, another major handicap for Maggie is the lack of education. Although Dee gets the chance to go to college, Maggie stays home and mainly strives to read and write on her own. Maggie’s injury makes her a victim and causes her to suffer an unequal treatment compared to her sister. Instead of g etting Maggie a proper treatment allowing her to enjoy a better healing, Mama and the community prefer to collect money and give Dee an education. Talking about Dee, Mama asserts: â€Å"I used to think she hated Maggie, too. But that was before we raised the money, the church and me, to send her to Augusta to school† (Walker 125). Meanwhile, Maggie is left home to strive by herself with her physical and moral scars with no formal education and no professional counseling for the unfortunate accident she has been through. This article informs: â€Å"Maggie is the aggregate underclass that has been left behind as a handful of Wangeros achieve their independence-an underclass scarred in the collective disasters Walker symbolizes neatly in the burning of the original Johnson home† (Cowart). Besides, attending college changes Dee completely as she questions her identity and chooses another name. Her return home makes her transformation more visible and creates clashes of vie ws with her mother and sister. According to this critic: â€Å"Many readers point to Dee's proclamation of her new name as the turning point in the story, the point at which Dee pushes her mother too far. They point out that Dee is rejecting her family heritage and identity in this scene† (Farrell). This name change deeply hurts Mama who finally realizes Dee is not the person she thought she was. Mama assimilates Dee’s rejection of her name to the rejection of her family and inheritance and becomes conscious that the expectations she placed on Dee were too

Acts of Faith Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Acts of Faith - Essay Example In this book, the author talks about various identity related issues that young Muslim immigrant generation faces in America. The author tries to find a perfect balance between the life of a Muslim and a fully American person. A person taking birth in America comes usually faces identity crisis because he/she has to cope with the challenge of finding the real identity out of the pool of incomplete identities. In this book, the author has mentioned that in the process of finding his true self, he experienced different aspects of a mixed culture. For example, the author was taking inspirations from people from other religions and had relations with Mormon and Jewish women. Practicing a different religion (Buddhism), having parents from some other religion (Islam), and discovering roots in some other culture (Indian Culture) are the basic elements of this book. This book is mainly for such immigrants who are in despair or feel alienated about their future. In a world full of fundamentalist aggression and noticeable religious division, this book provides a way and hope for people to find their real self, as well as a direction towards their future. I think this book is a good source of hope for people taking birth and growing up in America as Muslim immigrants. In general, such people face difficulty in finding their origin in terms of culture and region because they live in a Western culture that does not hold the same cultural or religious values as of their real cultures and religions. In some cases, they face identity crisis in their whole lives. This book provides them with some hope to find their identities while living in a different society. One of the main challenges for a second generation Muslim immigrant is to find the roots of his/her own religion and culture after facing a series of rejections all through his/her adolescence and early adulthood. This book can help such

Introducation to organisation and management Assignment

Introducation to organisation and management - Assignment Example The two firms that are the subject of these case studies are really night and day as far as culture and leadership goes. The first case study is Watson’s. Watson’s has a hierarchy that is authoritative, which means that employees have little input in decision-making and are really not respected. Management and unions have a toxic history due to a lack of trust. The managing director, Gordon Watson, is man who is stuck, in that he is not proactive, but prefers to keep things the status quo. He is also older and ready to retire, and does not interact with the workers. His underling, Ahmed Khan, however, does seem to have more vision, and he has excellent ideas that would be very beneficial to the company’s productivity. However, he is not being heard by the people higher up in the hierarchy. The same situation is present with the staff, in that they, too, have good ideas, but these ideas are not heard of given respect. The people in the organization do not have flu idity, in that they do not move between different positions, therefore there is little flexibility in fulfilling orders, so part of the staff is overburdened, while others are underburdened. The different departments do not communicate with one another. The staff is having high absenteeism, and there is also high turnover. The Human Resource Manager, instead of trying to find solutions to the high absenteeism and retention, makes excuses and does not take sexual harassment seriously. Consequently, the firm appears to be falling apart. On the other hand, H&M Consulting seems to have it together. Where Watson’s is a dinosaur, in that it refuses to go forward with new technology and ideas, H& M is the opposite, as they use new technology and ideas as their focus. H&M is not hierarchical, and centralized leadership is not strong, as it is composed of groups that have team leaders, and uses technology to coordinate what the different teams are doing. The teams are constantly chang ing, and constantly going to different projects. All this is not to say that there is not leadership, because there is. Theo Wolf, who is the CEO, is a visionary, his staff respects him, and has been called inspirational. He is communicative with his staff, and is very motivational. He encourages his staff to try new approaches and be proactive with company issues. Its staff is valuable, and learning and development are encouraged. The employees are given autonomy, so that they are responsible for their own development. In short, this organization values their employees, has trusted leadership who creates a shared vision, encourages its employees to be proactive with solutions, and does not have tyrannical leadership. Discussion Examining these two different companies is a study of a difference in organizational culture. The culture is â€Å"the coding of values and deeply-held beliefs that mold an organization's decision patterns, guide its actions, and drive individual behaviorâ €  (Dauphinais & Price, 1998, p. 190). Culture is also belief patterns that come from group norms, informal activities and values (Ivancevich et al., 2008, p. 503). The culture of an organization is visible to the members and to outsiders as the way things are done(Dauphinais & Price, 1998, p. 190). It is also subtle and invisible, in that it makes up the values, beliefs and attitudes that go throughout the organization. Culture can be an asset, if it is in line with company's vision, thus catalyzing the vision. Or it can be a drawback, hindering the vision if the culture is not so in line and the fit between the culture and the vision is flawed, as the beliefs that permeate the organization propel it to mediocrity, not to greatness. According to Dauphinais & Price, culture and culture change are not triggered from the top down, but from the bottom up and is created by â€Å"practical tools such as measures, rewards, and carefully structured people practices† (Dauphinais & Price, 1998, p. 191). The two companies cultures are night and day –

Globalization of the Production Chain Literature review

Globalization of the Production Chain - Literature review Example As the paper outlines, technology has facilitated competence and the most efficient and cheap labor is hired due to globalization. With globalization, computer production has become global and its production is spread to over 40 countries. Dell, Microsoft, IBM etc. are brands known in every part of the world. Globalization has enabled such global brand recognition and brand awareness amongst the customers (Ding and Akhtar 2001, pp.946-65).  Ding and Akhtar (2001), claim that this industry has had revolutionary changes because of globalization and all the giant players have production chains that are spread across major regions of the world. A focus on the market leader Dell reveals the influence globalization has had on the production chain and the human resource.  Dedrick & Kraemer (2002), claim that the personal computer industry shows the impact globalization has had on the business world. However, Dell has shown remarkable growth and is the current market leader when it comes to reaping the advantages of globalization.  Dell has been able to maintain its business model even in the globalizing industry through its smart planning and strategies in line with globalization. Dell made the best use of its resources and has the most efficient supply chain and thus has been able to excel its competitors IBM and Microsoft (Rosenau and Earnest 2004). Hudetz (1998) says that initially, supply chains of the PC industry were vertically integrated and required the firms to undertake the major tasks of product design, structuring, innovation, customer relation, and operations internally. With such a production chain the costs were high and the process was time-consuming (Ding and Akhtar 2001, pp.950-65). Even market leaders like Dell initially produced complete systems and was based in the United States while it outsourced some of the components from other manufacturers (Rosenau and Earnest 2004).  According to Ardnt (2001), these were the initial phases of the PC supply chain at Dell and in the entire industry at large. IBM which was also a big brand at the time also imported minor parts from other regions and had a relatively wide supply chain network. Gradually the industry realized that importing parts from other regions and countries cut down the costs and thus intermediary firms sprouted up which supplied such parts to the industry at competitive rates (Rosenau and Earnest 2004). Although Dell was technologically more advanced and had a strategy that would enable them to pierce the global market, they could not do so. This was because their costs were high when compared to the competitors like IBM who were outsourcing supplies from cheaper, developing nations and were more cost-effective and were able to reap more profit (Dowling 1999, pp. 30-42). According to Rosenau and Earnest (2004) with globalization strategies, Dell and other MNC's including the IBM and Microsoft set up their branches within other countries. In 1990s Dell was the first to surge the global markets especially the developing countries like India, China, Pakistan, and Malaysia, paving the way for the other big brands to follow in its footsteps (Rosenau and Earnest 2004). Globalization enabled them to get the cheapest rates and a competitive quality (Arndt 1997, pp. 695-707).

This is the next step in creating your marketing plan Essay

This is the next step in creating your marketing plan - Essay Example On the other hand, it may be indirect, i.e. involving a myriad of interconnected intermediaries who facilitate the movements of the products from the producers to the customers such as agents, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers (Dent, 2011). In the case of indirect distribution, each of the intermediaries receives a product at a set price then he moves it to the next at a much higher price until the products reach the final consumers. In this regard, the price of the product rises considerably as it goes through these channels thereby becoming very expensive and unaffordable by the time it reaches the final consumer. For instance, coffee goes through a long winding channel before reaching the final consumer. It involves the farmers who grow the coffee, the exporter who exports processed coffee from its country of production to overseas, the importer in overseas who orders coffee from coffee producing regions, the distributor of imported coffee such as supermarkets and stores, and finally the retailer who brews the coffee and sells it to the final consumer. This is where River Side Cafe stands (Kansal & Kapoor, 2003). However, in this case, the producer of the products on sale, i.e. coffee and tea, is the cafe and the customers of the products are the clients who throng into the company premises to taste a cup of pure traditional coffee and tea imported from Mexico. As such, River Side Cafe only considers itself and its customers in setting up its channels of distribution. The main product sold by the cafe is a service. Services are inseparable from their producers. Therefore, it is unlikely for the cafe to seek out external distributors of their coffee and tea rather than themselves. In addition, quality service delivery comes along with customer experience journeys and experiences that should enable the organization deliver maximum satisfaction to their consumers. The cafe will therefore adopt a direct

Adenauers Foreign Policy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Adenauers Foreign Policy - Essay Example n, anticommunist foreign policy for which Davison & Speier (1957) has expressed their opinion in the following words: "To a generation living with the memories of World War II, into which another German chancellor had plunged the world less than twenty years earlier, Adenauer has been the symbol of sobriety and moderation. His firm adherence to the principles underlying Western civilisation is beyond doubt, and his policies bear no trace of Hitler's nihilism and hybrid". (Davison & Speier, 1957, p. 2) And obviously both Adenauer and Brandt acquire this political characteristic that despite being chancellors of their eras, they only concern about ways to unite the broken Germany, not by aggression but by political diplomacy.Adenauer performed a historic role for confronting various challenging issues just after the Second World War. All his foreign policies lead him towards a single solution i.e., a united Europe and that is what he dreamt about throughout his life. Not only dreamt bu t also implemented his visions in the form of practical solution by developing certain policies, that remained successful in uniting both the East and West of the Germany. The best thing about Adenauer's regime was he did not receive resistance from a large communist minority. However, he received several obstructions on the basis of the opposition he received from the German Social Democratic party. Adenauer's Foreign Policy - German Sovereignty Adenauer felt the need to develop his own foreign policy in the late 1940s when he saw the German policies been threatened by France. At this stage he felt a real need to devise a new set of foreign policies but due to the restriction imposed upon him he was unable to do so. The only option he found open was to secure German sovereignty, and this could only be achieved by integrating FRG (Federal Republic of Germany) to Western Europe. Adenauer recovered Germany by effective foreign and domestic policy thereby standardising the German currency rate in 1948. It was in 1950s when Adenauer succeeded in recognising his new state's entry into Western institutions. In this context the first move he made was the acceptance of the partnership of those nations who at times were Germany's greatest opponents. France was at the top of the list. This was the first step towards establishment of a secure foreign policy that defended German sovereignty. Dissolving the Ruhr Authority Adenauer contributed towards gaining rights of the Ruhr's authority and was able to acquire freedom to the FRG thereby alleviating all provisions and statutes against European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). According to Schwarz (1995) "The economy of Western Europe had to be regarded as an interdependent system and could not prosper without the Ruhr. In his view it followed from this that a forced suppression of the German economy was in no-one's interests. Drawing on his experiences stretching back over almost three decades, he maintained that the establishment of a bloc-free Germany would be unwise, too. He pleaded for a reconstruction of the German economy; this meant that the Ruhr should be internationalised and linked closely with the Western European economic system". (Schwarz, 1995, p. 40) So, the foremost achievement of Adenauer was the independence of Ruhr authority, which without him