Condoleeza Rice Essay Example for Free

Condoleeza Rice Essay Upon assumption of her post as State Secretary, Condoleeza Rice has taken steps to bring the State Department under her control. As part of the broad restructuring of the diplomatic corps and under the guise of transformational diplomacy, Rice has shifted hundreds of Foreign Service positions from Europe and Washington to difficult assignments in the Middle East and elsewhere. As evidence of her aim for transformational diplomacy, Rice has even gone to the extent of announcing that diplomats will not be promoted to senior ranks unless they accept assignment in dangerous posts or gain expertise in at least two regions. Even though this move by the State Secretary has been viewed as overwhelming at the least, it has proven nevertheless that Secretary Rice is serious in giving diplomacy and the foreign service a new focus. Whereas diplomats and foreign service personnel focus more on career advancement and development, Rice’s issue of this prerogative as State Secretary, to indeed has improved the administration’s views on foreign policies. Ultimately, it is estimated that about one-third of the 6,400 foreign service positions will be affected in the coming years because of this order. However, it could be said that Rice’s plans are just part of a grand plan to have broader authority over a range of foreign assistance and policy programs thereby ending in politicizing of foreign assistance. For instance, Rice’s plan of restructuring US foreign assistance and elevating the USAID post, specifically the nomination of Randall L. Tobias as the new administrator of the U. S. Agency for International Development, would give the former a rank equivalent of deputy secretary of State. This move is obviously intended to draw the agency closer to the department although it short of a merger between USAID and the State. Moreover, this will give the director broader authorities over a variety of foreign assistance accounts that are managed by separate entities. As Jim Bishop opined, â€Å"We’re concerned that the same priority won’t be given to long-term development as resources are siphoned to support shorter-term diplomatic or military objectives† (Bishop). But it cannot be denied that this restructuring will definitely have ramifications to the diplomatic corps and the State Department as a whole. While it is good that as State Secretary has taken steps to give diplomats the wide experience and expertise in foreign relations before being promoted to a senior rank, such move has subsequently declared to the whole world that the State Department is run by an iron fist. I believe that this management policy would later on prove detrimental to the State Department as there would be thousands of foreign service personnel who will be affected by this order. Instead of being able to focus on the foreign policies advanced by the diplomats, they might rather focus on how to keep their posts and their career. This would mean lesser accomplishment for the promotion of US foreign policies. As Rice has been continuously promoting the idea of transformational diplomacy, she particularly describes it as a shift from merely reporting on events to influencing them to foster the growth of democratic states worldwide (Kessler and Graham). Part of Rice’s plans it to expand US presence in areas where there are only one-person diplomatic posts such Alexandria in Egypt and Medan, Indonesia and bring diplomats closer to the streets unto the pulse of the locale instead of barricading themselves in fortified embassies. The State Department also plans to expand the use of interactive Web sites maintained by diplomats to communicate with foreign citizens, promote the creation of rapid-reaction forces to deal with regional problems and seek to work more closely with military officers to promote the stability of nation conflicts (Rice, interview). The above-mentioned plans for the State’s foreign policies on the other hand would need to be reviewed as most of them seemed to be too grand themes that it might be impossible to accomplish or see the success of even just one policy. For example, Rice’s plan to work more closely with military officers in order to promote the stability of nation conflicts can definitely be considered a far-fetched plan if not hilarious at best. Aside from US allies, the United States has been considerably viewed as being arrogant and pushing its nose on issues not her own. The war in Iraq is a classic example of this. While the Iraqis were happy with the ouster of President Saddam Hussein, they however, were resentful of the continued military presence of the US armed forces in their country. Even the Iraqi soldiers whom the US worked closely with during the invasion and ouster of Saddam Hussein dislike the US policy of â€Å"keeping and maintaining peace† in the Middle East. Moreover, Rice’s plan to promote the creation of rapid-reaction forces to deal with regional problems can be considered as meddling in internal affairs of each country. Foreign diplomats and ambassadors, while representatives of the US government and its interests in a particular country certainly cannot meddle in regional affairs lest it will send a signal of political mistrust on the part of the United States to the country concerned. So long as the interests of the United States are not at risk, the US cannot interfere and force itself and its foreign policies on a country. Perhaps, Rice inadvertently forgot that foreign countries are beyond her control unlike the US State Department where she reigns. The most that she could do is to place pressure on the country only if US interests are at stake. On the other hand, Rice’s may have already succeeded in her efforts to bring the State Department under her control as she already lectured her senior staff about the dangers of media leaks. Thus, normally talkative officials have been observed to speak in carefully hushed tones. But her manner of administration can also considered a perfect example of leadership as she makes sure that she knows the whereabouts of her most senior staff, and once discussed with them a problematic newspaper article in North Korea policy. But nonetheless, Rice knows the power of the media and the messages as well as images it portrays to the whole world. Thus, her staff gives particular attention to the images and shots of Rice around the globe. Moreover, while she emphasizes to her staff the perils of media leaks, she on the other, has mastered the art of dodging questions from reporters that might be detrimental to the points she outlined for her speeches and conferences. In fact, she would often ignore questions that may inadvertently raise sore issues about Bush’s campaigns for democracy. This method practiced by Rice has considerably been sending mixed signals to the world. While it may appear that she is sincere in her efforts to effect the proposed changes in the State Department and the promotion of US foreign policy, it would nonetheless appear as well that she hesitates to trust the media and the world as well to tell them the truth herself. If I were on the part of the reporters, I would find incessantly disturbing that the State Secretary would not want to answer impromptu questions, much less questions that are not in her agenda. As she is the considered the â€Å"face† of the State Department, it would have been better had she practiced the art of being able to connect more with the media. But as I mentioned earlier, Rice seemed to be sending mixed signals and this would be better explained in my discussion of her promotion of democracy. Promotion of Democracy Condoleeza Rice has been repeatedly giving the relentless message to the international community that may have portrayed the State Department as a communications machine of the White House. Since her appointment as the Secretary of State she has articulated the promotion of democracy to any place which needs it. As she told a group of students in Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan, â€Å"We are not going to turn a blind eye to the human desire for freedom anywhere in the world† (Rice). Thus, this statement or something like it has become her rallying point and mantra in promoting democracy and perhaps justifying Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in retaliation to the September 11 attack by terrorists. In contrast to Colin Powell who was known as being an independent operator and has had his share of debates regarding the State Department’s foreign policies with the administration, Rice, on the other hand is seen as bringing the views of the White House into the State Department. This may be attributed to Rice’s loyalty to Bush whom she worked closely with during the Presidential elections. While Powell was uncomfortable giving out speeches that seemed to portray grand schemes and themes, Rice, however loves to give them out in news conferences, interviews and speeches. Rice has delivered major policy addresses designed to place President Bush’s vision with a larger strategic framework (Kessler). For example, while in Paris, she addressed a well-received speech that may have helped lay the groundwork for an agreement with European officials on confronting Iran over its nuclear programs. Then in Tokyo, she outlined a new U. S. vision of Japan’s increasing importance as a global power and challenged China to work harder to â€Å"embrace some form of open and generally representative government† (Kessler). Rice also never fails to insert her love for tourism and the arts into her responsibilities in promoting democracy and US foreign policies. According to aides, these visits demonstrates respect and interest in a country’s heritage and culture, thus, photo-ops are ensured to make Rice look good for the global audience. For example, while Rice was in Beijing, she attended a Sunday church service which although was a private visit and described her as a deeply political woman, it gave another significance as well. It shows Rice’s criticism of China’s lack of religious freedom. As mentioned earlier, Rice has cautioned her staff regarding media leaks and its implications, but nevertheless uses its power in furtherance of her responsibilities to the international community. As such, Rice has brought new media sophistication to an agency that long prided itself on its focus on policy not image. She has dropped Powell’s practice of talking to reporters in front of the glass doors of the State Department after he escorted foreign officials to their cars. Instead, she brings reporters upstairs to the more visually striking Benjamin Franklin room, reminiscent of the rooms in the White House, where she sits with foreign dignitaries in front of a fireplace (Kessler). All these are examples of what Condoleeza Rice is capable of doing despite being the first black woman in history to hold such post. Weapons of Mass Destruction The Bush administration has been washed and plagued with its decision to attack Iraq in response to the terrorist attack on September 11, linking the Al Qaeda and Iraq together. But there was no other person that supported this decision with much ardour than then-National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice. Despite the ramifications that resulted in not finding the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein and Iraq allegedly harboured, Rice is firm in her belief that they did the right strategic decision although she admits that they have made tactical errors. Even before she was confirmed for the appointment of Secretary of State, Rice faced almost nine hours of gruelling questioning before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in her role in helping the President decide to invade Iraq. While her detractors have pointed out that the administration had made the mistake of invading Iraq over the alleged weapons of mass destruction, Rice on the other insisted that the war in Iraq was not launched solely over the weapons of mass destruction. Accordingly, the deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein welcomed terrorists and attacked his neighbors, all the while paying suicide bombers to aggravate the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. For Rice, Saddam Hussein has been an international threat for a long time and that he must be taken out and stopped. Although we can justify Rice’s position with regard to the invasion of Iraq at that time, we cannot deny however that she and the administration has focused so much on the Iraqi threat that the administration may have unconsciously allowed other terrorism hot spots such as Somalia, Indonesia and the Philippines to grow and train. But then again, as Rice claims, she does study terrorist reports everyday and have been taking measures without disrupting international peace efforts and mediation. Regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for example, Rice claims that the United States is willing to support the government of new Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas but withholds that Arab states must crack down on the incitement of hatred against Israel (CNN). It is evident nonetheless that the administration have focused so much on the Iraqi problem, spending close to $300 billion dollars to disarm the alleged weapons that turned out were not there and spent only $1 billion a year that are sure to exist such as in North Korea. This particular attitude may have been totally in disagreement with what she claimed when she was still the National Security Adviser. According to her, past administrations have permitted defense budgets to decline after the Cold War to a point where the resources were not matching the multiple missions that were asked from the armed forces to perform. This has led the administration to think of foreign assistance and policy at a different light. For the Bush administration, the real goal for each country is to be prepared internally in order to grow economically as well. But as more people are getting aware of, Rice and Bush has indeed focused so much on the war on terrorism and against Iraq that it has failed to address other issues instead of focusing on the other responsibilities of the State Department. While it may be true that the problem of terrorism has grown to such huge proportion, the State Department should not have solely focused on such as there are still other ways in order to combat terrorism. Many political scientists and sociologists claim that foremost in the reason for the spread of terrorism is poverty and economic unrest. People from poverty-stricken countries like Somalia would do everything to continue living so it is inevitable that they would attach themselves to any entity or groups that could fill their stomachs with food in return for doing service for them. Had the State Department focused on policies that helped countries alleviate hunger and poverty, these countries would have not resorted to the use of force and instead would help the United States in its efforts to combat terrorism. Key Issues of Foreign Policy Among Condoleeza Rice’s claim on key issues regarding US foreign policies is to maintain confidence in the American commitment to justice and the rule of law. As such, she has for example urged the international community to act with great speed and deal with the humanitarian crisis in Darfur region in Sudan. Despite the US’ qualm regarding the United Nations International Criminal Court’s responsibility to try Darfur war criminals, claiming that the ICC powers are unchecked by any controlling authority, she has nevertheless showed US support on the resolution. Although she has already made it clear that the United States’ stand regarding the ICC remained unchanged, she asserted that the situation in Darfur was an extraordinary circumstance in which crimes against humanity are clearly being committed and that the world cannot afford further delay in addressing it (Gollust). Moreover, according to Rice, the US had no desire to be world’s jailer and that Washington wanted the terrorists that capture stand trial. Thus, although the United States had another alternate idea for a Darfur war crimes court to be set up in Tanzania but drawing little support instead, have agreed to accept the resolution that empowered the ICC in trying Darfur war crimes. Rice also averred that the use of force is not what is on the agenda now, particularly on the issues of Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programmes. Although they have condemned these countries’ nuclear programmes, Rice nevertheless maintains that they will not take the matters into their own hands and never take any option off the table but would also leave it to the United Nations to decide on the matter. On the other hand, the United States would continue to enhance its close ties with Britain in its fight against terrorism. Both the United States and Britain had been specifically staunch in their efforts to disarm Iraq for its alleged weapons of mass destructions and considering that Britain is among the economically well-favored nations, maintaining friendly and close relations with the country would not only help the United States in its efforts to combat terrorism but to also maintain its excellent economic ties. But we also have to applaud Rice’s guts as she does not hesitate to send stern diplomatic messages to countries that displease her or what she considers as those at the wrong side of freedom. For instance, she explicitly cancelled her trip to the Middle East when Egypt failed to respond to her request of releasing an imprisoned political figure. She also withdrew the US Ambassador from Syria when a former Lebanese prime minister was killed in a bomb blast and contented that additional sanctions might be taken under the Syrian Accountability Act. Conclusion The Secretary of State has enormous responsibility not only to the State Department but to the country as well. As for Condoleeza Rice, she is accountable for whatever decisions and advices that might have gone through her and passed on to the President for final decision. Thus, despite the criticisms that go along with her job, we can safely conclude that in the short years that Condoleeza Rice has replaced Colin Powell, she definitely has made some changes and although her decisions in running the State Department may at times be impugned, the changes under her remarkably had made differences in the Department. Whereas before, foreign service personnel and diplomats were more concerned with their respective career advancement, Rice has made sure that this practice is stopped and that diplomats live up with the expectations and demand of representing the United States to the various international posts. Moreover, Rice’s stance on the administration’s decision to invade Iraq despite the ramifications of such action has proved that she will do everything and that she will continue to defend her and that of the president’s actions. Although it is not difficult to hate and condemn her for methods in acting as the Secretary of State, we can however, commend her because of her ability to express her displeasure on issues that are of importance to her and the US interest.

Strategic Planning and Strategic Objectives Essay Example for Free

Strategic Planning and Strategic Objectives Essay An ongoing improvement plan can increase the quality of a product or service an organization produces. To develop a successful improvement plan, an organization must have a well-designed strategic plan that is in agreement with the mission and visions of the organization. This paper will discuss how quality is linked to 3Ms strategic plan objectives, analyze the process improvement plan that the organization currently uses and give examples of the tools and techniques used to measure quality. Lastly, this paper will show who has the ultimate responsibility for quality assurance, and the extent to which the organizations process improvement plan is related to the organizations strategic plan. Strategic planning and strategic objectives allow an organization to achieve consistency and competitive advantage for its management and products. When used effectively, both are linked to improving the quality of the organizations product through effective time management, total quality management, and mass customization (Melnyk Swink, 2005). 3M is aware of the importance of effective strategic planning and strategic objections and how both are connected to continuously improving quality products. 3M promotes quality inside and out and is proud to announce their Quality Statement: 3M promises you innovation, quality products and service from a company you can trust (3M, 2007). Their quality policy is to develop, produce, and deliver on time, products and services that exceed their customers expectations. In order to make this happen, 3M has implemented rigorous quality systems that are continuously being improved to keep up with customers demands. In addition, their manufacturing and service operations are registered to the internationally recognized ISO 9001 quality standard. 3M places a strong emphasis on quality design, utilizing problems and waste prevention to build quality into their products and processes. All 3M products are manufactured to 3M specifications and undergo testing to assure conformance. Continuous improvement at 3M has become a way of life. One of the key  strategies of all their manufacturing locations is to constantly improve their processes. Each site uses a quality tool kit to help meet objectives. 3M also uses many customer satisfaction measurements to determine their performance in the marketplace. The main driver of their continual improvement efforts for their business and manufacturing processes is Six Sigma (3M, 2007). Melnyk, S., Swink, M. (2005). Value-driven operations management: an integrated modular approach. The McGraw-Hill Companies. 3M (2007). Quality statement. Retrieved on October 15, 2007 from www.3m.com

Donald Trumps Immigration Rhetoric

Donald Trumps Immigration Rhetoric Immigration has always been a controversial subject in the United States. As a new administration begins its four-year reign, many illegal immigrants are worried about their positions within the U.S. For centuries, immigrants have migrated to the U.S. in hopes of obtaining the â€Å"American Dream.† However, when Trump announced his intention to run for the presidency, the American Dream seemed to become inaccessible for many hopeful Mexican and Muslim immigrants. Trump’s campaign rhetoric hit home for many Americans, and his ideals made him a forerunner for the Republican party. His fear mongering resonated with what so many white, Midwestern and Southern Americans believe: illegal Mexican immigrants are coming into America to rape our women, murder us, and take away jobs from hardworking citizens and Muslim immigrants are coming here to create terror. This led him to propose the building of a wall between the U.S. and Mexican border. He also proposed a travel ban on p eople from six majority Muslim countries. These, he deemed were a safety measure. As Trump continuously utilized institutional racism to grow his popularity among U.S. voters, Mexican and Muslim immigrants’ fears heightened. His controversial election shocked the world, leading many world leaders to welcome immigrants into their countries with open arms. Justin Trudeau, Canada’s prime minister, especially pushed back against Trump’s proposed bills. Throughout this dark time in American politics, Canada has continuously led by example as to how immigrants should be treated. Recently, the Trump administration executed a mass-deportation of many illegal immigrants back to Mexico. With tensions already heightened between Mexico and the U.S., this angered the Mexican government. Throughout Trump’s campaign, he ignorantly stated that Mexico would be paying for a wall on the U.S.-Mexican border. However, Mexican President Enrique Peà ±a Nieto has continuously stated that Mexico would not pay for such an extravagant measure. Further, Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray has said that he will vigorously fight the deportations of undocumented immigrants back to Mexico, as well as refuse to accept any non-Mexicans sent across the border (Agren and Stanglin). Videgaray has also said that the treatment of Mexican migrants in the United States will top Mexico’s agenda when President Nieto meets with the U.S. Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security. This announcement came shortly after Trump’s administration unveiled its tou gh new guidelines for enforcing immigration laws (Agren and Stanglin). The Trump Administration’s new guidelines are an example of the bullying that was prevalent during his campaign, and that is continuing well into his presidency. The Mexican government has even suggested it will go to the United Nations to defend the rights of its migrants (Agren and Stanglin). Trump gained popularity because of his so-called tough-on-crime platform, however, he incessantly forces his political ideals on the world, straining U.S.-World relations. Mexico is an important ally, but Trump’s unfair proposals are further damaging an important relationship, as well as potentially hurting the American economy. Although the Department of Homeland Security has said the new directives focus on criminals and those who pose a threat to the U.S., they expand the authority of federal agents to deport most of the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States (Agren and Stanglin). Mexican immigrants are not the only ones who Trump attacked on the campaign trail. He also proposed a ban on Muslims. The Muslim ban is an extremely offensive and racist directive, as it is like that of Adolf Hitler’s when he terrorized Germany’s Jewish community. The Muslim ban is yet another example of Trump’s use of ones’ identity to instill unnecessary hatred. Recently in the news, many immigrants from seven majority Muslim countries have been stopped at airports upon entering the U.S.   Many of these Muslims work for U.S. companies or are students, teachers, and people trying to visit their family members. On January 31st, 2017, Trump signed an executive order that indefinitely suspends admissions of Syrian refugees and limits the flow of other refugees in a process he has coined as â€Å"extreme vetting.† This executive order was a way to make good on one of his campaign promises to tighten border security and halt certain refugees from entering the U.S. According to CNN, the order bars all persons from certain terror-prone countries from entering the United States for 90 days and suspends the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days until it is reinstated only for nationals of countries for whom members of Trumps Cabinet deem can be properly vetted. The countries impacted by this hurtful ban are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. His order also set out to cancel the Visa Interview Waiver Program, which once allowed repeat travelers to the United States to be able to forgo an in-person interview to renew their visa (Merica). Under the new order, these travelers will now have to have in-person interviews. Fortunately, Democrats across the country vigorously fought this unlawful ban. A Washington state federal judge issued a temporary nationwide restraining order which stopped President Trumps executive order banning citizens of seven countries from entering the United States (Seipel). The travel ban unfairly targets Muslims and violates the constitutional rights of immigrants and their families. Just like Mexican immigrants, Muslims have been targeted by Trump and racially profiled. After Trump was elected as the 45th President of the United States, Canada began to prepare itself for a surge in Mexican migrants. Canada reportedly lifted the visa requirement amid the uncertainty of Donald Trump’s promises to crack down on undocumented immigrants. Mexican visitors will now no longer need visas to enter Canada. This momentous move has Canada anticipating an influx in Mexican tourists and business travelers. The visa was enacted in 2009, by Canada’s previous Conservative government to address an increase in â€Å"bogus† refugee claims (The Guardian). This visa lift, instated right after Trump’s vows to expel millions of illegal immigrants, could cause a substantial increase in Mexican asylum seekers. According to The Guardian, between the years 2005 and 2008, refugee claims from Mexico nearly tripled. This made Mexico the number one source country for claims, with more than 9,400 claims filed by Mexicans in 2008. However, only 11% were accepted (The Guardian). The previously Conservative Canadian government embraced the visa as a means of border control. However, the Canadian government was pressured by Mexico to end the policy after the number of asylum seekers plummeted in 2015. Justin Trudeau, the current Canadian prime minister agreed to get rid of the visa in exchange for Mexico expanding its imports of Canadian beef (The Guardian). In an interview, Justin Trudeau stated that this move would make it easier for Canada’s Mexican friends to visit while helping grow Canada’s local economies and strengthen their communities. During the time the visa lift was announced, no one believed that Trump stood a real chance of winning the presidency against Hillary Clinton, the popular democratic candidate especially after his vows to build the wall along the shared border of the U.S. and Mexico.   Although Canada lifted the visa requirement for Mexican travelers without anticipating Trump’s presidency, it came at a time when Mexican migrants needed it the most. Canada has proven itself to be a leader and a friend in a difficult time for immigrants worldwide. An immigration lawyer in Toronto, Lorne Waldman, said that the lifting of the visa requirement is going to be a major factor attracting people to come to Canada. Anticipating an influx of migrants, Waldman compared it to the wave of Muslims that entered Canada after 9/11. As Muslims saw a significant crackdown on immigrants entering the U.S. from the Middle East, there was increase in the number of people who crossed the border from the U.S. into Canada at that time. Since day one of his campaign, Trump has used racist lingo. In his first speech, back in 2015, he labeled Mexican immigrants as rapists and criminals. He also went on to say that Mexico is not sending their best people, rather they’re sending people with lots of problems. He further stated that Mexican immigrants were bringing in drugs and bringing in crime. A few weeks later, he labeled Mexican immigrants as â€Å"killers.† Trump’s continuous use of hateful rhetoric is damaging. By labeling these people, he is instilling fear in the American people of a group of individuals, who for the most part, just want to create better lives for themselves. Trump even went so far as to say that the Mexican government was purposely sending us criminals because they don’t want to deal with them. By making false accusations, Trump is creating an unnecessary hatred of a group of people who are in the United States to obtain the American Dream that for over two hundred years, we have proudly represented as a core American value. By 2016, President Trump had made numerous racist remarks about people with Mexican heritage. He criticized a federal judge who presided over a fraud case against Trump University. He angrily suggested that the court ruling wouldn’t be fair because the jurist was Mexican. Curiel, an Indiana native, refused to dismiss the civil lawsuits Trump was facing. At many of his rallies, supporters chanted â€Å"build the wall,† a rallying cry of thinly vailed racism.   His hurtful rhetoric promotes racism. NPR published an article on Trump’s CPAC appearance. President Donald Trump made the claim that while he was speaking, immigration officers were out finding gang members, drug dealers and criminal aliens and throwing them out. Trump’s claims falsely create assumptions of the type of people coming the United States. As a third-generation American, I find these to be incredibly hurtful. My great grandparents fled from Nazi Germany to Colombia in hopes of a better life. From Colombia, they traveled to the United States. My great grandparents, just like so many other immigrants, came to the United States to follow the American Dream. The United States provides hope for so many people, and Trump has continuously made offensive statements that tarnish the American ideals. Canada’s prime minister Justin Trudeau weighed in on Trump’s controversial immigrant ban. He tweeted that Canada would welcome immigrants and refugees fleeing from persecution. He mentioned that diversity is where Canada’s strength lies. He also tweeted a #CanadianIsACanadian.† It is leaders like this who better the world. Trump has continuously bullied people and shamed them for their identity. He claims that refugees want to hurt Americans, however most of them just want to escape the war-torn countries they come from. Canada has also announced that they will continue to accept asylum seekers who are crossing the U.S.-Canada border. The number of refugees crossing the border into Canada has increased in recent weeks amid fears that President Trump will crack down on illegal immigrants. Trudeau told parliament that Canada remains an open country because Canadians trust their immigration system and the integrity of their borders and the help they provide for people looking for safety (Reuters). Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen also said Canada would continue to honor the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement (Reuters). This agreement requires Canada to turn back refugees if they make asylum claims at Canadian border crossings with the United States. However, Amnesty International and other groups are worried that the United States is not safe for refugees and are pressuring the Canadian government to abandon the agreement. The United States has always been considered the home of the free which is why it is such an attractive location for immigrants. Trump has made it okay for people to be openly racist. White nationalist groups across the country have voiced their support for his presidency and Trump has not denounced them. Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, is chairman of the alt-right website Breitbart News. Bannon’s ex-wife has accused him of being anti-Semitic. Bannon’s nomination was controversial as he is known to be racist. It is choices like these that make minorities feel unwelcome in the United States. Former president Barack Obama touted the United States as an accepting nation of people from all walks of life. He championed the U.S. as a provider of hope for immigrants worldwide, and as a country which allows immigrants to celebrate their heritage. Trump is leading America down a different path, a path that only celebrates white Americans, and leaves minorities flailing and feeling like they don’t belong. Recently a Kansas man shot and killed an Indian engineer, injured another and also an American. He reportedly yelled â€Å"get out of my country† and was making racial slurs prior to the incident. This is not the first time a racially-motivated act of violence has been perpetrated in recent months. When Trump began campaigning for his presidency, racist white Americans were reported to have committed hate crimes more than once. In some areas of the United States, Nazi propaganda has popped up, a seemingly common trend as Trump became president which has made immigrants, refugees, people of color, and the like uncomfortable. In fact, many people are starting to feel unsafe leaving their homes due to the horrific acts of violence that are taking place. Geana Javier, a columnist for the Daily Evergreen, recently wrote an article on hate speech abusing free speech rights. She acknowledged that we have reached a time where political divisiveness has attained extreme levels (Javier). It seems that since Donald Trump’s election, people have used the right to freedom of speech as a shield to protect hate speech.   As previously mentioned, Trump stated that Mexico is not sending the U.S. its â€Å"best people,† but instead rapists and drug dealers.   Geana Javier states that these comments target an entire ethnic group and paints them in a negative light. Through these sorts of statements, Trump has disguised his racist opinions as immigration policies. Trump is instilling fear in the American people of an entire ethnic group who, for the most part, are good people. Immigrants have not contributed any more to crime than was already happening in the United States. It is deeply distressing that intolerant social views are reflected in current political policy. Yahya Abu Romman, a 22-year-old language major, does not feel welcome in the United States. He is a Jordanian citizen, but Syrian born. Upon his college graduation, he planned a six-week trip to the United States to celebrate. He landed in O’Hare International Airport a few days after Trump’s travel ban was instated. It was there and then that the positive impression of the U.S. which his father had instilled in him evaporated (Arraf). Romman’s father was a graduate from the University of Illinois. He’d always told Abu that America is the land of justice, opportunity, generosity and kindness (Arraf). Upon landing at O’Hare, however, a border officer could not understand why Romman did not have a Syrian passport. Discussion ensued about his brother who had lived illegally in the U.S. and overstayed a visa before becoming a citizen (Arraf). Emails were found by the border guards on Romman’s phone to flight schools he’d applied to in the U.S. The officer was not convinced that he was not planning to stay in the U.S. after flight school. This led to Romman’s visa being cancelled. When he wanted to call the Embassy before signing the papers agreeing to being deported, he was threatened by the border officer and told that if he did not sign, he’d be banned from entering the U.S. ever again. Romman had visited the U.S. before and felt that the people were welcoming. At the present time, however, he feels that is not the case.   In his opinion, he is safer remaining in Jordan: America was an opportunity for people here before. But now, no one is actually thinking about the United States for a future place to live (Arraf). It is experiences like these that make many people wary of Americans. Trump has made it clear that if you are not white and a native-born American, you are not worthy of respect. A cinematographer was barred from entering the United States to attend the Oscars after his film was nominated for an academy award. The 21-year-old worked on the harrowing film of his home country’s civil war, The White Helmets, according to TIME Magazine. The Department of Homeland Security decided at the last minute to block Khaled Khateeb from traveling to Los Angeles for the Oscars (Katz). Because Khateeb was travelling from one of the Muslim majority countries which Trump had banned, he was barred entrance into the United States. This is just another example of how Trump is using immigration laws to promote his racist agenda. His ban affects many people from all over the world who have legitimate reasons for travelling to the United States. Khaled Almilaji is yet another victim of Trump’s controversial ban. He has been stranded in Turkey since January 2017. His wife, who is pregnant with their first child, patiently awaits his return to Rhode Island. A student at Brown University, Almilaji has worked feverishly to keep up with his classes from overseas. After a federal judge froze Trump’s ban, Almilaji had hope of returning to his wife. Unfortunately, his hopes were dashed as he realized the new reality for Syrians trying to study in the United States. Khaled Almilaji has said that now Canada is looking like a better option. Paul Davidson, the president of Universities Canada, has said they have seen an influx of applications from international students. The Universities Canada website, dedicated to providing information about schools in the country, has doubled in views since November (Students Turn to Canada in Trump Immigration Era). Canada’s most elite universities including McGill, McMaster and the University of Toronto saw large increases in applications from students in the United States. Rebekah Robinson, a senior at a predominantly white school in Maryland mentioned she was attracted to the University of Toronto because of the diversity of its student body (Students Turn to Canada in Trump Immigration Era). Robinson, who did not support Donald Trump in the recent presidential election, said that his nomination made Canada even more appealing. This is not an uncommon story in recent months. Typically, the flow of students has been greater from north of the border rather than south, however that it is changing as tensions in the United States continue to grow. Because of the recent changes in immigration policies in Canada, it is easier for international students to study there and stay upon graduation. When students were asked why they were interested in the University of Toronto, many reasons were cited, most notably that the University of Toronto is ranked among the top five public universities internationally and that it is a globally friendly college in a globally friendly country (Students Turn to Canada in Trump Immigration Era). Over the years, Canada has made attracting talent from around the world a focal point. The University of Toronto is no different, and proudly boasts that its doors are open to the world. The United States, however, is the opposite. Unlike Canada, the United States is now a dangerous place for many foreign nationals to be. President Donald Trump has continuously used demeaning terminology and racial slurs during his campaign and his presidency which has led many people of color to question their safety in a country which has for so long championed itself as the land of the free. Donald Trump’s hateful rhetoric makes it okay for people to be openly racist, and even worse, express it. Trump’s hate speech does not only affect Muslims and Mexicans.   Since the election, more than 1,000 hate crimes have been recorded. The Southern Poverty Law Center indicated that these numbers were normally expected over a six-month period. Further, there have been at least sixteen attacks on synagogues and other Jewish centers. Donald Trump, unfortunately, has kept relatively quiet about many of these anti-Semitic episodes. When reporters pressed him on it, Trump repeatedly stated that he was not racist, nor was he anti-Semitic. He even went so far as to say that any anti-Semitic behavior was the work of his political opponents (Memoli). There has been a surge in racist and anti-Semitic graffiti and vandalism since Trumps election, including the use of Nazi imagery. According to CNN, an astounding forty-eight Jewish Community Centers reported bomb threats in the month of January alone. Trump, who claims to love Jewish people, is under scrutiny for his lack of action and his indifference to these hate crimes perpetrated on the Jewish community. Trump’s Muslim ban is a prime example of his racist agenda and a measure that Canada has openly opposed. After Trump announced his plans to propose a ban, Justin Trudeau tweeted that Canada would be a welcoming place to all. Universities Canada has also expressed their support of internationals fleeing persecution, by welcoming students, faculty, and staff from around the world to its campuses. Unlike the United States, Canada proclaims that international immigrants bring new knowledge, talent, and skills to higher education, research, and innovation to the benefit of all Canadians (Students Turn to Canada in Trump Immigration Era). Some Canadian schools even offered to waive application fees for students who were affected by the order, and to consider transcripts of those hoping to complete academic work in Canada (Students Turn to Canada in Trump Immigration Era). Trump’s ban is an impediment to the free flow of people and ideas and the values of diversity and inclusion, which are of the utmost importance in a strong society. ATTN Video posted a video on Facebook which addressed how the economy would suffer without immigrants. According to ATTN Video, America would lose up to 70% of its farm workers, which would lead to skyrocketing food prices. Agricultural production could lose as much as sixty billion dollars. Job creation would also decrease as immigrants contribute to population growth which in turn increases the demand for workers. To say that the reason people don’t have jobs because of immigrants is untrue and ignorant. Without immigrants, social security would take a serious hit because not enough taxes would be paid in. In 2010, undocumented workers alone contributed 13 billion dollars to the fund. Experts say that increasing immigration could actually save social security. Instead of helping â€Å"make America great again,† Trump’s views and policies on immigration which are not based in fact, not only promote racism, but hurt the economy and ruin relations between the U.S. and other countries. Canada has said it will allow 300,000 immigrants to enter the country in 2017. Although this target is unchanged from that of 2016’s plan, it is well above the average number of immigrants who were admitted from 2011 to 2015. John McCallum, Canada’s Minister of Immigration, has said that making 300,000 the permanent target will lead to economic growth. Canada, which has an aging population and needs a younger population to boost its economy, is hoping that robust immigration will help address this problem.   And, over the next five years, Canada is hoping to increase the number of immigrants they accept to 450,000. Donald Trump wants to impose laws against immigrants which will be detrimental to the United States’ economic growth. The United States is a nation full of immigrants. Without these hardworking individuals, the economy will suffer. Immigrants start businesses and are thirty percent more likely to do so than people who are non-immigrants.   In fact, immigrants comprise eighteen percent of all small business owners in the United States today. Immigrant-owned businesses also create jobs for American citizens. The Fiscal Policy Institute did a study in 2007 on businesses owned by immigrants and found that 4.7 million people are employed by immigrants who own businesses. Not only do immigrants create jobs for millions of Americans, they are also more likely to create jobs for other immigrants. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 7.5 percent of the foreign born are self-employed compared to 6.6 percent among the native-born (Furman and Gray). Immigrants are an important part of the American economy. They offer innovative thinking, which in turn helps the United States develop cutting-edge technology. Donald Trump would like the American people to believe that we do not need immigrants and has continuously promoted the idea that immigrants are dangerous to the United States and to its people. He would like people to believe that Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, murderers, rapists and other criminals and that Muslim ones are more likely to be terrorists than non-Muslim American citizens. Fortunately, not all Americans hold the same beliefs as our current President.   At least thirty-seven cities across the United States have indicated that they will not comply with Trump’s aggressive immigration policies. These cities, known as â€Å"sanctuary cities,† tend to be located in some of the more liberal areas of the United States. Cities including San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, and New York have stood in defiance against the new President of the United States. In retaliation, President Trump has stated that he will cancel federal funding directed to these cities, which may limit this act of federal disobedience. Donald Trump has made good on many of his promises regarding immigration through the many executive orders he has issued. These radical actions against immigration have made many feel less secure, and in some cases, downright terrorized. Trump has signed two executive orders that direct the Department of Homeland Security to start building the wall along the border with Mexico. This promise was a cornerstone of his campaign. Many are concerned that it will ramp up the repression of the undocumented and anyone who is suspected of being undocumented to a whole new level. His travel ban, another executive order Trump hoped to pass, targeted Muslims and singled them out as being more likely to commit terrorist acts and therefore, they must all be kept out. This ignorant belief highlights the fact that racism is still prevalent in the United States. It is astounding that a nation which is so diverse, voted for a man like Donald Trump. The hate and ignorance at the core of his political agenda, which is directed at some of the most vulnerable groups of people in the United States and the world, is clear. Among the provisions within Trump’s executive orders for his so-called wall is the instruction to detain every single undocumented immigrant. This also includes families with children who have been captured by the Border Patrol and who are held in a facility. His executive order would get rid of agents’ discretion to detain and release people under the condition that they appear for an asylum interview or court date (Katch). This means that detainees will have a much harder time obtaining legal representation and gathering evidence and witnesses to make their cases in court. Trump also gave the Border Patrol the ability to deport detainees who are waiting for their court dates. Another one of his executive orders will revive a program that was shelved by the Obama administration. This Secure Communities program allows for people who are processed in local jails to be checked against immigration databases. If any matches turn up, ICE is able to ask local law enforcement to hand over their prisoners for deportation (Katch). Both these orders tighten regulations on border crossing and immigrants. Most of the people migrating from Mexico to the United States do so to escape the hardships they face living in Mexico.   Their goal is to earn money to send home. Trump’s initiatives are yet another example of his distaste for immigrants. The fear immigrants harbor is well-founded. Trump has openly made hateful forms of Islamophobia and xenophobia central to his message from the beginning, and even though the campaign has ended, he has yet to back down. His racial rhetoric was made as an attempt to appeal to middle-class and working-class white Americans who harbor resentment towards a perceived â€Å"rigged system† which Trump has claimed numerous times benefits not only the rich, but the â€Å"line-jumping† immigrants who take jobs ahead of those who were born in the United States (Katch). He has maintained that these U.S. born Americans â€Å"played by the rules.† Throughout his campaign and presidency, Donald Trump has used hate speech and racist rhetoric to paint hard-working immigrants in a negative light.   He has continuously spoken negatively about minorities who are the backbone of the United States.   Our country, which has always prided itself on being the land of the free, is suddenly not so. The United States is now an unsafe place for people of color to settle. Donald Trump has employed well-known racists in his cabinet, and has yet to address the racially-motivated hate crimes that are occurring nationwide.   As a result, people have come to believe that under his presidency, hatred and racism is allowed. For years, people have flocked to the United States in hopes of attaining the American Dream. With Donald Trump as president, fewer people feel comfortable settling here. He has used racial slurs to tarnish the identity of millions of people and has made an effort to demonize them. Throughout this dark time in the United States, Canada has lead with the utmost grace. Canada has welcomed thousands of people into their country, and has let the world know that diversity is welcomed and wanted. Unlike Donald Trump, who seems to be advocating for a white America, Canada has graciously accepted immigrants and treated them with respect. The current president has lost sight of what it truly means to be an American. The United States, once a place where anyone could pursue their dreams, is now a place where many people are unsure of their future. In this dark time in American politics, Canada has led by example of how immigrants should be treated. Donald Trump and the American people could stand to learn a thing or two from our neighbors in Canada. Works Cited Canada PM: Will Not Halt Illegal Border Crossing Despite Opposition. Reuters. World News.,  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   21 Feb. 2017. Web. 23 Feb. 2017. Edelman, Adam. A Look at Trump’s Most Outrageous Comments About Mexicans As He   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Attempts Damage Control by Visiting With Country’s President. New York Daily News.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   News, 31 Aug. 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2017. Agren, David, and Doug Stanglin. Mexico Says No to Trumps New Deportation Rules. USA  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Today. USA Today, 22 Feb. 2017. Web. 23 Feb. 2017. Merica, Dan. Trump Signs Executive Order to Keep Out Radical Islamic Terrorists' CNN.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   CNN Politics, 30 Jan. 2017. Web. 23 Feb. 2017. Jarrett, Laura, Rene Marsh, and Laura Koran. Homeland Security Suspends Travel Ban. CNN.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   CNN Daily, 4 Feb. 2017. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Seipel, Brooke. Bush-appointed Judge Halts Trump Travel Ban Nationwide. The Hill. The  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Hill, 3 Feb. 2017. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Taylor, Jessica. President Trump At CPAC: The Era of Empty Talk Is Over' NPR. NPR  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Politics & Policy, 24 Feb. 2017. Web. 25 Feb. 2017. Butler, Karen. Justin Trudeau to Immigrants, Refugees: Canadians Will Welcome You,  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Regardless of Your Faith' UPI. World News, 29 Jan. 2017. Web. 1 Mar. 2017. Storey, Kate. Who Is Steve Bannon? 17 Things to Know About Donald Trumps Chief   Ã‚   Strategist. Cosmopolitan. Cosmopolitan, 14 Mar. 2017. Web. 16 Mar. 2017. Chapel, Bill. Kansas Man Arrested In Shooting That Reportedly Targeted Foreigners. NPR.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   NPR Politics & Policy, 24 Feb. 2017. Web. 16 Mar. 2017. Javier, Geana. Hate Speech Abuses Free Speech Rights. The Daily Evergreen. The Daily  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Evergreen, 23 Feb. 2017. Web. 17 Mar. 2017. Arraf, Jane. Deported With A Valid U.S. Visa, Jordanian Says Message Is Youre Not  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Welcome' NPR. NPR Politics & Policy, 24 Feb. 2017. Web. 20 Mar. 2017. Katz, Andrew. The White Helmets. Time Magazine. Time, 25 Feb. 2017. Web. 20 Mar. 2017. Students Turn to Canada in Trump Immigration Era. The Times-Picayune. The Washington   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Post, 28 Mar. 2017. Web. 29 Mar. 2017. McIntyre, Niamh. 11 Things That Have Happened Since Donald Trump Was Elected. The  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Independent. World, 20 Jan. 2017. Web. 29 Mar. 2017. Memoli, Michael A. Trumps Silence on a Documented Rise in Episodes of Anti-Semitism is   Ã‚  Ã‚   Mind-boggling, Group Says. The Los Angeles Times. The Los Angeles Times, 16 Feb.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   2017. Web. 29 Mar. 2017. Katch, Danny. Trumps Executive Hate Crimes. Socialist Worker. Socialist Worker, 26 Jan. 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017. Canada to Let 300,000 Immigrants Enter Country in 2017. The Guardian. The Guardian, 31  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Oct. 2016. Web. 31 Mar. 2017. Furman, Jason, and Danielle Gray. Ten Ways Immigrants Help Build and Strengthen Our  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Economy. The White House President Barack Obama. The White House President   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Barack Obama, 12 July 2012. Web. 31 Mar. 2017.

Hamlet - Ghost :: essays research papers

Hamlet - Ghost The presence of the apparition in the opening scene of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet sets a macabre and eerie tone while emitting and foreshadowing a theme of death. In addition to the death theme the presence of the ghost illuminates on the mystery surrounding the death of Hamlet’s father, the King of Denmark. Often in literature the presence of a ghost indicates something left unresolved. In this case, the death of Hamlets father is the unresolved event as well the revenge necessary to give the tormented soul repose. The ghost created mystery for the audience, spawns the chain of death and treachery in Denmark, causes characters to question the death of their former king, and makes the metaphysics of the play dark. The ghost says nothing despite the valiant efforts on the parts of Horatio, Marcellus, and Bernardo. Suspense is created when the audience is ignorant as to the purpose of the ghost. Later in the play the ghost is utilized to allow Hamlet and the audience knowledge of the vile murder of the king by Claudius, the kings own brother. When the ghost finally speaks, he tells Hamlet, “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder. Murder most foul, as in the best it is, But this most foul, strange, and unnatural.';(I.v.25-28) These quotes let Hamlet as well as the audience know that the fathers death was foul and unnatural contrary to popular belief. The spirit then reveals the murder to Hamlet by professing this: “A serpent stung me. So the whole ear of Denmark Is by a forged process of my death   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Rankly abused. But know, thou noble youth,  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The serpent that did sting thy father’s life Now wears his crown.(I.v.35-39) This statement not only reveals the culprit; it eludes to the manner in which the king was assassinated. Upon hearing this Hamlet and the audience realize who the murderer is and how the plot of vengeance will unfold. Without the apparition the beginning of the play would lack the supernatural and eerie aura as well as the revelation of most wretched crime thus making the play bland and meaningless. Although the ghost is apparently Hamlet’s father those who saw him were fearful. The reason behind this is that in the sixteenth century a ghost could be a demon trying to deceive Hamlet rather than the soul of his murdered father. “The papists in former times have publicly both taught and written that those spirits which men sometimes see and hear be either good or bad

European Colonialism and Imperialism in Aphra Behns Oroonoko Essay

European Superiority in Oroonoko Throughout Aphra Behn's Oroonoko, we can see the comparison between European and African culture occurring in many places. In a majority of the imagery, Behn's attitudes can be seen behind the text weighing heavily toward portraying European characteristics as socially more admirable. Oroonoko's introduction acquaints us with a person so refined in every way as to be almost god-like. Every feature of this great warrior-prince is shown in detail to be the most beautiful one could hope to behold. The narrator says,"...he was adored as the wonder of all that world, and a darling of the soldiers." (1869) He is even said to have,"...a native beauty so transcending all those of his gloomy race that he struck an awe and reverence even in those that knew not his quality;..." (1870) Clearly, this is the description of a person destined for greatness. Oroonoko, throughout his adventures, lives by these very features. After Oroonoko becomes sold as a slave, for example, he becomes a friend of the narrator and the overseer in the New World thro...

adolescent depression Essay -- essays research papers

Depression is a disease that afflicts the human psyche in such a way that the afflicted tend to act and react abnormally toward others and themselves. Adolescent depression is greatly under diagnosed, and leads to serious difficulties in school, and personal adjustment. The reason why depression is often overlooked in children is because children are not always able to express how they feel. Therefore, teachers should be trained in dealing with depressed youths, and to advise the parents of the child to seek professional treatment. School is the place where children spend most of their waking hours learning, socializing, and growing. A child needs to be mentally healthy in order to learn properly, and sometimes problems arise at home, with friends, or with themselves. These problems need to be noticed, and talked about. Teachers have to pay attention to adolescents’ behavioral patterns, and work with the child on a one to one basis. The child can then open up and talk freely with the teacher about anything that is on their mind. Learning disabilities or conduct disorder can put a child in greater risk of depression. Therefore, treating one problem and ignoring the other will not help the child overcome their difficulties (Fassler 63). Family must also play a major role in helping their depressed adolescent. Until the last decade, the commonly held view has been that depression affected persons in their middle years, and did not occur in childhood or adolescence. A lot has changed in the past decade. Due to systematic followup studies of children under treatment, and depressed parents, the onset of depression occurs during adolescence, and must be treated during adolescence (Weissman 210). Depression has a wide range of symptoms, from being sad or mad to withdrawal from others, or lashing out at others. Symptoms of youth depression are often masked. Instead of expressing sadness, teenagers may express boredom and irritability, or may choose to engage in risky behaviors. Other emotional problems make it hard to recognize depression in a child, but usually overlap with depression. Attention Deficit Disorder (ADHD), is a neurochemical problem which makes it difficult for a child to pay attention or focus. These children are very fidgety, have trouble sitting still, and may interrupt others. New research suggests that out of 1,700 adolescents with this d... ...ants work by allowing certain neurotransmitters to accumulate in the central nervous system. They are given to elevate mood, counter suicidal thoughts, and increase the effectiveness of psychotherapy (Weissman 195). Prescribing antidepressants to the young raises thorny issues. There is not an objective test for depression, forcing parents and physicians to decide whether a child is clinically depressed or simply riding the roller coaster emotions of growing up. Critics worry about aggressive marketing tactics and consequent overuse. Antidepressants often are used daily for many years, yet researchers haven’t conducted long term studies to see how the chemicals affect still growing bodies. Within ten years, doctors are reaching for the ability to pinpoint the causes of distress, make treatments more specific, hopefully to the point of where the first episode of depression in kids can be pointed out and treated (Koch 608). Until we have more research to prove the safeness of antidepressants among growing children, and more ideas of htow our brain actually works, the best we as a society can do is educate our children through resilliance to help depressed kids the best way we can.

Student Issues

Our group selected and discussed eight different essays addressing a range of subjects. Some of these essays focused on issues related to students, while others focused on issues related to our citizenship in this country and the world. The essays allowed us to consider issues that were familiar to us, as well as issues that were beyond our own personal experiences. Each essay provided us an opportunity to consider our future and how we view the world and the discussion allowed us to explore and gain insight into how we and our group members felt about these important issues. â€Å"Could Your Facebook Profile Throw a Wrench in Your Future? discusses the danger to future employment posed by information posted by students on Facebook (Dince 44-48). While some of the information in the article seems somewhat out of date, but the overall point of the essay remains relevant: You should be careful about what you put on your Facebook page because employers may be looking at it. Some people may be offended by this and it is certainly not very professional for an employer to go to great efforts to find out private information about you, but job applicants should not be surprised if employers choose to look for information about them on the Internet. Employers have difficult decisions to make when hiring employees and they want to use all the resources that are available to find out who the applicants really are. When we apply for jobs, we work hard to put our best foot forward and employers often want to know what we are really like. Information on the Internet is one way to see how an individual interacts with friends and family, personal issues he or she may have, and problems he or she may have. Many of us may feel it is an invasion of our privacy to have employers looking at our personal relationships or how we use our private time. However, we need to accept that information we put on the Internet, whether it is on Facebook, MySpace, a blog, or a website, is never truly private. We also need to be looking forward to our future plans and goals when we put personal information on the Internet. Information that seems appropriate or innocuous to us as students may appear immature or irresponsible when we are looking for professional employment. Once we put information on the Internet, it may never truly ever go away, so we have to consider that when deciding what to put on the Internet. â€Å"Earning and Learning: Are Students Working Too Much? focused on how college students are increasing focusing more time on working. I have seen this phenomenon first hand through my own college experiences (Kramer 61-65). I originally attended college right out of high school more than ten years ago and lived in the dorms and did not work. I knew students that worked, but they generally only worked a few hours a week and most of my fellow students did not work. As I have gotten older, I have observed relatives, acquaintances, and my fellow students after I returned to school feel an increasing expectation and pressure to work while they are going to school. Some of this may simply be out of necessity because of the decreasing availability of student aid. I also think that changes in cultural and societal influences have encouraged students to expect more material objects such as computers, cell phones, home theaters, game systems, and vehicles. When I was in college, the expectation was that we would eat ramen for four years and very few students had a television or computer. We all knew we were â€Å"starving students† who live a more deprived life for years, but that when we graduated we would be able work towards all those material objects. When I talk to students just starting out now, they seem to expect all the comforts and privileges that had living at home with their parents and this leads them to focus more on earning money and less on their schoolwork. While this is certainly not true for every student, I think cultural and societal pressures have affected the priorities of many students. â€Å"The Nontraditional Student in You† article (Compton & Shock 169-173) reminded me of my own experience as a non-traditional student. When I started college, I never expected that I would become a non-traditional student. I expected that I would complete college in four years and continue on to a career with my college degree. Much like many other students I know, my plans were interrupted by other circumstances of life. I took a break from school because of health problems. I then got married and for financial and practical reasons, decided to help support my wife while she finished school. At that point in my life, I felt as if I had moved on from the â€Å"college† stage of life and continued working. After working several years, I became frustrated with my ability to progress in my job and wanted to be able to have more career options. I was not able to pick up and move to a town with a university and the local community college offered extremely limited options for me since I had already completed two years of college. When I investigated other opportunities, I became aware of the increasing number of programs available online, which were option that were not available in the past. I was able to enroll in the online program and Chadron State and will finally be able to complete my degree next spring. I have encountered many nontraditional students with similar experiences. Their life experiences led them to other paths besides a college degree. After frustrations with their career options or earning potential, they decided they needed to complete college. The opportunities provided by the Internet have allowed many of these students, like me, to complete their degree and open up new opportunities. â€Å"Independent Media Alternatives† discussed the importance of independent sources of news (Barsamian 189-194). Most mainstream sources of media such as major news networks and newspapers focus on what will be popular or appealing to the general public or advertisers. While some good reporting undoubtedly takes place, the mainstream media outlets tend to shy away from positions or stories that are controversial or â€Å"rock the boat. † They sometimes focus so much on appearing fair and unbiased that they miss the truth. Since independent media sources are less focused on corporate success and less indebted to the powers that be, they can tackle controversial or groundbreaking issues. They can also help keep mainstream media focused on the important issues and make sure they are being honest. The Internet has provided even more opportunities for independent sources of media. Regular citizens can create blogs or websites to report news information at little to no cost. This allows even more individuals to report on what they observe. This allows media to belong not just to corporations, but to any individual who wants to share his observations and experiences with the world. This allows us to get more honest, unfiltered access to news from more diverse perspective. â€Å"Less Privacy is Good for Us (and You)† advocates for invasions of our privacy when they benefit others (Etzioni 131-135). The underlying issue is that many Americans think the right to privacy is inviolable, but protection of privacy at the expense of the danger of others is more important. There are undeniably situations where the life of another depends revealing someone’s private information would lead most people to agree that it would be appropriate to violate that right to privacy. However, privacy should not be violated anytime there is a potential benefit. While the right to privacy is not specifically listed in the U. S.  Constitution, many of the Amendments protect specific privacy interests and many other state and federal laws protect other aspects of privacy. It’s fundamental to a free society to protect citizens from undue intrusion by the government, and protecting privacy is an essential piece of that. While there are valid reasons to violate privacy when more significant interests are at stake, all interests and rights should be carefully balanced. Privacy should not be violated when the threat to other interests is only speculative, but only when it is truly necessary. Hate Radio† focuses on the hateful or racist statements made by commentators, most of who are on right-wing or conservative radio (William 163-172). While I do not listen to these stations, I have heard reports of some of the most outrageous and offensive comments. I find racist statements deplorable and believe that radio or TV personalities that make them are having a negative impact on society. However, I would never advocate censoring them because as much as I find their comments reprehensible, the same free speech rights that allow me to criticize them protects their right to say whatever they choose, regardless of how harmful it is. I think the appropriate response is not to censor them, but to speak out against them and encourage others to do the same. Pressuring companies to pull their ads from radio or TV shows that contain hate speech and encouraging consumers to boycott the products of companies that advertise on them can be an effective tool to make a statement against them. â€Å"Who and What is American? † discusses the way we define ourselves as American (Lapham 3-15). Lapham argues that define ourselves by labels such as â€Å"Asian-American† or â€Å"African-American† divide us and is contrary to the idea of us all being American. American culture and history is full of diverse people from diverse backgrounds all united by a common identity of being American. I believe that it is important for us each to recognize and celebrate our own background and culture as well as recognize and celebrate our common purpose as Americans. In that sense, labels can be positive and destructive, depending on how we use them. As long as labels are used to celebrate our personal and cultural heritage, they can help us identify with others and express our unique backgrounds, which is all part of the experience of being an American. If we use these kind of labels to reinforce stereotypes or create divisions, they can be destructive. Unlike the author, I don’t believe that the use of labels is inherently negative, but that we should instead use them carefully and be sure that we are using them in a positive, constructive manner. â€Å"The Internet: A Clear And Present Danger? † raises concerns about the harmful information that is available to children on the Internet and advocates for more restrictions and regulations to Internet content (Cleaver 173-178). It is clear that the Internet is full of pornography and predators. Some regulations and enforcement is important to keep children from accessing offensive or damaging information or being the victim of predators. The government has limited power to regulate and control those that post information on the Internet, especially since it is difficult to trace some Internet activity and many posting information are outside of the United States and beyond our government’s jurisdiction. The most important defense against the risk the Internet poses to children is parents. Parents need to control and monitor their children’s access to the Internet to ensure they are using it safely. Parents can observe their children while they are using the Internet, keep their computer in a public place in the home to monitor it, view their children’s past Internet activity, limit access to chat rooms, and block inappropriate sites. They can also teach their children about appropriate Internet use so that when they do use the Internet on their own, they can make safe choices. While some government action is can be helpful, the most effective way to protect children is through their parents. Parents should take the initiative and the responsibility of making sure their children’s use of the Internet is safe and productive.