Immigration Policy Of America Politics Essay

Immigration Policy Of America Politics Essay Immigration has been part of legislation since the founding of the nation. In 1790, Congress established a process saying ones that are born in the United States become citizens automatically. The first federal law was passed in 1875 limiting immigration qualification in order to prohibit the entry of criminals and prostitutes. Currently, there are two forms of immigration: permanent admission and temporary admission. The ones that are allowed permanent admission are granted permanent resident and a green card. Permanent residents are allow working in the United States and are able to file for citizenship. In 2004, there were about 946,000 people that were admitted to the United States as a permanent resident. Temporary admission is for foreigners who want entry to the United States for a limited of time on behalf of a specific purpose such as visiting families, tourism, temporary work, or school. These people are classified as nonimmigrants. Temporary admissions are not allowed to a pply for United States citizenship. If they want to apply for citizenship through naturalization, they need to submit an additional application for permanent resident before they can do so. In 2004, 5 million people were granted temporary admission. Immigration policy in the United States reflects many goals. First, it serves to reunite many families by admitting family members from foreign countries. Second, due to labor shortage, United States can admit ones with a specific skill to fill up positions in occupations. Third, it provides a shelter for people that face the risk of political or religious persecution from their own country. Lastly, by letting people from foreign countries immigrate to United States, it allows us to become a more diverse nation. Even though United States has goals for immigrations, there are still many rules and regulations involved; not anyone can just enter United States and become permanent or temporary residents. United States may deny visas or admission on either the temporary admission or permanent admission for many reasons. Some reasons may be because of criminal records, health records, or terrorism concerns. Immediate family members of a United States citizens are allow immigrating to the U nited States without many limitations. Citizens of the United States are allowed to sponsor relatives for permanent residents under the family-sponsored preference program. According to Garnett Hardin in his paper called Lifeboat Ethnics: The Case against Helping the Poor, he thinks that United States should simply not provide aid to people in the poor countries. Hardin started out his essay with a metaphor comparing the earth to a grand spaceship. Hardin said, Since we all share life on this planetà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ no single person or institution has the right to destroy, waste, or use more than a fair share of its resources (402). Hardin is more practical rather than liberal. He imagined United States as a lifeboat and the people that are out in the ocean are the ones that want to immigrate to United States. Hardin says, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦we must recognize the limited capacity of any lifeboat. A nations land has a limited capacity to support a population and as the current energy crisis has shown us, in some ways we have already exceeded the carrying capacity of our land (403). The way that Hardin think is correct. United States have more people being born each day then people dying; if United States accepts anyone as an immigrant, the nation would not have enough land to support them. Furthermore, there are many lazy people in this world. As what Hardin was saying, lets assume that we have a fifty people capacity on our lifeboat. To be generous, we can make room for ten more making the total capacity of sixty people. If we can make room for ten more, then we would need to make room for the rest of them also. Pretty soon, the lifeboat is going to overfill and everyone can possibly drown. To make that short, if we take one person into the nation, we would need to take the rest. There is no point letting them into our nation if they are not going to make any contributions. I believe that United States should only take immigrants that can contribute to the nation. Currently, there are many permanent residents in this nation that does not make any contribution whatsoever. Many immigrants have the mentality that if their relatives in the United States are able to sponsor them to come over, then they can sponsor them for the rest of their lives. In my opinion, ones that have an education, have a specific reason to come over to the United States, and ones that can help out the nation are allow becoming permanent residents in the United States. In John Tierneys paper, Angels in America, he believes that the United States immigration policy is too strict causing many immigrants to come illegally. Tierney used his grandfather and an illegal immigrant, Angel Espinoza, as examples. Tierney thinks it is unfair that Espinoza is not allowed to apply for citizenship while others can. Tierney continued onto explaining Espinozas situation. Espinoza left farm just like Tierneys grandfather and came illegally to the United States with little education. Later, he married an American descendant from his native country just like what Tierneys grandfather did. Tierneys grandfather applied for United States citizenship afterward and got approved while Espinoza did not. Espinoza was once caught at the border and violated the law which made him ineligible for a green card and permanent residency. Tierney goes on to explaining how Espinoza and his grandfather both worked hard, chasing the Americans dream, to support their families. Espinoza ha d to go to work every day with the fear of being departed from the United States for working illegally but his grandfather did not had to go through that. Tierney believes that if one is willing to work to achieve their goals then they should be treated equally. Tierney said, Id like to see Republicans on Capitol Hill explain to Espinoza why hes less deserving than their immigrant ancestors, but thats probably too much to expect. Espinoza has a simpler wish: I would like them to tell my American daughter why her father cant stay with her' (704). I personally disagree with Tierneys idea of immigration. Just because one is hard working does not necessarily mean they deserve to be a United States citizen. I believe that in order to become a United States citizen, one must have a moral character, knowledge of the United States history and government, and willingness to support the United States politically and militarily. Because Espinoza was caught at the border at one point in time, h e does not have the moral character. Tierney stated, Its been argued that Mexicans are different from past immigrants because theyre closer to home and less likely to assimilate. Compared with other immigrants today, theyre less educated, and their children are more likely to get poor grades and drop out of school (703). As I stated before, if one does not have an education, they are less likely able to contribute to the United States and have knowledge of the history and government. There are over a million immigrants that enter the United States legally or illegally each year. Having immigrants allow employers to have cheap labor but in the meantime, as David Masci stated, American workers suffer because the newcomers take jobs and suppress wage levels. Many people also argued that native-born people are unwilling to do low-wage jobs but that has been proven wrong. According to Mark Krikorian, an executive director of the Center of Immigration Studies, said in the article Debate Over Immigration, In parts of the country with few immigrants, low-wage jobs still get done, and by native-born people. Americans are not unwilling to do such jobs, but we prefer not to do so. If these immigrants did not take these low-wage positions, native-born Americans will be forced to take these types of jobs. Krikorian also said, Employers could find Americans to do these jobs if they wanted to, but theyd have to provide training and raise wages to do so. It is just easier to all ow immigrants to take these positions. There are also arguments stating that immigrants are over-crowding the United States and preventing immigrants already here from assimilating into American society (Masci). Masci also said that immigrants came to United States in the past because they want to be here, but currently, immigrants immigrate here for job opportunities and the concept of freedom. A lot of immigrants from foreign countries have the mentality that if they come to the United States and not able to find a job then they can get governmental aid such as Welfare. I believe that these are the type of people that are not allowed to immigrate to the United States. They do not truly love the country, but instead they want to come here for the freedom and for a better environment. In conclusion, immigration is a problem in the United States. People from foreign countries want to come to the United States for freedom and job opportunities. With all these people coming over and taking jobs from the current Americans, it causes the citizens to suffer. The extra people that are immigrating to the United States are overcrowding the nation. It is making it harder for new immigrants to adapt to and experience the American society when there are so many new immigrants coming into the nation each year. United States need a more strict immigration policy in order to keep out all the criminals and prevent terrorism. I highly agree with Garnett Hardins view of immigration where we should keep out as many immigrants as possible, and I strongly disagree with Tierneys view of immigration. He thinks that the policy right now is too strict causing people to come illegally. Without a strict policy, our nation would be in more danger due to criminals and terrorism.

Oppression (native Son) :: essays research papers

Oppression   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In the novel Native Son written by Richard Wright a young adult named Bigger Thomas goes through a metamorphosis, from sanity to insanity. He starts out a normal trouble youth, living in a run down housing project, where all he does is hang out with his gang. But the city relief program gives him an opportunity to work and make something of himself. All he has to do is chauffeur for a very rich family. But on his first job everything goes wrong and he ends up murdering the family’s daughter. Through this novel Bigger meets many other people, which have the same oppression as him but handle it in different ways. Some of these people include his mother, his girlfriend, and Max his lawyer. All of these people have a certain amount of oppression given to them by the outside world. The only difference is the way each one of them handle it.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ever since Bigger was a little boy he has felt very oppressed by the world because he was black. Bigger feels that he has nothing to be proud of so he takes this oppression to the heart and turns it into fear. The only way that he could express himself was to show the world that they should not oppress what they don’t know the power of. Bigger demonstrated that he should be feared and acknowledged by murdering the daughter of a very rich family. At one point after Bigger killed the daughter stated that “...for the first time in my fear-ridden life a barrier of protection between him and a world of fear.';(p. 119) Bigger feels as though know that he has killed this person that all will be well because of this new sense of power that he received from doing this horrible act. At this point Bigger feels assured that he could fool the world into thinking that he was normal. He started referring to all the people around him as blind, even when they where alr eady physically blind; “Ms. Dalton was blind; yes blind in more ways than one';(p. 120) but in his own mind he no longer felt the oppression or fear after he killed the Daughter.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The next most oppressed person is Bigger’s mother. She can not get a job because she is black and is of the female gender. So the world has oppressed her into poverty and the only way that she can respond to this oppression is to pray and worship the lord. Oppression (native Son) :: essays research papers Oppression   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In the novel Native Son written by Richard Wright a young adult named Bigger Thomas goes through a metamorphosis, from sanity to insanity. He starts out a normal trouble youth, living in a run down housing project, where all he does is hang out with his gang. But the city relief program gives him an opportunity to work and make something of himself. All he has to do is chauffeur for a very rich family. But on his first job everything goes wrong and he ends up murdering the family’s daughter. Through this novel Bigger meets many other people, which have the same oppression as him but handle it in different ways. Some of these people include his mother, his girlfriend, and Max his lawyer. All of these people have a certain amount of oppression given to them by the outside world. The only difference is the way each one of them handle it.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ever since Bigger was a little boy he has felt very oppressed by the world because he was black. Bigger feels that he has nothing to be proud of so he takes this oppression to the heart and turns it into fear. The only way that he could express himself was to show the world that they should not oppress what they don’t know the power of. Bigger demonstrated that he should be feared and acknowledged by murdering the daughter of a very rich family. At one point after Bigger killed the daughter stated that “...for the first time in my fear-ridden life a barrier of protection between him and a world of fear.';(p. 119) Bigger feels as though know that he has killed this person that all will be well because of this new sense of power that he received from doing this horrible act. At this point Bigger feels assured that he could fool the world into thinking that he was normal. He started referring to all the people around him as blind, even when they where alr eady physically blind; “Ms. Dalton was blind; yes blind in more ways than one';(p. 120) but in his own mind he no longer felt the oppression or fear after he killed the Daughter.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The next most oppressed person is Bigger’s mother. She can not get a job because she is black and is of the female gender. So the world has oppressed her into poverty and the only way that she can respond to this oppression is to pray and worship the lord.

Barkovs Hamlet: A Tragedy of Errors Essay -- essays research papers

William Shakespeare authorship: The text of Hamlet contains indications that Shakespeare portrayed himself as an allegedly dead university graduate. HAMLET: A TRAGEDY OF ERRORS, OR THE TRAGICAL FATE OF WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE? by Alfred Barkov To the contents When the text of William Shakespeare: a mask for Hamlet - Christopher Marlowe? William Shakespeare Hamlet is read attentively, and no details are disregarded, it becomes evident that William Shakespeare included in it something quite different from what has been traditionally interpreted. According to the text, prince Hamlet was not a son to king Hamlet, king Hamlet has never been poisoned, pregnant Ophelia was drowned by prince Hamlet's half-brother. Though that might sound odd, the facts Shakespeare included in the text suggest that the plot of Hamlet has been perceived erroneously. In what we traditionally consider to be the plot of Hamlet, there exist multiple contradictions and discrepancies which cannot be explained within the established interpretation. Even the age of the hero is not known for sure: Hamlet of the Act I is around twenty while in the Act V he appears to be thirty years old. If we really rate Shakespeare's talent that highly as we use to proclaim, we have to exercise a different approach to the contradictions in Hamlet. That is, they must be treated as composition means intended by Shakespeare as integral parts of the structure of Hamlet. Attentive reading suggests that the contradictions reflect a sophisticated structure with two plots both containing seemingly the same cast of characters factually possessing with different biographies. Though the real plot of Hamlet as it was intended by Shakespeare can be comprehended without employment of any theory, there was necessary to develop a version of Literary Theory capable to address the problems of decoding and describing the inner structure of special class of fiction called menippeah. Despite that Hamlet belongs to that class, in my paper, I avoided plunging into the issues of literary theory because the hidden content of any menippeah can be perceived with just attentive reading, Shakespeare's Hamlet being no exception. Menippeah is different from the three known classes of fiction: the epics, the lyrics, and the drama. It employs a specific way of narrating widely used even in everyday communication (when irony is intended.)... ...lizabeth?.. The Shakespeare mystery was maintained at the state level as a top state secret. Queen Elizabeth personally tackled two cases threatening the fate of Christopher Marlowe. Chapter VIII: The second Virgin in the history of human civilization? Christopher Marlowe taught Arabella Stuart, a prospective queen. The parliament adopted a decision the throne should be succeeded by Queen Elizabeth's 'natural' rather than 'legitimate' issue. Chapter IX: Is Christopher Marlowe The Swan of Avon? Shakespeare-Hamlet: is Marlowe the Swan of Avon? The place Queen Elizabeth delivered a child in April 1564 is situated on river Avon. That might attribute Ben Jonson's definition to Marlowe. Related pages: Shakespeare Authorship. Hamlet and Marlowe's works: same structure Hamlet by William Shakespeare, and Christopher Marlowe's dramas possess with identical very sophisticated structure. Hamlet, a summary (The complete version, in Russian) Roberta Ballantine's site dedicated to Christopher Marlowe William Shakespeare Authorship Roundtable Alfred Barkov ut5ab alfred@barkov.kiev.ua P.O. Box 36 Kiev 01103 Ukraine Copyright  © Alfred Barkov 2000, 2003 Last updated: Nov. 23, 2003

Prospero and Ariel Essay

   She just wants to be. This is why I want Lady Macbeth to show her emotions quite clearly when she is telling the spirits to take her emotional ways. I want her to be yelling these things and perhaps crying as she says to take all these things away from her. As soon as she says â€Å"Come, you spirits† I want her to drop to her knees with her hands spread out above her head, beckoning them to come to her. Lastly when she says â€Å"to cry, ‘Holy, hold,’ I want her to just cry silently holding herself tightly, her head down. This would have intrigued both Elizabethan audience as well as today; all though she wants to be apart of evil spirits and kill someone who in Elizabethan times would have been chosen from God, which would be a sin above all sins, not only to kill, not only to trust the witches but to kill somebody appointed from God would be blasphemy. But she would still have emotion showing that she is still human. After this soliloquy I want fog to immerse her to represent the evil that is folding around her and I want the lights to go out. When the lights come back on I want her to be in perfect condition, like it had never had happened. This is when Macbeth will enter. In this first section of the play there are certain words I need the actress to put extra emphasis on. We know that Lady Macbeth is controlling, evil, power-hungry, and a temptress. This is why during this scene I want her to say â€Å"Thus thou must do, if thou have it† hissing the words, and grinning slightly to herself. This represents how she is plotting her evil ways to kill Duncan. Also when she says â€Å"bear welcome in your eye, your hand, your tongue: look like the innocent flower But be the serpent under ‘t† I want her to have one hand on Macbeth’s face tracing over it and another hand around his waist, very close into him. I want her to make serpent loud and very clear for it is very important. Elizabethans are very religious as noted before, but the serpent is a representation of the serpent in Adam and Eve. Where it deceives Eve and makes her eat the apple. Elizabethans would be fearful of snakes and they would have dark and evil aspects associated with this animal. Which is why their must be great emphasis on it. I do this to emphasize her control over Macbeth, by touching him and to show him how to manipulate his face, but also how she uses her sexuality to make him do so. Lady Macbeth has the last words in this scene, this shows her power over Macbeth and how she is the one leading. Now Shakespeare tends to keep the last lines a rhyming couplet to summarize the scene. This one though does not fit this pattern, it ends with â€Å"Leave all the rest to me. † This is to emphasize that Lady Macbeth is going to be the one to kill Duncan. This sentence is very important for she also cuts off when Macbeth says â€Å"We will speak further,† this shows how Lady Macbeth is controlling Macbeth; she is giving him no choice. This relationship bond would have also intrigued Elizabethans at this time. Not only was she condemning herself to eternal damnation she also was being the man in a relationship. Woman Elizabethans would have been thought to just smile and give men children, while cooking and cleaning. Lady Macbeth defies this view on woman, for she controls her husband and tells him exactly what to do. While in today’s society this would be almost considered normal that she had some power in the relationship. Later on in the play we see a gradual change in Lady Macbeth. The scene where I feel there is the most contradictory to what we first see of her is in act 5 scene One. In this scene we see Lady Macbeth’s mental state be torn and how she goes into madness. She is sleep walking, and dreaming of the murder of Duncan. Before Lady Macbeth even enters the stage, she is already being talked about behind her back, by people who had once been a lower status then her. This immediately shows Lady Macbeth has lost her status, and control. When Lady Macbeth enters the room, she is holding a candle. This is very significant because it shows how Lady Macbeth is afraid of the dark, and in this case the dark is associated with evil. For this reason I want Lady Macbeth to be holding the candle very close to her bosom and protecting it from the wind or any draft. She must seem very close to it and must not let it out of her sight. When she says â€Å"Hell is murky† I want her to say it extremely slowly with her eyes closed and her face in pain while her hands wrapped around herself. I pay close attention to this because it now shows how Lady Macbeth who once did not care of hell, is now scared of it. I want her hands wrapped around her for this particular sentence to show how she is alone and vulnerable as well as her eyes closed. This further proves that she does have a conscience. This scene is very significant to the audience to see such a change in Lady Macbeth. I would need Lady Macbeth to not look at anyone straight in the eyes; she would have to seem in another world. For she is, she is dreaming. Her hair would probably be tousled to further indicate her inability to keep up with reality, slowing falling into her own little world. We see her trying to rub the blood off her hands (which in reality is not there), we know this for the gentlewoman says â€Å"washing her hands; I have known her continue in this a quarter of an hour† and Lady Macbeth says â€Å"Yet here’s a spot†. By spot Lady Macbeth refers to Duncan’s blood on her hands and in her mind she cannot get it off, it’s a stain on her conscience. Her conscience is controlling her, doing exactly what she didn’t want to happen in the first place. She wanted control; she wanted to be able to do this without caring about the death of men yet she goes into madness from doing it. This part is also in straight relation to when Macbeth killed Duncan, for he had said that there was blood on his hands, â€Å"Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood Clean from my hand? † But at that point of time Lady Macbeth had taken it literally, and told him to wash his hands, â€Å"A little water clears us of this deed;†. While now she now see’s how it never goes away no matter how much she scrubs. Lady Macbeth feels as if she is a murderer and what she has done cannot be undone. But also to this self hatred and regret she also believes she has made a monster as well. She says â€Å"Thane of Fife had a wife: where is she now? † Shakespeare draws immediate attention to this sentence for it’s a rhyme. Shakespeare is emphasizing how Lady Macbeth knows Macbeth killed her, and that this killing had also helped with the tearing of her conscience. She feels that she created this beast and that it is her fault that the wife of the thane of fife is dead. I want her to say these words shaking her head and crying, to show how much that this one death has affected her more because she did not want her to die. During this scene Lady Macbeth now speaks in prose. This shows how Lady Macbeth has a loss of control and status. It is also very highly punctuated this forces the actress to speak in a broken fashion, which reflects Lady Macbeth’s state of mind. I want the actress to embrace this and speak with lots of different paces and pitches. I don’t want her to speak with anything flowing, every word should b disjointed almost, especially when she repeats what she said in the earlier scenes such as â€Å"Fie, my lord – fie! A soldier and afeard† and also â€Å"Here’s the smell of the blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh! Oh! Oh! â€Å", which related to what Macbeth had said before â€Å"Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood Clean from my hand? No, this my hand will rather The multitudinous seas incardine, Making the green one red. † I perceive this as a very sad scene. The Doctor’s last words in the scene make us pity Lady Macbeth. Elizabethans would have seen Lady Macbeth almost as a devil, today even we would have seen Lady Macbeth particularly evil, but in this scene this perception of her transforms into pity and sorrow for her. We see her being tortured by her wrong doing. The Doctor says â€Å"Still keep eyes upon her†, he talking about God to take care of her and to forgive her of her wrong doing and make her soul at peace. The Doctor knows what she has done, for Lady Macbeth in her dream state is spilling the murder. Even with this he asks for God to look down upon her and protect her from herself. These lines he speaks would have to be much emphasized with a lot of sadness in his tone of voice. Perhaps after his lines Lady Macbeth could drop to her knees and start frantically rubbing her hands with desperation to further make the audience have a touch of heart for Lady Macbeth. All though I think today’s audience might only slightly pity Lady Macbeth, while in Elizabethan’s times not at all. Elizabethan’s would be glad that Lady Macbeth is in pain and is suffering from her wrong doing, and they would of thought that if you do evil, God will punish you.

Interpersonal Communication in a Marriage

My name is Olevia Johnson and I am going to be giving you a little advice on how you should communicate with one another in your new marriage. I am going to address the way you should properly use interpersonal communication with one another on a healthy daily basis. I want to address in this letter: Understand how perceptions, emotions, and nonverbal expression affect interpersonal relationships. Define emotional intelligence and its role in effective interpersonal relationships. Evaluate appropriate levels of self-disclosure in relationships. Describe strategies for managing interpersonal conflicts. Understand the impact of gender and culture on interpersonal communications. In learning how to understand how perceptions, emotions and nonverbal expression affect interpersonal relationships I ran across this article and it stated , Schachner, Dory A. Patterns of Nonverbal Behavior (Fall 2005) Nonverbal behavior and sensitivity to a relationship partner’s nonverbal messages have important effects on the quality of interpersonal interactions and relationships. The abilities to encode, or express, and to decode, or understand, nonverbal cues are crucial to the communication of emotions (e. g. Ekman, 1988; Siegman & Feldstein, 1987) and are associated with mental health, social adjustment, and relationship satisfaction (e. g. , DePaulo, 1992; Noller, 1985). Encoding and decoding abilities are diverse and quite variable, being affected by social context and interactants’ social roles (Snodgrass, 1985). They apply to a variety of content domains, including personal dispositions, behaviors, internal states, interpersonal intentions, self-presentational strategies, and social relations (Bernieri, 2001). – . Emotional intelligence and its role in effective interpersonal relationships. Bridgepoint Education, (2011) para2. 5 Emotional intelligence is a set of skills that can be learned. We can improve our emotional intelligence by increasing our awareness of emotional issues and improving our ability to identify, assess, and manage our feelings. Emotional intelligence is something that we use to communicate with others and without it we could not be able to understand what others are saying to us and the emotions that they are using to explain to us what is wrong what is just going on in their lives and the lives around us. When evaluating of levels of self-disclosure a lot of people feel very uncomfortable about certain things they tell a person it could be that they don’t trust a person enough to disclose this type of information or they just want to be more private than others. In chapter 7 (Bridgepoint Education, (2011) Para 5. It states that Most of us willingly give people some types of information such as name and the town in which we live. However, would you give someone your street address? Your phone number? A credit card number? The answer to these questions is usually â€Å"It depends. † Decisions about self-disclosure are often based on how well you know the other person, your predictions about how he or she will react to the information, your judgment about why he or she needs to know the information, and your assumptions about what he or she will do with the knowledge. In other words, you must know someone well enough or be comfortable enough with him or her to be able to predict how the listener will respond. You must trust the other person not to take advantage of the information you share. We do not disclose to everyone we know in the same way. You may have some information you are willing to share with everyone, some information you would be willing to share with a close friend, some information you would share only with your spouse or significant other, and still other information that you might share with a close friend but might not tell your family. John and heather these things that you should think about when you are discussing your love life among others these things can harm a marriage , especially the beginning . Now I would like to discuss strategies for managing interpersonal conflicts, it has always been important to manage the way the relationship of you and another person communicates. You can do this by addressing a problem in the relationship early on. In chapter 9(Bridgepoint Education, (2011) Para 5 it states that you can do this by Your knowledge of the other person and how he or she might react to such displays should govern whether you use any of these methods. Remembering the positive things about your relationship when you are in conflict can often allow you to work out differences and have a utually satisfying resolution that preserves a happy relationship. You can also often prevent conflict by using the other interpersonal communication skills discussed in this text and increasing your awareness of your own communication behaviors. Are you unconsciously creating potential conflict situations through your use of threatening language? Is your nonverbal behavior at times dominee ring or overbearing? Do you get overly emotional during conflict situations? Paying attention and modifying your behavior, checking your perceptions with other people, practicing effective listening skills, and using the skills of emotional intelligence can all be useful means of preventing or diminishing conflict. Also, resist the temptation to judge others when they do not communicate as well as you would like and try to be tolerant and accepting of the behavior of others when they explain things in more detail than you need, they talk too slowly, or they ramble. These are key things to remember whenever you and your mate or having a bad day I might say , or something did not go right for the other one. I want you guys to understand the impact of gender and culture on interpersonal communications. In the Journal of Social psychology it states that the research on gender differences is quite extensive (Burgoon, Buller, & Woodall, 1989; Hayduk, 1983). Observed differences between males and females typically are attributed to the more affiliative and/or submissive sex roles of women in a society relative to men (Eakins & Eakins, 1978; Henley & LaFrance, 1984); presumably, such roles lead women to establish closer proximity to others, to use a more direct body orientation, and to be more receptive to the use of touch than men are. In fact, studies have confirmed that (a) female dyads interact at closer distances than do male dyads (Aiello & Jones, 1971; Evans & Howard, 1973; Mehrabian & Diamond, 1971), (b) mixed-sex dyads tend to be more proximate than male dyads (Baxter, 1970; Cook, 1970; Evans & Howard, 1973), (c) women allow closer approaches from others than men allow (Dosey & Meisels, 1969; Patterson & Edinger, 1987; Willis, 1966). d) the body orientations of women interactants are more direct than those of men (Jones, 1971; Mehrabian & Friar, 1969), (e) female and mixed-sex dyads use touch more than male dyads (Elzinga, 1975; Hall & Veccia, 1990; Henley, 1973; Jones, 1971; Major, 1982; Stier & Hall, 1984), and (f) in mixed-sex interactions touch may be initiated more by males (Henley, 1973; Heslin & Boss, 1980; Major & Williams, 1980) or by either gender depending on factors such as culture (Shuter, 1977), type of touch (Hall & Veccia, 1990; Jones, 1986), or age of interactants (Hall & Veccia). In other countries as well, similar results have been obtained (Shuter, 1976, 1977; Sussman & Rosenfeld, 1982). These types of facts are things that you should consider as an interracial couple and try to always defeat the odds Those are just some of the topics I wanted to address with you so on the rest of your marital journey you can just love one another with less conflict. This is why I felt the need to address the way you should properly use interpersonal communication with one another on a healthy daily basis. Good Luck,

Cultural Democracy

Cultural democracy – Summary This is the summary of the conference or debate between the two speakers Mr. Jerry Sambuaga and Mr. Lee Nathanael Santoso, discussing the topic of Cultural Democracy. The first topic that is discussed was on the ideal form of democracy. Mr. Jerry said that the ideal form of democracy is the one that prioritize freedom, to have liberalism implemented, which will eventually lead to individualism. In his opinion liberalism should be implemented in all aspects, such as in politics and economy.The examples of liberalism in politics are presidential election or parties, whereas the example of liberalism in economy is human rights. The freedom of speech, freedom to express opinions, since 1998, is the key to liberalism (direct democracy). On the other hand, when discussing the topic on the ideal form of democracy, Mr. Nathanael raises up the question â€Å"Whether democracy is universal or locally? † as his comeback. People now have human rights, t he right to choose what they think democracy is. He said that in Singapore the government plays a larger role compared than the role of freedom of speech (representative democracy).Mr. jerry said that democracy is invented in the west, and the democracy in Indonesia is still very fragile, there are aspects that have not yet been touched such as civil society, law enforcement, etc. There is a statement that Mr. Jerry gave that Mr. Nathanael also agrees on, and that is â€Å"Democracy is not a destination but a goal†. Mr. Nathanael added that democracy indeed is a mean or a goal, and the goal is not democracy but to make sure that every people have basic necessities (security, etc). Mr.Nathanael asked a rhetorical question, † which political system that can guarantee their country to be flexible enough to attain political grid lock? † From his point of view, Singapore is the closest one that has been able to achieve this. The second topic that the moderator discusse d was, â€Å"Should a country this big (Indonesia) use a federal system or a unitary system? † Mr. Nathanael said that our country should adopt a mix of the two systems. From Mr. jerry's point of view, Indonesia should use a federal system, because Indonesia is very diverse, if we force something it can cause damages. Mr. Nathanael debated Mr.Jerry's statement by saying that Singapore also has diversity, but they know how to harmonized the different point of views, opinions, etc. He said, â€Å"Minorities and other ethnicity receive the right to take part, to give a voice. † Mr. Jerry debated Mr. Nathanael’s statement by saying that Singapore has an oppressive or an authoritarian system, instead of having a freedom of speech. â€Å"Singapore has a good system but can it last with that system? Indonesia may not yet be successful now, but with the existence of liberty, and opportunity given for people to be able to govern, may lead Indonesia to become a developed country. Mr. Nathanael debated Mr. Jerry’s statement saying, â€Å"The authoritarian system in Singapore is different compared to China, in Singapore the law is clear, you can have a say on criticizing the government, but you must have facts to support it. Mr. Jerry’s opinion is that our country is best suited with having a little number parties, because a large number of parties slows down decision making, and does nut suit the presidential system. While Mr. Nathanael said that democracy is not about political parties, part of government,  it is about achieving national interests.He said that, â€Å"only the parties with money that can win (in indo), but in Singapore if you have a good vision you will be heard†. â€Å"Should democracy control freedom? † Mr. Jerry said that one’s freedom of expression could violate another's freedom of expression. Freedom should be controlled but not limited. Democracy may not be the best system, but it is stil l better to educate the people to participate. He added, â€Å"Freedom of rights of Singapore must be developed. † Mr. Nathanael commented, â€Å"Singapore are convinced that this is the system for them, the issue is Singapore’s system should be more relevant. Singapore’s human rights can’t be compared with Indonesia’s priority of economic prosperity. Cultural Democracy Critical Analysis Cultural Democracy is the term for a philosophy or policy emphasizing pluralism, participation, and equity within and between cultures. Which consists of a set of related commitments such as, protecting and promoting cultural diversity, and the right to culture for everyone in our society and around the world;? encouraging active participation in community cultural life;? enabling people to participate in policy decisions that affect the quality of our cultural lives; and ? ssuring fair and equitable access to cultural resources and support. There are three basic types of democracy: Direct democracy is a political system where the citizens participate in the decision-making personally, Representative democracy involves the selection of government officials by the people being represented, and Parliamentary democracy is a representative democracy where government is appointed by representatives as opposed to a ‘presidential rule' wherein the President is both head of state and the head of government and is elected by the voters.In my opinion, I think the ideal form of democracy should be the one where liberalism is highly considered, but where there is also a balance in government involvement. Because, as the people, we know what our country needs most, but with the diversity that our country possess, and with the different opinions that people have, there should be a representative democracy that can represent the people and chooses the best decisions for the people and the country. Should democracy control freedom?I think that freedom is both a positive and a negative think, if not controlled properly. People have different opinions, and if all of them have the freedom of speech, then there will be a moment where their freedom of expression will clash with others’ freedom of expression. That is why that freedom should also be controlled to a point of degree where people would still have the freedom of speech. The main reason why Indonesia has not been able to reach its full potential is because we have weak institutions, hence weak democracy.Indonesia should learn the complexity that is democracy, the many aspects that is consists of such as  legal certainty, transparency, freedom, etc. The one thing that Indonesia should be able to do to improve as a country is by knowing how to prioritize. Of course, in democracy alone there are many aspects that it consists of, and to manage this by knowing which to prioritize first, to the extent where all the aspects will be covered one by one. Indonesia should be consistent in following or running a liberal system.Of course, there are processes that need to be done; we need to fight for the freedom of the economy. The best solution is to have a modification based on the aspiration of the people. We should be able to learn, and adopt all the good elements that each country possesses, mix them up and implement them as our democratic system. By: Pamela Lemmuela (04320120057) FISIP/HI/2012 RESEARCH : ? Democracy? From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A woman casts her vote in the second round of the French presidential election of 2007 Part of the Politics series|Democracy| History  Ã‚ · Outline| Basic forms| * Direct * Representative| Variants| * Anticipatory * Consensus * Deliberative * Demarchy * Economic * Electronic * Grassroots * Illiberal * Inclusive * Liberal * Non-partisan * Ochlocracy * Participatory * Radical * Religious * Representative direct * Sociocracy * Soviet * Totalitarian * Other| Politics portal| * v t e| Part of the Polit ics series| Basic forms ofgovernment| Power structure| * Confederal * Federal * Hegemony * Imperial * Unitary| Power source| Democracy * Direct * Representative * Other * Monarchy * Absolute * Constitutional * Oligarchy * Aristocracy * Meritocracy * Military junta * Plutocracy * Stratocracy * Technocracy * Timocracy * Other * Anarchy * Authoritarianism * Autocracy * Anocracy * Despotism * Dictatorship * Kritarchy * Republic * Theocracy * Totalitarianism| List of forms of government| Politics portal| * v t e|Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows people to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination. The term originates from the Greek (demokratia) â€Å"rule of th e people†,[1] which was coined from demos) â€Å"people† and (kratos) â€Å"power† in the 5th century BCE to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens; the term is an antonym to â€Å"rule of an elite†. The English word dates to the 16th century, from the older Middle French and Middle Latin equivalents. A democratic government contrasts to forms of government where power is either held by one, as in a monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals, as in an oligarchy or aristocracy.Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders and to oust them without the need for a revolution. [2] Several variants of democracy exist, but there ar e two basic forms, both of which concern how the whole body of citizens executes its will. One form of emocracy is direct democracy, in which citizens have direct and active participation in the decision making of the government. In most modern democracies, the whole body of citizens remain the sovereign power but political power is exercised indirectly through elected representatives; this is called representative democracy. The concept of representative democracy arose largely from ideas and institutions that developed during the European Middle Ages, the Age of Enlightenment, and the American and French Revolutions. [3] Contents   [hide]   * 1 Definition * 2 History * 2. Ancient origins * 2. 2 Middle Ages * 2. 3 Modern era * 3 Countries * 4 Types * 4. 1 Basic forms * 4. 2 Variants * 4. 3 Non-governmental * 5 Theory * 5. 1 Aristotle * 5. 2 Rationale * 5. 3 Ideal forms * 5. 4 Practice * 5. 5 Criticism * 6 Development * 7 See also * 8 References * 9 External links| [edit] Defini tion While there is no universally accepted definition of â€Å"democracy,†[4] equality and freedom have both been identified as important characteristics of democracy since ancient times. 5] These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes. For example, in a representative democracy, every vote has equal weight, no unreasonable restrictions can apply to anyone seeking to become a representative, and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution. [6][7] One theory holds that democracy requires three fundamental principles: 1) upward control, i. e. overeignty residing at the lowest levels of authority, 2) political equality, and 3) social norms by which individuals and institutions only consider acceptable acts that reflect the first two principles of upward control and political equality. [8] The term â€Å"democracy† is sometimes used as shorthand for liberal democracy, which is a variant of representative democracy that may include elements such as political pluralism; equality before the law; the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances; due process; civil liberties; human rights; and lements of civil society outside the government. [citation needed] In the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute, but in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the dominant principle is that of parliamentary sovereignty (while maintaining judicial independence). [citation needed] In other cases, â€Å"democracy† is used to mean direct democracy. Though the term â€Å"democracy† is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles also are applicable to private organizations. Majority rule is often listed as a characteristic of democracy. by whom? ] Hence, democracy allows for political minorities to be oppressed by the â₠¬Å"tyranny of the majority† in the absence of legal protections of individual or group rights. An essential part of an â€Å"ideal† representative democracy is competitive elections that are fair both substantively[9] and procedurally. [10] Furthermore, freedom of political expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press are considered to be essential rights that allow citizens to be adequately informed and able to vote according to their own interests. 11][12] It has also been suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of individuals to participate freely and fully in the life of their society. [13] With its emphasis on notions of social contract and the collective will of the people, democracy can also be characterized as a form of political collectivism because it is defined as a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. [14] While democracy is often equated with the republic an form of government, the term â€Å"republic† classically has encompassed both democracies and aristocracies. 15][16] [edit] History Main article: History of democracy [edit] Ancient origins See also: Athenian democracy Cleisthenes, â€Å"father of Athenian democracy†, modern bust. The term â€Å"democracy† first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens. [17][18] Led by Cleisthenes, Athenians established what is generally held as the first democracy in 508-507 BCE. Cleisthenes is referred to as â€Å"the father of Athenian democracy. [19] Athenian democracy took the form of a direct democracy, and it had two distinguishing features: the random selection of ordinary citizens to fill the few existing government administrative and judicial offices,[20] and a legislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens. [21] All citizens were eligible to speak and vote in the assembly, which set the laws of the city st ate. However, Athenian citizenship excluded women, slaves, foreigners ( metoikoi), and males under 20 years old. [citation needed] Of the estimated 200,000 to 400,000 inhabitants of Athens, there were between 30,000 and 60,000 citizens. citation needed] The exclusion of large parts of the population from the citizen body is closely related to the ancient understanding of citizenship. In most of antiquity the benefit of citizenship was tied to the obligation to fight war campaigns. [citation needed] Athenian democracy was not only direct in the sense that decisions were made by the assembled people, but also directest in the sense that the people through the assembly, boule and courts of law controlled the entire political process and a large proportion of citizens were involved constantly in the public business. 22] Even though the rights of the individual were not secured by the Athenian constitution in the modern sense (the ancient Greeks had no word for â€Å"rights†[23]), the Athenians enjoyed their liberties not in opposition to the government but by living in a city that was not subject to another power and by not being subjects themselves to the rule of another person. [24] Even though the Roman Republic contributed significantly to certain aspects of democracy, only a minority of Romans were citizens with votes in elections for representatives.The votes of the powerful were given more weight through a system of gerrymandering, so most high officials, including members of the Senate, came from a few wealthy and noble families. [25] However, many notable exceptions did occur. [citation needed] [edit] Middle Ages During the Middle Ages, there were various systems involving elections or assemblies, although often only involving a small amount of the population, the election of Gopala in Bengal region of Indian Subcontinent (within a aste system), the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (10% of population), the Althing in Iceland, the Logting in the Faero e Islands, certain medieval Italian city-states such as Venice, the tuatha system in early medieval Ireland, the Veche in Novgorod and Pskov Republics of medieval Russia, Scandinavian Things, The States in Tirol and Switzerland and the autonomous merchant city of Sakai in the 16th century in Japan. However, participation was often restricted to a minority, and so may be better classified as oligarchy.Most regions in medieval Europe were ruled by clergy or feudal lords. The Kouroukan Fouga divided the Mali Empire into ruling clans (lineages) that were represented at a great assembly called the Gbara. However, the charter made Mali more similar to a constitutional monarchy than a democratic republic. A little closer to modern democracy were the Cossack republics of Ukraine in the 16th–17th centuries: Cossack Hetmanate and Zaporizhian Sich. The highest post – the Hetman – was elected by the representatives from the country's districts.Magna Carta, 1215, England The Parliament of England had its roots in the restrictions on the power of kings written into Magna Carta, which explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects, whether free or fettered – and implicitly supported what became English writ of habeas corpus, safeguarding individual freedom against unlawful imprisonment with right to appeal. The first elected parliament was De Montfort's Parliament in England in 1265.However only a small minority actually had a voice; Parliament was elected by only a few percent of the population, (less than 3% as late as 1780[26]), and the power to call parliament was at the pleasure of the monarch (usually when he or she needed funds). The power of Parliament increased in stages over the succeeding centuries. After the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 was enacted, which codified certain rights and increased the influence of Parliament. 26] The franchise was slowly increased and Parliament gradually gaine d more power until the monarch became largely a figurehead. [27] As the franchise was increased, it also was made more uniform, as many so-called rotten boroughs, with a handful of voters electing a Member of Parliament, were eliminated in the Reform Act of 1832. In North America, the English Puritans who migrated from 1620 established colonies in New England whose governance was democratic and which contributed to the democratic development of the United States. 28] [edit] Modern era [edit] 18th and 19th centuries The first nation in modern history to adopt a democratic constitution was the short-lived Corsican Republic in 1755. This Corsican Constitution was the first based on Enlightenment principles and even allowed for female suffrage, something that was granted in other democracies only by the 20th century. In 1789, Revolutionary France adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and, although short-lived, the National Convention was elected by all males in 1792. [29]The establishment of universal male suffrage in France in 1848 was an important milestone in the history of democracy. Universal male suffrage was definitely established in France in March 1848 in the wake of the French Revolution of 1848. [30] In 1848, several revolutions broke out in Europe as rulers were confronted with popular demands for liberal constitutions and more democratic government. [31] Although not described as a democracy by the founding fathers, the United States founders also shared a determination to root the American experiment in the principle of natural freedom and equality. 32] The United States Constitution, adopted in 1788, provided for an elected government and protected civil rights and liberties for some. In the colonial period before 1776, and for some time after, often only adult white male property owners could vote; enslaved Africans, most free black people and most women were not extended the franchise. On the American frontier, democracy became a way of life, with widespread social, economic and political equality. 33] However, slavery was a social and economic institution, particularly in eleven states in the American South, such that a variety of organizations were established advocating the movement of black people from the United States to locations where they would enjoy greater freedom and equality. In the 1860 United States Census the slave population in the United States had grown to four million,[34] and in Reconstruction after the Civil War (late 1860s) the newly freed slaves became citizens with (in the case of men) a nominal right to vote.Full enfranchisement of citizens was not secured until after the African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968) gained passage by the United States Congress of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. [35][36] [edit] 20th and 21st centuries The number of nations 1800–2003 scoring 8 or higher on Polity IV scale, another widely used measure of democracy. 20th cent ury transitions to liberal democracy have come in successive â€Å"waves of democracy,† variously resulting from wars, revolutions, decolonization, religious and economic circumstances.World War I and the dissolution of the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires resulted in the creation of new nation-states from Europe, most of them at least nominally democratic. In the 1920s democracy flourished, but the Great Depression brought disenchantment, and most of the countries of Europe, Latin America, and Asia turned to strong-man rule or dictatorships. Fascism and dictatorships flourished in Nazi Germany, Italy, Spain and Portugal, as well as nondemocratic regimes in the Baltics, the Balkans, Brazil, Cuba, China, and Japan, among others. 37] World War II brought a definitive reversal of this trend in western Europe. The democratization of the American, British, and French sectors of occupied Germany (disputed[38]), Austria, Italy, and the occupied Japan served as a model for the la ter theory of regime change. However, most of Eastern Europe, including the Soviet sector of Germany fell into the non-democratic Soviet bloc. The war was followed by decolonization, and again most of the new independent states had nominally democratic constitutions. India emerged as the world's largest democracy and continues to be so. 39] By 1960, the vast majority of country-states were nominally democracies, although most of the world's populations lived in nations that experienced sham elections, and other forms of subterfuge (particularly in Communist nations and the former colonies. ) A subsequent wave of democratization brought substantial gains toward true liberal democracy for many nations. Spain, Portugal (1974), and several of the military dictatorships in South America returned to civilian rule in the late 1970s and early 1980s (Argentina in 1983, Bolivia, Uruguay in 1984, Brazil in 1985, and Chile in the early 1990s).This was followed by nations in East and South Asia by the mid-to-late 1980s. Economic malaise in the 1980s, along with resentment of Soviet oppression, contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the associated end of the Cold War, and the democratization and liberalization of the former Eastern bloc countries. The most successful of the new democracies were those geographically and culturally closest to western Europe, and they are now members or candidate members of the European Union. Some researchers consider that contemporary Russia is not a true democracy and instead resembles a form of dictatorship. 40] The Economist's Democracy Index as published in December 2011, with greener colours representing more democratic countries and clearly authoritarian countries in dark red. The liberal trend spread to some nations in Africa in the 1990s, most prominently in South Africa. Some recent examples of attempts of liberalization include the Indonesian Revolution of 1998, the Bulldozer Revolution in Yugoslavia, the Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon, the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, and the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.According to Freedom House, in 2007 there were 123 electoral democracies (up from 40 in 1972). [41] According to World Forum on Democracy, electoral democracies now represent 120 of the 192 existing countries and constitute 58. 2 percent of the world's population. At the same time liberal democracies i. e. countries Freedom House regards as free and respectful of basic human rights and the rule of law are 85 in number and represent 38 percent of the global population. [42] In 2010 the United Nations declared September 15 the International Day of Democracy. 43] [edit] Countries The following countries are categorized by the Democracy Index 2011 as Full democracy:[44] 1. Norway? 2. Iceland? 3. Denmark? 4. Sweden? 5. New Zealand   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  | 6. Australia? 7. Switzerland? 8. Canada? 9. Finland? 10. Netherlands   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã ‚  | 11. Luxembourg   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  ? 12. Ireland? 13. Austria? 14. Germany? 15. Malta| 16. Czech Republic   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  ? 17. Uruguay? 18. United Kingdom? 19. United States? 20. Costa Rica| 21. Japan? 22. South Korea? 23. Belgium? 24. Mauritius? 25.Spain| The Index assigns 53 countries to the next category, Flawed democracy: Argentina, Benin, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, France, Ghana, Greece, Guyana, Hungary, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mali, India, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Namibia, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Taiwan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Zambia[44] [edit]Types See also: List of types of democracy Democracy has taken a number of forms, both in theory and practice. Some varieties of democracy provide better representation and more freedom for their citizens than others. [45][46] However, if any democracy is not structured so as to prohibit the government from excluding the people from the legislative process, or any branch of government from altering the separation of powers in its own favor, then a branch of the system can accumulate too much power and destroy the democracy. 47][48][49] World's states colored by form of government as of 20111 Presidential republics2|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Semi-presidential republics2|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Parliamentary republics2|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Single-party republics|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Parliamentary constitutional monarchies|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Absolute monarchies|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Military dictatorships|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Parliamentary constitutional monarchies in which the monarch personally exercises power|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Republics with an executive president dependent on a parliament|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Countries which do not fit any of the above systems| | This map was complied according to the Wikipedia list of countries by system of government. See there for sources. 2Several states constitutionally deemed to be multiparty republics are broadly described by outsiders as authoritarian states. This map presents only the de jure form of government, and not the de facto degree of democracy. The following kinds of democracy are not exclusive of one another: many specify details of aspects that are independent of one another and can co-exist in a single system. [edit] Basic forms [edit] DirectMain article: Direct democracy Direct democracy is a political system where the citizens participate in the decision-making personally, contrary to relying on intermediaries or representatives. The supporters of direct democracy argue that democracy is more than merely a procedural issue. A direct democracy gives the voting population the power to: Landsgemeinde of the canton of Appenzell Innerr hoden, example for direct democracy in Switzerland 1. Change constitutional laws, 2. Put forth initiatives, referendums and suggestions for laws, 3.Give binding orders to elective officials, such as revoking them before the end of their elected term, or initiating a lawsuit for breaking a campaign promise. Of the three measures mentioned, most operate in developed democracies today. This is part of a gradual shift towards direct democracies. Elements of direct democracy exist on a local level in many countries, though these systems often coexist with representative assemblies. Usually, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law. [14] [edit]Representative Main article: Representative democracy Representative democracy involves the selection of government officials by the people being represented. If the head of state is also democratically elected then it is called a democratic republic. [50] The most c ommon mechanisms involve election of the candidate with a majority or a plurality of the votes. Representatives may be elected or become diplomatic representatives by a particular district (or constituency), or represent the entire electorate through proportional systems, with some using a combination of the two.Some representative democracies also incorporate elements of direct democracy, such as referendums. A characteristic of representative democracy is that while the representatives are elected by the people to act in the people's interest, they retain the freedom to exercise their own judgment as how best to do so. [edit] Parliamentary Main article: Parliamentary system Parliamentary democracy is a representative democracy where government is appointed by representatives as opposed to a ‘presidential rule' wherein the President is both head of state and the head of government and is elected by the voters.Under a parliamentary democracy, government is exercised by delegat ion to an executive ministry and subject to ongoing review, checks and balances by the legislative parliament elected by the people. [51][52][53][54][55] Parliamentary systems have the right to dismiss a Prime Minister at any point in time that they feel he or she is not doing their job to the expectations of the legislature. This is done through a Vote of No Confidence where the legislature decides whether or not to remove the Prime Minister from office by a majority support for his or her dismissal. 56] In some countries, the Prime Minister can also call an election whenever he or she so chooses, and typically the Prime Minister will hold an election when he or she knows that they are in good favor with the public as to get re-elected. In other parliamentary democracies extra elections are virtually never held, a minority government being preferred until the next ordinary elections. [edit] Presidential Main article: Presidential system Presidential Democracy is a system where the public elects the president through free and fair elections.The president serves as both the head of state and head of government controlling most of the executive powers. The president serves for a specific term and cannot exceed that amount of time. Elections typically have a fixed date and aren’t easily changed. The president has direct control over the cabinet, the members of which are specifically appointed by the president himself. [56] The president cannot be easily removed from office by the legislature, but he or she cannot remove members of the legislative branch any more easily.This provides some measure of separation of powers. In consequence however, the president and the legislature may end up in the control of separate parties, allowing one to block the other and thereby interfere with the orderly operation of the state. This may be the reason why presidential democracy is not very common outside the Americas. [56] A semi-presidential system is a system of demo cracy in which the government includes both a prime minister and a president. The particular powers held by the prime minister and president vary by country. 56] [edit] Constitutional Main article: Constitutional democracy A constitutional democracy is a representative democracy in which the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a constitution that emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities (see civil liberties).In a constitutional democracy, it is possible for some large-scale decisions to emerge from the many individual decisions that citizens are free to make. In other words, citizens can â€Å"vote with their feet† or â€Å"vote with their dollars†, resulting in significant informal government-by-the-masses that exercises many â€Å"powers† associated with formal government elsewhere. [edit] Hybrid Some modern democracies that are predominately representative in nature also heavily rely upon forms of political action that are directly democratic.These democracies, which combine elements of representative democracy and direct democracy, are termed hybrid democracies[57] or semi-direct democracies. Examples include Switzerland and some U. S. states, where frequent use is made of referendums and initiatives. Although managed by a representative legislative body, Switzerland allows for initiatives and referendums at both the local and federal levels. In the past 120 years less than 250 initiatives have been put to referendum.The populace has been conservative, approving only about 10% of the initiatives put before them; in addition, they have often opted for a version of the initiative rewritten by government. [citation needed] In the United States, no mechanisms of direct democrac y exists at the federal level, but over half of the states and many localities provide for citizen-sponsored ballot initiatives (also called â€Å"ballot measures†, â€Å"ballot questions† or â€Å"propositions†), and the vast majority of states allow for referendums.Examples include the extensive use of referendums in the US state of California, which is a state that has more than 20 million voters. [58] In New England Town meetings are often used, especially in rural areas, to manage local government. This creates a hybrid form of government, with a local direct democracy and a state government which is representative. For example, most Vermont towns hold annual town meetings in March in which town officers are elected, budgets for the town and schools are voted on, and citizens have an opportunity to speak and by heard on political matters. 59] [edit] Variants [edit] Republic Main article: Republicanism In contemporary usage, the term democracy refers to a go vernment chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative. [60] The term republic has many different meanings, but today often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a president, serving for a limited term, in contrast to states with a hereditary monarch as a head of state, even if these states also are representative democracies with an elected or appointed head of government such as a prime minister. 61] The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticized democracy, which in their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy, often without the protection of a Constitution enshrining basic rights; James Madison argued, especially in The Federalist No. 10, that what distinguished a democracy from a republic was that the former became weaker as it got larger and suffered more violently from the effects of faction, whereas a republic could get stronger as it got larger and combats faction by its very struc ture.What was critical to American values, John Adams insisted,[62] was that the government be â€Å"bound by fixed laws, which the people have a voice in making, and a right to defend. † As Benjamin Franklin was exiting after writing the U. S. constitution, a woman asked him â€Å"Well, Doctor, what have we got—a republic or a monarchy? â€Å". He replied â€Å"A republic—if you can keep it. â€Å"[63] Queen Elizabeth II, a constitutional monarch. [edit] Constitutional monarchy Main article: constitutional monarchyInitially after the American and French revolutions, the question was open whether a democracy, in order to restrain unchecked majority rule, should have an elite upper chamber, the members perhaps appointed meritorious experts or having lifetime tenures, or should have a constitutional monarch with limited but real powers. Some countries (as Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Scandinavian countries, Thailand, Japan and Bhutan) turned powerful mon archs into constitutional monarchs with limited or, often gradually, merely symbolic roles.Often the monarchy was abolished along with the aristocratic system (as in France, China, Russia, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Italy, Greece and Egypt). Many nations had elite upper houses of legislatures which often had lifetime tenure, but eventually these lost power (as in Britain) or else became elective and remained powerful (as in the United States). [edit] Socialist Socialist thought has several different views on democracy. Social democracy, democratic socialism, and the dictatorship of the proletariat (usually exercised through Soviet democracy) are some examples.Many democratic socialists and social democrats believe in a form of participatory democracy and workplace democracy combined with a representative democracy. Within Marxist orthodoxy there is a hostility to what is commonly called â€Å"liberal democracy†, which they simply refer to as parliamentary democracy because of its often centralized nature. Because of their desire to eliminate the political elitism they see in capitalism, Marxists, Leninists and Trotskyists believe in direct democracy implemented through a system of communes (which are sometimes called soviets).This system ultimately manifests itself as council democracy and begins with workplace democracy. (See Democracy in Marxism) Democracy cannot consist solely of elections that are nearly always fictitious and managed by rich landowners and professional politicians. —Che Guevara,  Speech, Uruguay, 1961[64] [edit] Anarchist Anarchists are split in this domain, depending on whether they believe that a majority-rule is tyrannic or not. The only form of democracy considered acceptable to many anarchists is direct democracy.Pierre-Joseph Proudhon argued that the only acceptable form of direct democracy is one in which it is recognized that majority decisions are not binding on the minority, even when unanimous. [65] However, anar cho-communist Murray Bookchin criticized individualist anarchists for opposing democracy,[66] and says â€Å"majority rule† is consistent with anarchism. [67] Some anarcho-communists oppose the majoritarian nature of direct democracy, feeling that it can impede individual liberty and opt in favour of a non-majoritarian form of consensus democracy, similar to Proudhon's position on direct democracy. 68] Henry David Thoreau, who did not self-identify as an anarchist but argued for â€Å"a better government†[69] and is cited as an inspiration by some anarchists, argued that people should not be in the position of ruling others or being ruled when there is no consent. [edit] Demarchy Main article: Demarchy Sometimes called â€Å"democracy without elections†, demarchy uses sortition to choose decision makers via a random process. The intention is that those chosen will be representative of the opinions and interests of the people at large, and be more fair and impart ial than an elected official.The technique was in widespread use in Athenian Democracy and is still used in modern jury selection. [edit] Consensus Main article: Consensus democracy Consensus democracy requires varying degrees of consensus rather than just a mere democratic majority. It typically attempts to protect minority rights from domination by majority rule. [edit] Supranational Qualified majority voting is designed by the Treaty of Rome to be the principal method of reaching decisions in the European Council of Ministers. This system allocates votes to member states in part according to their population, but heavily weighted in favour of the smaller states.This might be seen as a form of representative democracy, but representatives to the Council might be appointed rather than directly elected. Some might consider the â€Å"individuals† being democratically represented to be states rather than people, as with many others. European Parliament members are democraticall y directly elected on the basis of universal suffrage, may be seen as an example of a supranational democratic institution. [edit] Non-governmental Aside from the public sphere, similar democratic principles and mechanisms of voting and representation have been used to govern other kinds of communities and organizations.Many non-governmental organizations decide policy and leadership by voting. Most trade unions and cooperatives are governed by democratic elections. Corporations are controlled by shareholders on the principle of one share, one vote. [edit] Theory A marble statue of Aristotle. [edit] Aristotle Aristotle contrasted rule by the many (democracy/polity), with rule by the few (oligarchy/aristocracy), and with rule by a single person (tyranny or today autocracy/monarchy). He also thought that there was a good and a bad variant of each system (he considered democracy to be the degenerate counterpart to polity). 70][71] For Aristotle the underlying principle of democracy is freedom, since only in a democracy the citizens can have a share in freedom. In essence, he argues that this is what every democracy should make its aim. There are two main aspects of freedom: being ruled and ruling in turn, since everyone is equal according to number, not merit, and to be able to live as one pleases. But one factor of liberty is to govern and be governed in turn; for the popular principle of justice is to have equality according to number, not worth, †¦.And one is for a man to live as he likes; for they say that this is the function of liberty, inasmuch as to live not as one likes is the life of a man that is a slave. —Aristotle,  Politics 1317b (Book 6, Part II) [edit] Rationale Among modern political theorists, there are three contending conceptions of the fundamental rationale for democracy: aggregative democracy, deliberative democracy, and radical democracy. [72] [edit] Aggregative The theory of aggregative democracy claims that the aim of the de mocratic processes is to solicit citizens’ preferences and aggregate them together to determine what social policies society should adopt.Therefore, proponents of this view hold that democratic participation should primarily focus on voting, where the policy with the most votes gets implemented. Different variants of aggregative democracy exist. Under minimalism, democracy is a system of government in which citizens give teams of political leaders the right to rule in periodic elections. According to this minimalist conception, citizens cannot and should not â€Å"rule† because, for example, on most issues, most of the time, they have no clear views or their views are not well-founded.Joseph Schumpeter articulated this view most famously in his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. [73] Contemporary proponents of minimalism include William H. Riker, Adam Przeworski, Richard Posner. According to the theory of direct democracy, on the other hand, citizens should vot e directly, not through their representatives, on legislative proposals. Proponents of direct democracy offer varied reasons to support this view. Political activity can be valuable in itself, it socializes and educates citizens, and popular participation can check powerful elites.Most importantly, citizens do not really rule themselves unless they directly decide laws and policies. Governments will tend to produce laws and policies that are close to the views of the median voter– with half to his left and the other half to his right. This is not actually a desirable outcome as it represents the action of self-interested and somewhat unaccountable political elites competing for votes. Anthony Downs suggests that ideological political parties are necessary to act as a mediating broker between individual and governments.Downs laid out this view in his 1957 book An Economic Theory of Democracy. [74] Robert A. Dahl argues that the fundamental democratic principle is that, when it comes to binding collective decisions, each person in a political community is entitled to have his/her interests be given equal consideration (not necessarily that all people are equally satisfied by the collective decision). He uses the term polyarchy to refer to societies in which there exists a certain set of institutions and procedures which are perceived as leading to such democracy.First and foremost among these institutions is the regular occurrence of free and open elections which are used to select representatives who then manage all or most of the public policy of the society. However, these polyarchic procedures may not create a full democracy if, for example, poverty prevents political participation. [75] Some[who? ] see a problem with the wealthy having more influence and therefore argue for reforms like campaign finance reform. Some[who? ] may see it as a problem that only voters decide policy, as opposed to a majority rule of the entire population.This can be used a s an argument for making political participation mandatory, like compulsory voting or for making it more patient (non-compulsory) by simply refusing power to the government until the full majority feels inclined to speak their minds. [edit] Deliberative Deliberative democracy is based on the notion that democracy is government by deliberation. Unlike aggregative democracy, deliberative democracy holds that, for a democratic decision to be legitimate, it must be preceded by authentic deliberation, not merely the aggregration of preferences that occurs in voting.Authentic deliberation is deliberation among decision-makers that is free from distortions of unequal political power, such as power a decision-maker obtained through economic wealth or the support of interest groups. [76][77][78] If the decision-makers cannot reach consensus after authentically deliberating on a proposal, then they vote on the proposal using a form of majority rule. [edit] Radical Radical democracy is based o n the idea that there are hierarchical and oppressive power relations that exist in society.Democracy's role is to make visible and challenge those relations by allowing for difference, dissent and antagonisms in decision making processes. [edit] Ideal forms [edit] Inclusive Main article: Inclusive Democracy Inclusive democracy is a political theory and political project that aims for direct democracy in all fields of social life: political democracy in the form of face-to-face assemblies which are confederated, economic democracy in a stateless, moneyless and marketless economy, democracy in the social realm, i. . self-management in places of work and education, and ecological democracy which aims to reintegrate society and nature. The theoretical project of inclusive democracy emerged from the work of political philosopher Takis Fotopoulos in â€Å"Towards An Inclusive Democracy† and was further developed in the journal Democracy & Nature and its successor The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy. The basic unit of decision making in an inclusive democracy is the demotic assembly, i. e. he assembly of demos, the citizen body in a given geographical area which may encompass a town and the surrounding villages, or even neighbourhoods of large cities. An inclusive democracy today can only take the form of a confederal democracy that is based on a network of administrative councils whose members or delegates are elected from popular face-to-face democratic assemblies in the various demoi. Thus, their role is purely administrative and practical, not one of policy-making like that of representatives in representative democracy.The citizen body is advised by experts but it is the citizen body which functions as the ultimate decision-taker . Authority can be delegated to a segment of the citizen body to carry out specific duties, for example to serve as members of popular courts, or of regional and confederal councils. Such delegation is made, in prin ciple, by lot, on a rotation basis, and is always recallable by the citizen body. Delegates to regional and confederal bodies should have specific mandates. [edit]

Biopsychosocial Paper Essay

Family Composition Steven currently lives with foster parents. There is another teen age male in the home. According Steven’s file prior to this placement he lived with his biological father, and prior to residing with his biological father Steven was placed in group homes and foster placements, having been previously been removed by CPS from his parent’s care due to substance abuse issues. Steven receives a weekly a weekly 2-hour visit with his biological mother that is supervised by an agency monitor. According to social worker’s case notes these visit take place at a local dinner. Steven is also eligible for weekly observed 1-hour visits with his biological father. However, social worker has written in his case notes that father can no longer make the visits with biological mother due to the fact that he now works graveyard shifts. Social worker’s quarterly report states that â€Å"the mother has had difficulty refraining from discussing inappropriate topics involving her family court case and related topics with Steven during visits. † Also, the mother would some times get defensive when redirected away from discussing these topics. The social worker also wrote in the Quarterly Report that Steven appeared to enjoy visiting with his mother, and would often ask her for things that his foster parents have already said he could not have until he earned it. But the biological mother has been supporting the foster parent’s by not giving into Steven’s begging. According to the Quarterly Report Steven’s foster parents have noticed that his behavioral difficulties at home appear to coincide with his supervised visits with his biological mother. Household Composition According to Steven’s file he has lived in his current placement since March 2, 2007. This home consists of the foster parents, and another teenager placed through the agency mental health program. Quarterly Report states that Steven’s foster father is the primary caregiver. Foster father has told social worker that Steven lies and manipulates the truth and then gets in trouble for this. Social worker states in his case notes that Steven does not appear to think that he is doing anything wrong. Overall, the social worker feels that Steven is comfortable in this home. According to the Quarterly report Steven’s foster father mainly works with him on talking care of his hygiene consistently. As part of an agreement to earn extra cash, Steven is expected to bathe, brush his teeth, apply deodorant, and comb his hair daily. Developmental/Current Health There is no information about Steven’s birth or early development. According to file Steven had a physical examination on April 27, 2007 and was â€Å"diagnosed as a well adolescent†. The doctor commented that he has a history of ADHD and Depression. Steven received new glasses in May 2007. Steven also had a dentist appointment on April 26, 2007 during which he had two cavities filled. Also according to Steven’s file, he has been prescribed psychotropic medications. These include Abilify and Ritalin. Mental Health According to file, Steven has been diagnosed with ADHD, Cognitive Disorder NOS, and Anxiety Disorder NOS. He is currently taking medications for these disorders. He presents with some of the classic ADHD symptoms such as inattention, restlessness, and impulsivity even when he is on his medication. The social worker stated that he is a â€Å"strange kid† and that he can’t or won’t look you in the eyes. He appears to lack self-esteem and self confidence. According to quarterly report, Stevens though process is scattered, and he is mentally and emotionally younger than his chronic logical age of fourteen. Social worker writes that is Steven does not get his way, he shows frustration by pouting, excessive questioning asking why he can’t get his way, and slamming doors. According to case notes, Steven has broken his glasses, a laundry basket, a DVD player, a PlayStation, and has punched a hole in the wall. Steven seems to lack social skills. Intake notes state that he has had a history of physical aggression towards peers at school, and that he is impulsive. Steven’s file indicated that he has been involved in a group through his WRAP services provider to help him with socialization skills, and he attends these meeting on a weekly basis. Steven also receives EMQ Wraparound services for his mental health needs. Quarterly Report states that Steven has an EMQ facilitator that coordinated these services. He receives therapy services once a week contracted through EMQ Family Services. In addition, he has two behaviorists who visit him once a week to work on behavior contracts. Steven is prescribed psychotropic medication. His psychiatrist also works for EMQ. Because these service providers are part of EMQ Wraparound program, Steven is supported with a whole network of specialists who cater to his specific mental health needs. Sexual History According to Steven’s social worker, he is starting to become interested in girls, and likes talking to them and getting their attention. Alcohol and Substance Use History Steven has no alcohol or substance abuse history, but his father has had problems with alcohol. This is why Steven was placed in protective custody. Educational History Steven is currently in the ninth grade at a local public high school. According to his file he has an active IEP that places him in a special day class for the emotionally disturbed (SDC/ED) children. Social worker writes that Steven can handle the class work and homework, but struggles emotionally and behaviorally during class. According to the social workers report, Steven’s last teacher noted that he has difficulty staying in his seat as well as disturbing the students in the class with his talking. According to Stevens IEP he falls within average range in reading, math, written language and oral expression. However, he has difficulty with listening comprehension, handwriting size and spacing, organizing, maintaining focus, and handling frustration. Prevocation skills listed as areas of concern on Steven’s IEP were task completion, social skills and follows directions. Also on the IEP as area’s of need include written language. According to Steven’s IEP, he is able to write multiple paragraphs, but lacks proper writing conventions. The IEP also shows that Steven is passing all his classes with a GPA above a 3. 0. Social worker states that Steven does not want to be in special education classes because it is â€Å"not cool†.